Yes. A compact or amendment may include provisions addressing the application of the criminal and civil laws and regulations of the Tribe or the State that are directly related to and necessary for the licensing and regulation of the gaming activity. At the request of the Secretary pursuant to § 293.8(e), the parties must show that these laws and regulations are both directly related to and necessary for the licensing and regulation of the gaming activity.

Yes. A compact or amendment may include provisions allocating criminal and civil jurisdiction between the Tribe and the State necessary for the enforcement of the laws and regulations described in § 293.16.

Yes. If the compact or amendment includes a negotiated allocation of jurisdiction to the State for the regulation of the gaming activity, the compact or amendment may include provisions to defray the State's actual and reasonable costs for regulating the specific Tribe's gaming activity. If the compact does not include requirements for the State to show actual and reasonable annual expenses for regulating the specific Tribe's gaming activity over the life of the compact, the lack of such a requirement may be considered evidence of a violation of IGRA.

Yes. A compact or amendment may include provisions addressing the Tribe's taxation of tribally licensed gaming activity in amounts comparable to the State's taxation of State licensed gaming activities. A compact may not include provisions addressing the Tribe's taxation of other activities that may occur within or near the Tribe's gaming facility. The inclusion of provisions addressing the Tribe's taxation of other activities may be considered evidence of a violation of IGRA.

Yes. A compact or amendment may include provisions addressing how the parties will resolve a breach of the compact or other disputes arising from the compact including mutual limited waivers of sovereign immunity. If a Tribe is concerned that an agreement or other document including, but not limited to, any dispute resolution, settlement agreement, or arbitration decision, constitutes a compact or amendment, or if the Tribe is concerned that the agreement or other document interprets the Tribe's compact or amendment to govern matters that are not directly related to the operation of gaming activities, the Tribe may submit the document to the Department as set forth in § 293.4. The inclusion of provisions addressing dispute resolution outside of Federal court in a manner that seeks to avoid the Secretary's review may be considered evidence of a violation of IGRA.

Yes. A compact or amendment may include provisions addressing the Tribe's standards for the operation of the gaming activity within gaming spaces, as well as the Tribe's standards for the maintenance of the gaming facility, including licensing. If a compact or amendment mandates that the Tribe adopt standards equivalent or comparable to the standards set forth in a State law or regulation, the parties must show that these mandated Tribal standards are both directly related to and necessary for the licensing and regulation of the gaming activity.

Yes. A compact or amendment may include provisions that are directly related to the operation of gaming activities; such provisions may address activities occurring off of Indian lands.

(a) The parties must show that these provisions described in § 293.22 are directly connected to the Tribe's conduct of class III gaming activities. Examples include, but are not limited to:

(1) Minimum age for patrons to participate in gaming;

(2) Transportation of gaming devices and equipment; or

(3) Exclusion of patrons.

(b) Mutually beneficial proximity, or even co-management alone is insufficient to establish a “direct connection” between the Tribe's class III gaming and adjacent business or amenities. Additionally, Tribal infrastructure projects or economic development activities that are funded by gaming revenue and may service or otherwise provide a benefit to the gaming activity are not directly related to the conduct of gaming without other evidence of a direct connection.

(c) Provisions which are not directly related to the operation of gaming activities include, but are not limited to:

(1) Expressly limiting third party Tribes' rights to conduct gaming activities under IGRA;

(2) Relating to treaty rights;

(3) Relating to tobacco sales;

(4) Requiring compliance with or adoption of State environmental regulation of projects or activities that are not directly related to the Tribe's operation of gaming activities and maintenance of the gaming facility;

(5) Requiring memorandum of understanding, intergovernmental agreements, or similar agreements with local governments;

(6) Requiring enforcement of State court orders garnishing employee wages or patron winnings;

(7) Granting State court jurisdiction over tort claims arising from the Tribe's conduct of class III gaming activities;

(8) Regulating non-gaming conduct not within gaming spaces or non-gaming Tribal economic activities, including activities in or adjacent to the gaming facility, including, but not limited to, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels, event centers, water parks, gas stations, and convenience stores; or

(9) Relating to the conduct of Tribal class I or class II gaming activities.

(d) The inclusion of provisions for which the parties cannot show a direct connection to the Tribe's conduct of class III gaming activities may be considered evidence of a violation of IGRA.

Yes. Notwithstanding § 293.23(c)(8), a compact or amendment may include provisions or procedures addressing the organizational and representational rights of employees, including service or hospitality workers, where such provisions or procedures are “directly related” to the operation of gaming activities as articulated by the Ninth Circuit in Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians v. California, 42 F.4th 1024, 1035-1040 & n.2 (citing Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians v. California (In re Indian Gaming Related Cases Chemehuevi Indian Tribe), 331 F.3d 1094, 1116 (9th Cir. 2003)).

Yes. Consistent with 25 CFR 558.1, a compact or amendment may include provisions addressing the Tribe's standards and requirements for employee background investigations and licensing. If the compact or amendment includes a negotiated allocation to the State for concurring in or processing employee background investigations or licenses, the parties must show that the licensing process is as stringent and timely as the background investigation and licensing requirements of 25 CFR parts 556 and 558. The compact may also include provisions for the reasonable reimbursement of background investigation and licensing fees.

Yes. A compact or amendment consistent with §§ 293.16 and 293.22 may include provisions addressing statewide remote wagering or internet gaming that is directly related to the operation of gaming activity on Indian lands. A compact or compact amendment may not, however, alter otherwise applicable Federal law. A compact may specifically include, for regulatory purposes, provisions allocating State and Tribal jurisdiction within the State over remote wagering or internet gaming originating outside Indian lands where:

(a) State law and the compact or amendment deem the gaming to take place, for the purposes of State and Tribal law, on the Tribe's Indian lands where the server accepting the wagers is located;

(b) The Tribe regulates the gaming; and

(c) The player initiating the wager is not located on another Tribe's Indian lands within the State, unless that Tribe has lawfully consented.

(a) A compact or amendment may include provisions that address revenue sharing in exchange for a State's meaningful concessions resulting in a substantial economic benefit for the Tribe.

(b) The Department reviews revenue sharing provisions with great scrutiny beginning with the presumption that a Tribe's payment to a State or local government for anything beyond § 293.18 regulatory fee is a prohibited “tax, fee, charge, or other assessment.” In order for the Department to approve revenue sharing the parties must show through documentation, such as a market study or other similar evidence, that:

(1) The Tribe has requested and the State has offered specific meaningful concessions the State was otherwise not required to negotiate;

(2) The value of the specific meaningful concessions offered by the State provides substantial economic benefits to the Tribe in a manner justifying the revenue sharing required by the compact; and

(3) The Tribe is the primary beneficiary of the gaming measured by projected revenue to the Tribe against projected revenue shared with the State.

(c) The inclusion of revenue sharing provisions to the State that is not justified by meaningful concessions of substantial economic benefit to the Tribe may be considered evidence of a violation of IGRA.

Yes. However, IGRA anticipates compacts are long-term agreements between a Tribe and a State. These agreements reflect carefully negotiated compromises between sovereigns. A refusal to negotiate a long-term compact, or a short-term extension of at least one year to allow for negotiations to continue, may be considered evidence of a violation of IGRA.

No. Subject to §§ 293.4(b) and 293.8(d), any contract or other agreement between a Tribe and a State, its agencies, or its political subdivisions that seeks to regulate a Tribe's right to conduct gaming—as limited by IGRA—is a gaming compact that must comply with IGRA and be submitted for review and approval by the Secretary consistent with § 293.8. A Tribe may submit any other agreement between the Tribe and the State, its agencies, or its political subdivisions for a determination if the agreement is a compact or amendment under § 293.4(c). This includes agreements mandated or required by a compact or amendment, which contain provisions for the payment from a Tribe's gaming revenue or restricts or regulates a Tribe's use and enjoyment of its Indian lands, including a Tribe's conduct of gaming.

(a) Compacts and amendments pending on March 22, 2024, will continue to be processed under this part, promulgated on December 5, 2008, and revised June 4, 2020, unless the Tribe or the State requests in writing to proceed under this part. Upon receipt of such a request, the Secretary shall process the pending compact or amendment under this part.

(b) This part does not alter final agency decisions made pursuant to this part before March 22, 2024.

(c) All compacts and amendments submitted after March 22, 2024 will be processed under this part.

The information collection requirements contained in this part have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), and assigned control number 1076-0172. A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.