Singapore's Casinos - A Good Gamble After All

​In 2010, Singapore rolled the dice on integrated resorts. Let’s show hand and look at some of the profits and losses from going all-in.
​
How much cash are we talking, when we bring up Singapore’s integrated resort (IR) casinos, and the wealthy international crowd that they romance? A former IR employee says this: “If you’re serving a happy high-roller, getting a tip of $300 is  possible.” This person remembers seeing certain patrons spending $500,000 in a single night.
 
This anecdote points to the rationale behind these establishments. In 2004, when former minister George Yeo controversially proposed the building of Singapore’s first-ever casino(s), the question on his mind was not Should we do it, but Can we afford not to?
 
After all, the tourism industry these days contributes around 4% of Singapore’s total GDP, with an estimated 18.5 million tourist arrivals and S$27.1 billion in tourist receipts in 2018. Unfortunately, despite being a prominent destination, we lack evergreen cultural attractions like gorgeous temples or kawaii hanbok girls. It wouldn't be hard for people to lose interest in visiting this little red dot.

The two IRs, Marina Bay Sands (MBS) and Resorts World Sentosa (RWS), opened in 2010 to help address this challenge. What has their impact been since then?

​The Pros - So much money. So much.
 
Marina Bay Sands (MBS) is reportedly one of the world’s most profitable casinos. In 2019, MBS’s total revenue (from casino games, hotel accommodations, etc) was US$3.101 billion, and its EBITDA was US$1.661 billion.
 
Accordingly, this integrated resort owned by Las Vegas Sands Corporation (LVSC) provides significant revenue to the Singapore government. For instance, LVSC paid S$72 million in April 2019 to merely renew its gaming license at MBS for three years.
 
Along with licensing fees come taxes. A 7% goods and services tax is imposed on gross gaming revenue. This gross revenue is further impacted by a casino tax of 5% on revenue from premium players and 15% on revenue from normal players. To top it all off, corporate tax of 17% applies to the IR business as a whole.
 
BUT that's enough math. You're probably already dying from all this number vomit.
 
My rough estimate is that licensing fees plus taxes per year could be in the range of S$250 to 350 million.
 
At least S$250 million per year from MBS alone. That is just… freaking fantastic.
 
Some other benefits brought by IRs:          

• Land lease: LVSC paid S$1.2 billion for the 60-year land lease for MBS. It is paying hundreds of millions more for the land lease for the upcoming MBS Expansion Project.
• Jobs: According to a 2019 Straits Times article, MBS and RWS together employ 20,000 people (more than 65% of whom are locals), and support a further 40,000 jobs. One-third of the jobs held by Singaporeans are positions for professionals, managers and executives.

• Cultural icon: MBS stands out in Singapore’s skyline and makes the country globally recognizable in popular movies.
• Unique Selling Points: Besides expanding Singapore’s range of tourism offerings, both IRs boast unique attractions. Universal Studios Singapore at RWS is Southeast Asia's first and only Universal Studios theme park. The Sands Expo® and Convention Centre at MBS is Singapore’s largest meeting venue and reportedly hosted 3,600 events in 2018.

 
Potential Cons – No. of casino visits by Singapore Citizens / PRs
 
Many measures are taken by the government to discourage increases in problem gambling that might arise due to the IRs.
 
The most well-known of these is the casino levy. Citizens or Permanent Residents (PR) who wish to gamble at the IRs must first pay either $100 per day visit or $2,000 for an annual pass before they can enter (this was increased to $150 and $3,000 respectively in April 2019). This measure discourages the financially unprepared from participating in casino gambling.
 
However, the total levies collected could be a worrying sign. A 2019 Channel NewsAsia (CNA) article stated that around S$1.3 billion in casino entry fees were paid between 2010 and 2018.
 
If you work out the numbers:
Average amount of levies per year - S$140 million (rounded down to nearest ten-million)
Lowest possible no. of yearly unique visitors (divide by annual pass cost) – 70,000 (or lower, if some bought a day pass before buying an annual pass)
Highest possible no. of yearly unique visitors (divide by day pass cost) – 1,400,000
 
Without data on the actual number of unique visitors, average casino spending or income range, it’s hard to comment further. But even if the number of unique visitors is in the lower range (say 100,000-200,000), this is a significant number and will need to be monitored regularly for potential problems in future (although some surveys suggest that the rate of problem gambling is very low).
 
Minor Cons – Casino-related crime
 
Observers have cautioned against the future growth of criminal activity typically associated with casinos (e.g. money laundering, drug trafficking, vice activities), and recently the Business Times reported that MBS is being probed by the US Department of Justice over whether anti-money laundering regulations were breached.
 
The picture painted by a 2019 CNA article is rosier: the annual number of casino crimes fell 58 per cent from 299 to 126 cases between 2010 and 2018, and theft and cheating make up the majority of those crimes and were “mostly opportunistic and petty in nature".
 
Is casino crime a significant issue or not? In this case, my bet is that it’s under control for now.
 
When the casinos were first proposed, members of the public questioned if the People’s Action Party (PAP) was compromising the country’s moral fabric, or if it was running out of innovative ideas to keep the country going.
 
I think the PAP has a vested interest in clamping down on potential crime in the casinos. To fail would be to tarnish what is otherwise a wildly successful endeavor. More importantly, a crime-infested casino would damage the party’s brand emphasis on pure-white incorruptibility. 
 
Conclusion
 
George Yeo was widely criticized when he made his casino proposal, but looking back at the benefits the IRs have brought, I believe that his decision to brave that controversy really paid off for Singapore.
 
But if Singapore’s approach to gambling still fails in your eyes, take comfort that long ago, the government had already arranged for a good part of casino levies, 4D and TOTO income to be channeled to social programs and causes. 😊 So all this while, all that 4D ticket money has always been piling up to help somebody in need…