MGM Resorts has formally denied a Maryland waitress’s allegations that the company unlawfully confiscated a $76,000 tip, claiming instead that “legitimate business reasons” justified taking the chips from her. The dispute centres on what should have been a life-changing moment for cocktail server Tajia Mackyeon at MGM National Harbor.

What Mackyeon Says Happened

According to the lawsuit filed this year, Mackyeon was serving at a high-stakes baccarat table on April 13 when a winning patron handed her $76,000 in chips as a tip. The complaint states she asked for confirmation multiple times, with the player affirming the gesture was genuinely hers. Mackyeon’s legal team emphasises the patron was neither intoxicated nor behaving erratically at the time.

Then things went wrong. MGM supervisors approached Mackyeon and instructed her to hand over the chips. The chips were subsequently returned to the customer. Her legal representatives argue this violated federal wage protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act, causing severe emotional distress.

MGM’s Response Falls Short on Detail

In a court filing from May 29, MGM denied several key facts: that the chips were a genuine tip meant for Mackyeon, that the chips were returned to the patron, and even that the baccarat player had been winning significantly. But here’s where MGM’s defence starts to crumble. The company refused to say what actually happened. It provided no alternative account of events and never disclosed what became of the chips.

Instead, MGM leaned on legalistic language. The company claimed it acted within the law and invoked what it termed a “bona fide, legitimate, and good faith dispute” over whether it owed Mackyeon wages or tips at all. That’s a thin response to a serious allegation.

The Legal Battle Ahead

Mackyeon is seeking approximately $1.1 million in damages. The case is now entering the discovery phase, where evidence will be scrutinised and witnesses questioned. That’s when MGM will need to back up its claims with actual facts. Right now, it’s largely said “no, that didn’t happen” without explaining what did. For a company of MGM’s size and sophistication, that approach looks defensive rather than convincing.

What the team thinks

Philippa Ashworth says:

While Baz raises an important case that deserves scrutiny, I’d argue the real story here extends beyond the individual dispute to MGM’s broader compliance framework, which warrants closer examination of whether casino operators are adequately trained in tip-handling protocols across their properties. The industry needs to acknowledge that cases like this, regardless of the legal outcome, damage consumer confidence precisely when regional markets like Maryland are still establishing their regulatory credibility, and companies would be wise to implement transparent tip-management policies before regulators impose them. This incident highlights an opportunity for the sector to demonstrate that strengthened internal controls around gratuities aren’t just legally prudent, but fundamentally good for long-term brand reputation and market stability.