The societal costs incurred by local communities could far outweigh the potential financial benefits expected from several planned casino resorts.

As Thailand moves closer to passing a bill that would introduce the country’s first casino resorts, academics have warned that the potential societal costs may be too high to justify, potentially eclipsing the anticipated tax revenue from casino operations.

Thai Academics Question the Benefits of Casino Resorts

Thailand has been considering entering the casino resort market for many years, and a bill currently in its final stages could enable the country to establish its first casino resort ahead of Japan, providing a competitive edge.

Local residents would not be barred from gambling but would be required to pay a fee of 5,000 baht each time they enter the casino. Foreigners, on the other hand, would be charged a one-time fee of 5,000 baht per year.

Although the outlook for casino resorts appears positive—with the potential to create thousands of jobs, attract wealthy tourists, and curb illegal gambling—some experts fear that the benefits of legalising gambling may fall short compared to the harm the new legislation could inflict.

Economist Chidtawan Chanakul predicts that the regulation of casinos and the establishment of casino resorts would lead to an immediate rise in gambling-related harm and addiction within the population.

“A study in the US has found that for every dollar earned from casinos in Las Vegas, the US government has to pay 3 dollars to remedy the impact of casinos. It is therefore not worthwhile,” Chanakul stated, citing international research.

She also criticised the government’s claim that the casino resorts would generate valuable employment. According to Chanakul, these jobs would be largely low-skilled and would not contribute to the country’s progress towards reducing the income gap or transitioning to a high-income economy.

Corruption Could Further Diminish the Benefits of Casino Resorts

Chanakul also dismissed the government’s comparison to Singapore. She argued that while Singapore has very low levels of corruption, Thailand is far more corrupt—more comparable to the Philippines—making it unlikely that the benefits of casino resorts would outweigh the costs.

Nualnoi Trirat, director of the Centre for Gambling Studies, supported Chanakul’s scepticism regarding the positive impact of gambling legalisation. She too expressed concerns about government integrity, legislation, and corruption, which could undermine any meaningful benefits from legalising casino resorts.