Indigenous gaming in Canada occupies a unique legal and policy space, shaped by the intersection of federal criminal law, provincial regulatory authority, Aboriginal rights under section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982, and a decades-long evolution of negotiated agreements between provincial governments and First Nations communities. The year 2024 has seen several significant developments in this space, with First Nations authorities in multiple provinces pushing for enhanced revenue-sharing arrangements and, increasingly, direct participation rights in the online gaming segment that has generated the most significant growth in recent years.
Historical Context: From Casinorama to Modern Compacts
The legal foundation for Indigenous gaming in Canada was substantially shaped by the 1996 Casinorama case in Ontario (Shawanaga First Nation v. Ontario), which confirmed that First Nations could operate gaming activities under provincial legislation provided they operated within the framework established by the province. This decision, combined with subsequent negotiations between the Ontario government and First Nations communities, led to the establishment of revenue-sharing agreements that direct a portion of OLG's net revenues to Indigenous communities.
Ontario's current framework provides for a remittance of 1.7 percent of OLG's net revenues to be distributed among 133 First Nation communities that are party to the Gaming Revenue Sharing and Financial Agreement (GRSFA). In FY 2022-23, this arrangement resulted in distributions of approximately $130 million to participating communities, making it one of the most significant sources of non-tax gaming revenue for First Nations in Canada.
Manitoba established a different model through the Manitoba First Nations Gaming Authority (MFNGA), which holds the mandate to oversee and manage gaming activities designated to First Nations under agreements with the provincial government. The MFNGA framework gives Manitoba First Nations a more direct operational role in gaming facilities than Ontario's revenue-sharing model, with several First Nations-managed casinos operating under MFNGA oversight.
First Nations Gaming Authority Models: BC and Saskatchewan
British Columbia's First Nations Major Lottery Agreement provides a mechanism for revenue sharing from BCLC's lottery operations, but the model has historically been less comprehensive than Ontario's or Manitoba's arrangements. The BC First Nations Gaming Secretariat has been engaged in discussions with the BC government about expanding First Nations participation to include a share of BCLC's online gaming revenues from PlayNow.com — a revenue stream that did not exist in its current form when the original agreements were negotiated.
In Saskatchewan, the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority (SIGA) operates eight gaming facilities under agreements with the provincial government and the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations. SIGA is one of the most developed examples of First Nations gaming authority operational models in Canada, with the gaming facilities generating revenues that flow to the First Nations Fund and are distributed to participating First Nations communities for economic development, social programs, and cultural initiatives.
SIGA has been actively exploring the expansion of its mandate to include online gaming activities, reflecting the broader shift in gaming consumption toward digital channels. The Saskatchewan government's approach to online gaming — which is currently managed exclusively through the Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Authority's (SLGA) online platform — has not yet included a formal mechanism for SIGA participation in online revenues, a gap that SIGA has identified as a priority for resolution in the current legislative term.
Ontario's Online Gaming Gap
In Ontario, the transition to a competitive multi-operator model under iGaming Ontario has created a structural question about how First Nations revenue-sharing obligations interact with revenues generated by private operators rather than OLG. The GRSFA formula — which provides 1.7 percent of OLG's net revenues — applies to OLG's directly managed operations. The private operators registered with iGaming Ontario are not party to the GRSFA and their revenues are not subject to the same distribution formula.
First Nations representatives and the Chiefs of Ontario have raised this structural gap in submissions to the provincial government, arguing that as private operator revenues grow to represent an increasing share of Ontario's total online gambling market, the effective share of total gambling revenues flowing to First Nations under the existing formula will decline as a percentage. The Ontario government has indicated it is reviewing the structure of First Nations gaming revenue distributions in light of the iGaming Ontario market's growth, but no formal amendment to the GRSFA has been announced.
Calls for Online Gaming Participation Rights
Beyond revenue-sharing adjustments, a growing number of First Nations authorities across Canada have expressed interest in direct participation rights in the online gaming sector — not merely as recipients of a portion of Crown corporation or provincial revenues, but as operators or partial operators of online gaming platforms targeting First Nations communities or operating under First Nations branding and governance structures.
The legal basis for such participation is complex. Criminal Code section 207 permits a provincial government to license a person to conduct a lottery scheme, and provincial governments have discretion in determining whether to extend such licenses to Indigenous entities. Several First Nations have argued that their Aboriginal rights and self-government interests should include the right to offer online gaming to their members without requiring provincial authorization, a legal argument that has not been definitively resolved by Canadian courts.
The practical barriers to First Nations online gaming entry are substantial: regulatory compliance costs, technology platform requirements, and the capital investment required to establish a competitive online gaming operation are not trivial. First Nations authorities have proposed hybrid models under which they would partner with existing licensed operators or technology suppliers to provide the operational infrastructure while the First Nation holds a governance and revenue-interest stake.
Atlantic Canada and the ALC Model
Atlantic Lottery Corporation operates across New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador, with its revenue distributed to the four provincial governments based on population-weighted formulas. First Nations gaming agreements in the Atlantic region have historically been less developed than in Ontario or the Prairie provinces, reflecting both the smaller Indigenous population share in Atlantic Canada and the ALC's structure as a multi-province entity that complicates bilateral negotiation.
Recent discussions in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have focused on whether First Nations communities in those provinces should receive a defined share of ALC's video lottery terminal revenues generated on or near reserve lands — an arrangement that would mirror elements of the Saskatchewan and Manitoba models applied to a different revenue source.
Policy Outlook for 2024-25
The policy environment in 2024 is more receptive to expanded Indigenous gaming participation than at any point in the past decade. Reconciliation commitments by federal and provincial governments, combined with the demonstrated economic development impact of First Nations gaming revenues in communities like those participating in SIGA or the GRSFA, have created political space for renegotiating legacy frameworks that were designed before online gaming represented a meaningful share of total gambling revenues.
The most likely near-term development is a formal amendment to Ontario's GRSFA that extends its scope to capture a share of iGaming Ontario's total market revenues. Beyond Ontario, Saskatchewan and BC represent the provinces most likely to advance formal online gaming participation rights for Indigenous authorities, given the existing institutional infrastructure in those provinces and the specific advocacy positions taken by SIGA and BC First Nations representatives in 2023 and 2024.