On the eve of Thanksgiving, plaintiffs from six states filed the civil lawsuit against Kalshi in New York claiming that the prediction market platform violated state gambling laws, engaged in illegal deceptive activity and unjustly enriched itself at the expense of its customers. Attorneys for the plaintiffs filed the suit one day after a Nevada federal judge lifted a preliminary injunction that previously enabled Kalshi to continue operations in the state. Kalshi indicated that it plans to appeal that judge’s decision.

Kalshi, which handled more than $1 billion in NFL event contracts in the first month of the 2025 season, described the class-action lawsuit as “meritless fiction”. In a statement released on 26 November, Kalshi wrote: “This lawsuit demonstrates many fundamental misunderstandings about how federally regulated DCMs (designated contract markets) operate.”

The lawsuit appears to be the first of a class-action variety against a prediction market, an asset class that has grown rapidly over the last six months. The suit may trigger further debate on the role of market makers throughout the exchange trading ecosystem. Market makers are typically defined as firms that help facilitate the buying and selling of securities by providing liquidity.

Plaintiffs: Market makers benefit at expense of consumers

In April 2024, Susquehanna International Group (SIG) announced a partnership with Kalshi, under which it became the first institutional market maker to launch a trading desk dedicated specifically to event contracts.

Founded by billionaire Jeff Yass, SIG is a global quantitative trading firm that serves as a market maker for a wide range of trading products, particularly options and exchange-traded funds (ETFs). While Kalshi partners with other market makers beyond SIG, the prediction market has not disclosed the names of the other companies. SIG is widely viewed as Kalshi’s primary market maker.

According to the lawsuit, market makers benefit from their “unique contractual and technological integration” with prediction markets. The relationship, the plaintiffs contend, provides the market makers with unfair advantages such as reduced fees, differing position limits and enhanced access to the markets. Moreover, the advantages “greatly reduce” the market makers’ financial exposure, the plaintiffs allege.

“As a result, individual consumers hardly stand a chance, all the while thinking they are just betting against other consumers,” the lawsuit states.

A market maker essentially serves as a counterparty to ensure there is enough liquidity on the platform. For instance, a buy contract on the Detroit Lions to defeat the Dallas Cowboys this Thursday is priced at 61 cents on Kalshi (a payout of $164 on a $100 trade). For every trade, a counterparty must take the other side. At one point on Tuesday morning, there were 138,689 contracts on the Lions at 61 cents for $84,600. However, a Kalshi user does not know if the counterparty is an institutional market maker such as SIG or another retail consumer.

Kalshi co-founder: An attempt to discredit prediction markets

Kalshi co-founder Luana Lopes Lara took exception with the lawsuit in a lengthy post on her X account. She called the allegations false, adding that any company with a large consumer base deals with lawsuits “that have no merit”. In addressing the market maker allegations, she stated that Kalshi is a peer-to-peer exchange that doesn’t have “a house”.

Along with SIG, Kalshi operates its own market maker, an affiliate called Kalshi Trading. The offering is a common practice within the industry, Lopes Lara said, emphasising that many financial exchanges have a similar setup. Last month, Kalshi Trading represented less than 6% of the platform’s making volume, she indicated.

She also criticised the author of a post on X who wrote that Kalshi misled users into adopting the belief that they wagered against other bettors, when in fact they wagered against the company. The author, who goes by the username @rawsalerts, received more than 460,000 views with the post.

“It’s not surprising that entrenched interests are seeding false narratives to discredit prediction markets: this is very similar to what the banks did to discredit the crypto industry (a good reminder not to blindly trust what you read online),” Lopes Lara wrote.

Alfonso Straffon, a prominent financial analyst in the sports betting space, wrote a letter to the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission ahead of a proposed roundtable on prediction markets. In a six-page letter, Straffon explained why betting markets on sports are driven by the same kind of economic forces and actors found in any financial market.

“In the business of sports betting, the bookmaker is no different than a market maker as defined in the world of financial markets, including those market makers authorised by the CFTC to provide liquidity on designated contract markets such as Kalshi,” he wrote.

Upcoming cases

Represented by three attorneys from law firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP, the plaintiffs filed last week’s lawsuit in US District Court for the Southern District of New York. After the New York State Gaming Commission sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist order from operating in the state, the company filed a lawsuit in October seeking to block the state from enforcing the order.

Besides New York, at least half a dozen other states have filed comparable orders against the prediction market site. The list includes New Jersey, Illinois, Nevada and Ohio, which all rank among the largest states nationwide in sports betting handle.

In September, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell filed a suit against Kalshi alleging that it is operating in the state as an illegal sports betting platform. On 9 December, a court in Massachusetts will hold a hearing addressing the state’s preliminary injunction against Kalshi and the company’s motion to dismiss the case.

The new lawsuit comes as the nation’s top sportsbooks prepare for the debut of their own prediction markets. Both DraftKings and FanDuel plan to roll out prediction market platforms in the coming months. Soon after, they are expected to be joined by Fanatics, Coinbase and US President Donald Trump’s Truth Social platform. Kalshi is facing further pressure from news last week that SIG and Robinhood will form a joint venture to launch their own prediction market exchange.

Matt Rybaltowski

Matt is primarily responsible for long-form feature coverage on complex sports betting scandals. He also provides coverage on finance, M&A and other technological developments.

The joint effort took place 28-29 November in locations in both Sweden and Spain. However, Europol said the criminal network in question operates in the Stockholm area of Sweden.

Europol said the criminal group runs illegal gambling operations and launders “significant” criminal proceeds. During the raids, police discovered an illegal gambling operation with an estimated annual turnover of €20 million ($23.2 million).

Evidence was also found related to money laundering services for the network and other criminal groups. This, the agency added, was being used for its own benefit and for other criminal actors, with additional links to drug trafficking in Sweden and across the Nordics.

Illegal gambling probe leads to five arrests

The coordinated strike saw almost 150 police officers search six premises in Sweden and two in the Spanish city of Murcia. Police arrested five suspects, including three in Sweden and two in Spain.

Police also seized several hundred thousand euros’ worth of valuable items, including luxury watches and cash. In addition, during a search of a property in Sweden, which police said was being used as an illegal gambling club, authorities seized drugs prepared for resale and found signs of possible human trafficking.

“The suspects form the core of a local criminal network known for its use of violence and intimidation, allowing the group to secure revenues, enforce debts and control sections of the illegal gambling market in the Stockholm area,” Europol said.

“By offering services to other criminals, the group operated as a key facilitator within the wider criminal environment.”

Europol committed to wider criminal clampdown

The agency said the strike is part of a wider, multi-agency strategy to “systematically” dismantle networks that harm local communities while relying on international criminal connections.

“Europol plays a central role in this approach by linking international intelligence with local enforcement actions,” the agency said. “By connecting national authorities across borders, Europol ensures that information collected in one jurisdiction can be turned into operational impact in another – including on the streets of Stockholm.”

Couple arrested over AU$1.2 million fraudulent casino win

A husband and wife from Kazakhstan have been arrested over allegations they defrauded an Australian casino out of AU$1.2million (US$786,059).

The BBC reports that the couple was caught cheating at Crown Sydney. Dilnoza Israilova was found to be wearing a discreet camera on her T-shirt while gambling at the venue.

Police also found “magnetised probes” and a mirror attachment for a phone allegedly used to rig games. Both she and her husband, Alisherykhoja Israilov, were arrested shortly after.

New South Wales Police charged the pair with dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage. They remain in custody over the matter.

Malta regulator issues further warning over illegal sites

The Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) has distanced itself from two websites that claim to be licensed by the regulator.

Both Lavbet321.com and Kasinoseta.com claimed to have been approved by the MGA and that they hold a Malta licence. However, the regulator said this was not the case with either site.

The MGA said that any reference to the regulator or a Malta gaming licence is “false and misleading”.

“The MGA would like to remind consumers not to utilise services provided by an entity unless they have ascertained that the entity in question is authorised to provide such services by the MGA,” the regulator said.

London councils join anti-gambling ad campaign on Underground

Five more London councils have declared their support for a campaign to stop gambling advertising on the city’s Underground.

Barnet, Brent, Enfield, Hackney and Lewisham councils joined the Coalition to End Gambling Ads (CEGA), the BBC reported. The group campaigns against the spread of harmful gambling promotions, with the Underground one of its focus areas.

Haringey Council was the first council to join CEGA in January 2025. The ongoing campaign calls for the end of advertising for all forms of gambling.

In 2021, Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan pledged to implement such a ban as part of his re-election manifesto. However, this has yet to come to fruition.

Evoplay welcomes Mantsiou as chief financial officer

The game development studio Evoplay has promoted Vasilena Mantsiou to the role of chief financial officer.

As CFO, she will oversee the studio’s financial strategy, planning and operations. This, Evoplay said, will support sustainable growth and stability as part of its global expansion plans.

Mantsiou joined Evoplay in May 2022 and was promoted to head of the accounting department in January 2024.

“Vasilena’s been an integral part of Evoplay’s journey, demonstrating exceptional leadership and deep financial expertise,” said Ivan Kravchuk, CEO at Evoplay, “Her promotion to CFO is a natural step forward. We’re confident that her strategic vision will continue to support our long-term goals as we expand into new markets.”

Caesars launches sports betting in Missouri

On the first day online sports betting became available in Missouri Monday, Caesars Entertainment has announced its launch.

Players in the state can now download the Caesars Sportsbook mobile app and place bets on a range of markets. They can also visit physical locations at both Harrah’s Kansas City and Horseshoe St Louis.

Missouri was also the first state where Caesars launched with Universal Digital Wallet on the first day of wagering. This enables deposits and withdrawals across Caesars platforms in all regulated states.

Eric Hession, president of Caesars Digital, said: “From our intuitive mobile app to our in-person sportsbooks at Harrah’s Kansas City and Horseshoe St Louis, we’re committed to providing a secure and responsible way for fans to engage with the sports they love.”

The suspension is effective immediately and covers the operator’s remote and non-remote betting licences. London-headquartered Deadheat has held both licences since January 2015.

The regulator noted the suspected failures were “key considerations” in its decision to suspend these licences.

“The review and consequent suspension follow concerns that activities have been carried out in a manner which is inconsistent with the licensing objectives, not in accordance with conditions of their licence and that the licensee may be unsuitable to carry on the licensed activities,” the commission said.

“We have made it clear to the operator that during the suspension, we expect it to focus on treating consumers fairly and keeping them fully informed of any developments which impact them.”

James Grassi and Antony Komui are listed as company directors at Companies House, and both have been in their roles since April 2012. Christos Symeon also started out as a director at the same time but resigned in August 2019.

Gambling Commission continues clampdown on rule-breakers

Deadheat is the latest operator to have been targeted by the commission. The regulator has made a series of announcements regarding suspension and fines in recent weeks.

Days ago, Videoslots was fined £650,000 for breaching several regulations AML and social responsibility. NetBet was also ordered to pay £650,000 earlier in November, again due to AML and social responsibility failings

Elsewhere, the commission suspended Spribe OÜ’s software licence in October for failing to comply with hosting requirements. The commission said this was due to “serious” non-compliance. At the time the supplier said it was applying for the relevant hosting licence immediately and expected to be back up and running within a few weeks.

Videoslots, which runs Videoslots.co.uk, MrVegas.com and Megariches.com, will make the payment in lieu of a £2 million financial penalty. It was also issued with a formal warning and ordered to undergo a third-party audit to ensure it is effectively implementing AML and safer gambling policies.

The commission said failings were identified for the period from October 2019 through to February 2022. Videoslots was ruled to not have complied with certain Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP).

These include paragraph three of licence condition 12.1.1, which says licensees must ensure money laundering policies and procedures are implemented effectively. These should also be reviewed and revised appropriately to ensure that they remain effective.

Videoslots was also found to be in breach of paragraphs 1a, 1b and 2 of Social Responsibility Code Provision (SRCP) 3.4.1. These require licensees to identify and interact with customers to minimise the risk of gambling harms.

“Social responsibility failures stemmed primarily from a reliance on systems that did not effectively monitor customer activity to identify harm or potential harm associated with gambling,” the regulator said.

“The Commission’s investigation determined that although the operator’s monitoring systems automatically set a monthly deposit limit for customers, that limit ran across a calendar month and did not include the customer’s initial deposit.”

Videoslots users lost thousands despite deposit limits

Setting out some of the issues identified at Videoslots, the commission flagged one user who lost £5,000 in a month. This was despite the same player having in place a £3,000 monthly deposit limit.

Another customer lost £5,000 in less than 24 hours despite a £3,000 monthly deposit limit, while a further customer lost £7,500 over 18 days despite a £2,000 monthly deposit limit.

The commission also raised concerns over the monitoring systems deployed by Videoslots. It said these did not effectively identify customers who were potentially at risk of gambling harm. One player did not receive interaction from the operator despite losing £6,550 in three active days across a two-month period.

‘Gaps’ in Videoslots’ AML and countering terrorist financing

Meanwhile, the regulator found issues with Videoslots’ AML/Countering Terrorist Financing (CTF) policies and procedures. These included record management omissions and an over-reliance on an algorithm to identify and monitor customer behaviours, which the regulator said appeared “ineffective” in some instances when tested.

One example was a customer who demonstrated a high level of depositing and gambling activity over a 16-day period. The user funded their account with digital pre-payment vouchers, totalling in excess of £75,000. After gambling, proceeds were transferred to four different bank accounts, while the same customer was found on occasion to be accessing their account from outside Britain.

The commission said despite these high-risk factors, the user’s automated AML risk score did not trigger the threshold for Videoslots to request source of funds information in a timely manner. This led to “unacceptable” delays in an account review and an absence of “effective customer due diligence and effective oversight”.

“One of the key failures was that the automated scoring system in place at the time did not identify the activity as high risk,” the commission said. “There was a presumption that the activity was funded from recycled winnings without any supporting evidence to explain why the customer was adopting a complex and unnecessary deposit and withdrawal pattern.”

In another case, a player’s risk profile was not appropriately escalated despite high deposit and withdrawals during a certain month. According to the commission, Videoslots relied on the fact the player had significant wins and assumed the account was funded from recycled winnings. This was “without sufficient scrutiny or any acceptable form of interaction” to validate this assumption.

Commission updates open-loop payment systems advice

Commenting on the case, John Pierce, director of enforcement at the commission, criticised the over-reliance on ineffective systems. He said controls were not applied to the standards expected by the regulator.

“The investigation identified a serious example where pre-paid digital vouchers had been used for gambling without effective oversight and early intervention,” he said. “The over-reliance on an algorithm to monitor risk meant that the customer was able to carry out a high volume of deposits and transfer the proceeds of gambling to multiple different destination accounts with insufficient and timely checks or robust source of funds verification taking place.”

Pierce also flagged the acceptance of digital vouchers as a method of payment. He said this requires “robust controls” from a safer gambling perspective, particularly where it is possible to purchase digital vouchers using credit or crypto via third-party websites

“Open-loop payment systems are high risk in nature because they could enable anonymous deposits and make it harder to trace funds,” he said. “In this case, the licensee failed to implement timely customer interactions and did not conduct enhanced customer due diligence until the customer had reached significant spend thresholds. Such failings are unacceptable.

“Operators must review how open-loop payment systems such as prepaid digital vouchers are managed in a gambling environment. This is because they are high risk and present operational challenges in terms of effective monitoring.

“While our position on the use of open loop payment systems has not changed, we have updated our risk information to reflect our concerns about digital vouchers.”

Another financial penalty for Videoslots

This marked the second large financial penalty for Videoslots in 2025. In April, it was ordered to pay SEK12 million ($1.3 million) by Sweden’s Spelinspektionen for failing to counteract excessive gambling.

Videoslots employs an automated system to monitor bettors’ behaviour, which triggers when certain risk indicators are met. It also prevents users from making further deposits when certain thresholds have been reached. However, Spelinspektionen ruled 12 players were gambling excessively and Videoslots’ attempts to halt such activities were insufficient.

Meanwhile, in Great Britain, the Gambling Commission has been clamping down on other operators that have breached regulations. These include NetBet, which was ordered to pay £650,000 earlier in November, also due to AML and social responsibility failings.

Elsewhere, Spribe OÜ’s software licence was suspended for failing to comply with hosting requirements. The commission said this was necessary on “grounds of suitability” due to “serious” non-compliance. In addition, the regulator suspended the operating licence of VGC Leeds Limited, which operates the Victoria Gate Casino land-based venue in Leeds, England.

ACMA orders blocking of illegal gambling sits

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has issued banning orders against a further nine illegal gambling and affiliate websites.

ACMA said the sites did not hold a licence to offer online gambling in Australia. As such, it requested that Australian internet service providers block access to the sites.

Among the brands were Cashed, King Maker, Posido, Spinight, Spinsy, The Pokies Reviews and Topio Networks. Also flagged was wizbet.app, an imitation of the licensed WizBet service, and next2go-au.com, an imitation of the approved Next2Go service.

“Since ACMA made its first blocking request in November 2019, 1,369 illegal websites have been blocked,” ACMA said. “Around 220 illegal services have also pulled out of the Australian market since we started enforcing new illegal online gambling rules in 2017.”

PAGCOR commits funds to typhon support

The Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation has allocated Php32.85 million ($557,267) to assist those impacted by the recent Typhoon Tino and Super Typhoon Uwan.

The typhoons left widespread devastation across the Philippines, claiming hundred of lives and affecting over 2.5 million families. Funds from PAGCOR were used to buy 31,500 relief packs containing food and non-food essentials.

Another batch of 16,500 relief packs worth Php18.07 million will also be dispatched.

“In times of calamities, PAGCOR will always be ready to step in and extend support to our fellow Filipinos,” CEO Alejandro Tengco said. “Part of our nation-building mission is to help our kababayans rebuild their lives.”

Hippos ATG names Nurmi as COO

The newly established Hippos ATG has appointed Jussi Nurmi as its chief operating officer.

Nurmi has 10 years of experience within the iGaming industry, including time working in senior roles with Betsson and TonyBet.

In April, Sweden’s ATG announced a 50/50 joint venture with local Finnish racing association Suomen Hippos. It was later confirmed the business would operate in Finland with the ATG brand.

“Hippos ATG combines strong heritage with a clear ambition to build a modern and sustainable business for the Finnish market,” Nurmi said. “I’m excited to contribute to creating a competitive and responsible gaming company in Finland.”

Intralot extends with Arkansas Scholarship Lottery

In the US, Intralot has signed a new, 10-year contract with the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery.

The agreement, which comes into effect next August, will extend a partnership that began in 2009. It covers the introduction of new technology for the lottery.

Intralot will introduce its new lottery solution, including the LotosX Central Gaming System. Arkansas will be one of the first states in the US to roll out the technology.

“We look forward to our continued partnership with Intralot.” Arkansas Scholarship Lottery Executive Director Sharon Strong said. “With this new agreement, we remain committed to both our players and our mission of supporting Arkansas students.”

National Council on Problem Gambling appoints Maurer

The National Council on Problem Gambling has appointed Heather Maurer as its new executive director.

Maurer brings over 25 years of leadership experience in the fields of public health, policy, and nonprofit management. She was most recently CEO of the National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health.

As executive director, Maurer will lead strategic direction and oversee national programmes, partnerships and advocacy initiatives.

“I’m honoured to join NCPG and build on its strong legacy of leadership in addressing gambling-related harm,” said Maurer.

Keith Whyte served as executive director of the national council for more than 25 years before his departure in January.

Svenska Spel and ATG on 7 November submitted a joint op-ed article to the Svenska Dagbladet newspaper, outlining their support for a possible ban, which would put an end to any form of online bonuses awarded by licensed operators in Sweden.

In the article, Svenska Spel’s Anna Johnson and Hasse Lord Skarplöth of ATG argued bonuses could lead to gambling-related problems. They noted the particular appeal of the bonuses to younger people, drawing them to gambling and causing long-term issues.

The op-ed also highlighted certain statistics from a recent report by the Swedish Association for Alcohol and Drug Education. One piece of data suggested gambling among boys in their second year of high school increased from 27% to 43% in five years.

While BOS Secretary General Gustaf Hoffstedt shared concerns over young people and gambling, he rejected the direct link to bonuses. He said a ban on bonuses in online gambling would not solve the problem.

“We believe that everyone agrees and is concerned that gambling among young people under the age of 18 is a growing problem,” he said.

“But to claim that this is due to the welcome bonuses that are currently offered to adult players, without mentioning how today’s young people learn to play for money through so-called skins and loot boxes in their favourite games, is not serious.”

Gambling monopolies’ motive

Hoffstedt insisted the ban would benefit both Svenska Spel and ATG by reducing the size of Sweden’s legal market and pushing more players to play with the gambling monopolies.

“Both of these gambling companies, which emerged from the Swedish gambling monopoly, took significant market shares with them from the start when the Swedish gambling market was re-regulated in 2019,” he said.

“The fact that their competitors, who in many cases start with zero customers on their data base, are prohibited from offering a bonus when a new customer is recruited is of course tempting for the old monopolists.

“But they bite their own tail. Because with demands for further restrictions on the legal licensed gambling market, they can only defend their market share in an increasingly shrinking licence market.”

“These two companies could have brought together the gambling market, or at least the members of their own trade association, for some common good. However, they ignore this and run solo games for short-term benefit for themselves, but not for Sweden and above all not for consumer protection in the gambling market,” Hoffstedt added.

Black market concerns from bonus ban

Hoffstedt also flagged concerns over how a ban could drive players to unlicensed sites, which may offer bonuses but not the same protection measures as approved brands.

With this, he called for balance in gambling regulations to consider both consumer protection and gambling pleasure. This, he said, would ensure a higher proportion of users gambling with regulated websites.

“A high proportion of legally licensed gambling is achieved through striking a balance between consumer protection and gambling pleasure,” he said. “The gambling consumers must themselves want to be in the licensed gambling market. If this is not achieved, the entire system will collapse.

“Now Johnson and Lord Skarplöth also want to remove the possibility of giving a bonus to a new gambling customer. If they get their way, we probably haven’t seen the bottom yet in how low the proportion of legally licensed gambling can fall.”

Sweden is in the process of overhauling part of its gambling regulation to deepen enforcement against the black market.

A review of the Gambling Act reached a milestone in September when the Ministry of Finance published investigator Marcus Isgren’s report, outlining amendments designed to strengthen the country’s regulatory framework and close loopholes that enabled illegal operators to market to locals.

But Hoffstedt previously told iGB the long-awaited update was unlikely to solve some of the market’s deeper-rooted struggles relating to the proliferation of illegal gambling.

Platinum was fined £10 million ($13.1 million) in October for “serious” failings related to anti-money laundering and social responsibility. It was also handed a formal warning and ordered to undergo a third-party audit over the matter.

While the failings were primarily social responsibility issues specific to British regulation, certain AML systems and controls failings from 2023 were flagged as part of the same investigation.

In addition to its British licence, Platinum holds a licence in Gibraltar. As such, the Gibraltar regulator has considered its position, publishing a statement over the matter.

It said there was no specific evidence of money laundering or criminal spend and that there was “very limited financial benefit” to Platinum from the cases. However, it also flagged a “lack of adequate due diligence” for deposit levels and other failures of due diligence and approach to risk.

Examples flagged by the British regulator included failing to identify a user who exceeded their £2,500 loss limit within 16 minutes of registering their account as being at risk of potential harm. Another user staked £73,000 and lost £4,100 in 23 days without any interaction from Platinum.

Meanwhile, Platinum’s customer interaction system failed to identify a player as at risk of harm. This was despite the user losing £5,000 within 24 hours of registration, then over £16,000 in less than three months.

No further action against Platinum in Gibraltar

Despite raising concerns over Platinum’s conduct, the Gibraltar regulator elected not to pursue any further financial penalty.

Setting out its reasoning, the regulator noted the historical nature of the failings, which date back to 2023. It also acknowledged the “significant” value of the fine already issued by the British regulator.

In addition, the Gibraltar commission said Platinum’s systems and controls in relation to the Gibraltar regulatory regime have been improved. It said they are considered “satisfactory”, subject to third-party review in respect of the British regulator’s requirements.

However, given the circumstances of the case, the Gibraltar regulator saw it appropriate to issue a formal caution to Platinum.

“On balance, the licence holder is considered fit and proper to hold a Gibraltar licence given the documented improvements it has made to its systems, controls and approach to risk over time,” the commission said.

“Licence holders that are dual licensed are reminded they are expected to comply with the regime not only in Gibraltar but also of other relevant jurisdictions in which they operate.

“The fact that a formal caution has been issued will be taken into consideration if other matters come to light in the future.”

The £10 million fine was the second time Platinum has faced a financial penalty in recent years. In March 2023, it was slapped with a fine of £2.9 million, again for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures. At the same time, Kindred’s 32Red brand was fined £4.2 million for similar issues.

Rival supplier Playtech was, in October, unmasked in US court filings as the client behind a covert campaign that had employed the Israeli intelligence firm Black Cube to produce and circulate a defamatory report accusing Evolution of trading within black markets.

The dispute has all the ingredients of a boardroom thriller: disguises, fake identities, hidden cameras and dossiers couriered to regulators. Yet beneath the surface lies a more immediate concern for investors: what do the claims and some of the report’s findings mean for Evolution’s valuation, reputation and ability to sustain shareholder confidence? 

Immediate impact

The case traces back to December 2020, when Playtech contracted Black Cube to craft a report designed to damage Evolution’s standing in the US and European markets. Black Cube’s findings came to a close in November 2021 in a complaint filed with the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement, which alleged that Evolution’s games had been deliberately supplied in jurisdictions under US sanctions, such as Syria and Iran.  

However, according to court filings, Black Cube’s methods were elaborate and ethically dubious as agents posed under false pretences, secretly recorded current and former employees of Evolution and cherry-picked evidence. Depositions revealed that Black Cube’s co-founder, Avi Yanus, was promised a six-figure success fee for achieving specific outcomes.

Evolution’s statement claimed that the New Jersey Superior Court deemed Black Cube’s report “objectively false”, however the court’s February 2025 ruling said, “this court is not making any dispositive finding with regard to the merits of Plaintiffs’ case.” It therefore deemed the case to still be in its infancy. 

Evolution’s public release, which broke the news on 21 October, portrayed Playtech in a particularly nefarious light. The release described Playtech’s actions as a “smear campaign” and “a defamatory scheme”. The statement also described the Playtech-commissioned report as “highly inflammatory”, intended to “substantially harm” Evolution. The immediate market impact was felt by Playtech as its share price plummeted between 25% and 38%, reflecting investor concern over its role in commissioning the investigation.

The gaming giant’s share price bounced back in the couple of days following Playtech’s public response to Evolution, also released on 21 October.

Short-term PR bruise or long-term credibility at risk?

Evolution’s share price, by contrast, held steady or even rose slightly upon the release of its statement, signalling the market’s initial support for the Swedish company.

Ben Robinson, managing partner at Corfai Capital, interprets the market response as a reflection of the companies’ different roles, as portrayed in the court filings. He also highlights Evolution’s image within the media coverage, compared to Playtech.  

“The market punished Playtech, while Evolution held steady or rose slightly. The street clearly saw Evolution as the target, not the culprit,” he notes. “The 2021 dossier probes closed in February 2024 with no action, blunting the claims and capping further downside unless new facts emerge. Headlines could still sting, but this looks priced in, a short-term PR bruise rather than a lasting rerating.” 

Reputational risk

Despite the apparent resilience of Evolution’s share price, the litigation and public disclosure of internal filings carry reputational risks. Robinson cautions that even if Evolution wins the final dispute, filings and findings could stir old concerns over grey market exposure. Evolution has said its long-standing complaint against Black Cube will be updated to include Playtech.

An affidavit made by Yanus, and shared during court proceedings, suggested Evolution was supplying games in Iran, Sudan and Syria – countries designated as state sponsors of terrorism. Evolution, in its most recent case filing disputing claims made by Black Cube, has insisted these were “material false statements”.

But court documents relating to Evolution’s case include comments that suggest Evolution does maintain some presence in black markets. The document cites a recording made by Black Cube of a conversation with Kfir Kugler, the founder and CEO of developer Ezugi, a live casino developer Evolution acquired in 2018. It quotes Kugler as saying: “[W]hat we do is that we supply products. This is, you know, unofficial. So, we do have games for Kurdistan and Iraq.”

Separately, Evolution remains embroiled in a UK Gambling Commission investigation for providing its games to black market operators. An update on this is expected before the end of the year. “I’d expect pointed questions from investors, but no break in confidence. The risk now sits in perception, not fundamentals,” Robinson says of the review.

Asia cyber attacks and RNG performance impacts Evolution valuation

Evolution claims the 2021 report has caused “multi‑billion‑dollar damage” to its business and share value. Reports have previously said that when the report first came to light, Evolution’s share price “plummeted by more than 30% over the week, wiping approximately $10 billion off its market capitalisation”.  Current data show Evolution’s market cap at around €11.6 billion (at the end of October 2025), which is a drop from about €26.9 billion in December 2021.

But beyond its long-claimed links to grey or black markets the supplier has faced increased valuation damage from continued cyber attacks across Asia and internal restructuring following a number of acquisitions. Its RNG business has been on a slow recovery journey for the last few quarters.

As the dispute progresses, the case could continue to impact share prices for both Evolution and Playtech, Robinson says. “From a share value perspective, both sides appear to have little to gain from letting this escalate.”

With regards to access to operators in unregulated jurisdictions, the complex web of aggregator networks and VPN usage makes complete prevention virtually impossible. 

“Content from major suppliers, including both Evolution and Playtech, often appears through third-party aggregators. That doesn’t prove direct involvement; it reflects the increasingly fragmented nature of distribution,” he adds.

Evolution must abide by Market Abuse Regulation

An equity analyst speaking to iGB under condition of anonymity, believes both Playtech and Evolution are aware their products seep into unregulated territories, and they should also be aware how bringing attention to this will eventually damage them both.

“It’s common knowledge that content leaks into grey or even black markets through intermediaries or cloned instances. Everyone in the sector understands this, and both sides must recognise that escalation could harm them equally,” they add.

Evolution, listed on the Nasdaq Stockholm exchange, faces particular scrutiny under the EU Market Abuse Regulation (MAR). When court proceedings reveal information that could affect a company’s valuation, that data may qualify as inside information – requiring prompt public disclosure. Failure to do so can invite regulatory investigation or sanctions. 

A Nasdaq spokesperson declined to comment on the specific case but told iGB: “It is the company’s responsibility to assess whether information constitutes inside information and to indicate this in the press release with reference to MAR.

“We continuously review that issuers comply with the Exchange’s rules and may initiate an investigation against an issuer if there are suspicions of rule violations.” 

Evolution’s balance sheet looks strong 

The saga underscores the growing struggles of corporate rivalry in the online gambling industry. Black Cube, known for its work in geopolitical and corporate espionage, was contracted to explore potential misconduct against a competitor.

Yet the path to accountability has been slow, with Black Cube repeatedly resisting court orders and Playtech striving to remain anonymous for some time. The litigation comes at a moment when the regulatory environment for B2B gaming suppliers is tightening, particularly in Europe.

Richard Williams, a lawyer at Keystone Law, notes that the issues raised in Evolution’s case are far from isolated. “The CEO of the Gambling Commission [Andrew Rhodes] said at his briefing in London on 7 November, that there will be a lot more to come in relation to games suppliers providing games to black market operators serving the UK,” he notes.

“I do not therefore think that Evolution is a special case. We are likely to see a lot more enforcement activity against licensed B2B software developers over the course of the next 12 months.” 

Broader implications on competitive ethics?

Investors will be watching not only the legal outcomes but also the broader implications for governance, compliance and competition ethics. Robinson suggests that the case may reshape investor thinking around reputation and ethics within the sector. “The case paints Playtech as the instigator and that plays in Evolution’s favour.

“The market split confirms it, positioning Evolution as the one smeared, not at fault. Regulators are likely to stay on the sidelines, but sentiment clearly leans against Playtech. In the B2B igaming space, investors may start scoring ethics and rivalry conduct alongside compliance, raising scrutiny on intel tactics.” 

Financially, the litigation and reputational fallout have not materially destabilised Evolution, which has historically had a strong balance sheet and substantial liquidity. “I’d expect a small risk premium to linger until the case closes, probably into 2026. Evolution’s balance sheet looks strong enough to support ongoing dividends and buybacks, and legal costs appear contained. Unless those costs escalate meaningfully, there’s no clear reason for capital policy to change,” Robinson observes. 

Nonetheless, the firm’s leadership is conscious of the need to maintain investor trust and demonstrate transparency. Adrian Westman, Evolution’s head of communications, underscores the company’s ongoing commitment to compliance and responsibility.

“Compliance is everyone’s responsibility and Evolution takes it with the utmost seriousness. Evolution invests significantly in systems and technology and uses all tools at our disposal to ensure compliance with all applicable laws, regulations and industry standards,” he tells iGB.

Playtech has also indicated it is committed to overall sector compliance and, in its 21 October statement, said it was “confident that these proceedings will confirm the credibility and legitimacy of the investigation and the importance of the issues it seeks to address”.

“Playtech welcomes court examination of the report and its findings,” it added.

More than a legal scuffle

The case illustrates the tangible costs of reputational warfare. The initial report did not only provoke regulatory scrutiny but resulted in significant financial damage to Evolution. Despite the eventual vindication, being targeted by a well-known competitor using private investigators can quietly hurt the company’s reputation and make investors less confident. 

Robinson reflects: “This dispute highlights ‘reputational warfare’ as a tangible cost of doing business. It echoes Evolution’s 2022 short-seller hit and other recent intelligence skirmishes across the sector. Boards will now tighten oversight of vendor conduct and due diligence, while ESG investors scrutinise governance around reputation management.” 

In January 2022 the company was hit by a short report that claimed the company’s unregulated revenue should have been valued differently from its regulated revenue.

Playtech, meanwhile, is left to contend with the fallout from being publicly identified as the orchestrator of the campaign against Evolution. The £1.8 million paid to Black Cube, while significant, pales in comparison to the reputational and financial costs of a collapsed share price and regulatory attention. For a publicly traded company, a shock of this scale can translate into lasting scrutiny from investors, regulators and analysts, even after the immediate financial penalties are absorbed. 

The Evolution saga is therefore more than a legal scuffle: it is a reminder that in the digital, highly regulated world of online gaming, the boundaries between competition and deception can blur, and the consequences are measured not only in pounds or euros, but in trust and market confidence. 

Evolution continuously denies black market links

As the case progresses through 2026, it will continue to command attention from investors, competitors and regulators alike. However, Evolution is confident in its legal footing. Westman insists the company’s focus is on accountability rather than damage control. “Evolution’s current defamation litigation is the company’s effort to hold Playtech and Black Cube accountable for its wrongdoing and protect shareholder value,” he said. 

But Playtech is also confident of its position. In its public statement it said its subsidiary approached Black Cube as an independent investigator to look into “credible and repeated concerns” from operators, suppliers and regulators about Evolution’s activities in prohibited and sanctioned markets. 

When asked by iGB, Westman insists the findings in the Playtech-commissioned report were false. Indeed, Evolution has for several years firmly denied it has had any involvement in illegal activities.

The next legal steps for Evolution will be to prepare its defamation case against Playtech and Black Cube case for trial, which is expected to run through 2026. “We are confident that the law and facts are on our side and look forward to presenting our case,” Westman adds. 

A total of 1,024 players have been suspended, the TFF confirmed on Monday as an investigation is carried out, including footballers from some of the leading teams in Turkey including Galatasaray, Besiktas and Trabzonspor.  

All players were referred to the Professional Football Disciplinary Board (PFDK) as part of the process.

One of the most high-profile names on the list is Turkish international Eren Elmali, who plays for Galatasaray. The club currently sits first in the Süper Lig, the country’s top division. Following publication of the list, Elmali was withdrawn from the Turkish national team squad ahead of the upcoming World Cup qualification matches against Spain and Bulgaria.

Elmali has since posted a statement on social media, in which he claimed his name appeared on the list in reference to a bet made five years ago. He denied placing any other bets since this wager.

“I want to make clear that my name is included in this file because of a betting transaction I made about five years ago involving someone other than my own team,” Elmali said on Instagram. “Since then, I have neither placed a bet nor had any connection to this matter.”

Lower Turkish leagues suspended amid betting probe

To support clubs during the suspension, the TFF has agreed with Fifa to grant a 15-day transfer and registration period. This will allow clubs to sign new players for a limited time outside the traditional transfer window.

In addition, the TFF has elected to suspend all matches in two lower divisions for two weeks. No games will take place in either the TFF 2. Lig or TFF 3. Lig for at least the next fortnight.

All scheduled matches across the top-tier Süper Lig and TFF 1. Lig will run as planned. No matches are due to take place this coming weekend due to the international break.

“The TFF is continuing correspondence with official institutions, and the investigation will be expanded and continued based on these responses,” the TFF said.

Potential damage to football in Turkey

In terms of the wider impact on Turkish football, Bıçak Law Firm founder Vahit Bıçak tells iGB it could damage the reputation of Turkish football, both reputationally and structurally.

“If the allegations prove accurate, this suggests that betting-related misconduct is not confined to isolated incidents but may indicate systemic weaknesses in integrity education, monitoring and enforcement mechanisms across the football pyramid,” Bıçak says

“The investigation’s scale risks undermining public trust in the fairness and transparency of domestic competitions. Sponsors, broadcasters and fans all expect clear evidence that the sport is governed by strong ethics and accountability. Hence, the PFDK’s proactive stance – although dramatic in scale – should also be viewed as a reaffirmation of Turkey’s commitment to protecting the integrity of the game.”

TFF regulations state any player found to have participated in betting or gambling on football matches, domestic or international, could face disciplinary penalties. These can range from match suspensions and monetary fines to long-term or permanent bans.

However, Bıçak says there are broader criminal law implications. If a player is found to have participated in, facilitated, or benefited from illegal betting, this could trigger prosecution under Law No 7258, which may lead to fines or imprisonment.

A turning point for Turkish football?

He believes the case is so serious that betting regulations in Turkey could be overhauled. This, he said, would introduce clearer oversight mechanisms and reduce the appeal of unregulated markets.

“This investigation has the potential to become a turning point for Turkish football,” Bıçak said. “While it exposes serious integrity concerns, it also presents an opportunity to strengthen regulatory frameworks, improve compliance culture and restore confidence in the sport.

“The key will be ensuring that enforcement is balanced with education and preventive measures, so that future generations of players understand both the ethical and legal consequences of betting activity.

“The distinction between casual betting and organised illegal betting activity is crucial in determining the level of liability and potential criminal exposure,” Bıçak adds.

He explains the case could lead to widespread reform of Turkish sport, as well as the approach towards betting regulation and education. This could include improved education and integrity programmes, closer cooperation between regulators and law enforcement and increased transparency and digital monitoring.

The committee made these recommendations in its report on the taxation of gambling in the UK on Friday. These follow an inquiry into proposed increases in gambling tax held in October and will inform the government on what route to take on gambling taxation, ahead of the 26 November autumn budget.

First, the committee said the government must take account of the different harms caused by different types of gambling. It said the Treasury must ensure Remote Gaming Duty and Machine Gaming Duty are always set at a higher rate than Gaming Duty.

“Different forms of gambling cause varying level of harm to individuals, families and society,” the report said. “We are not convinced that current Treasury policy on the taxation of gambling captures the varying extent of those harms.

“We are urging the government not to cave in to industry scaremongering and to tax online betting games at a rate that reflects the level of harm they inflict.”

Risks differ across gambling verticals

The report insisted current Treasury policy on gambling taxation did not “capture the varying extent of [the] harms” caused by online casinos.

“The government should sharpen the differentiation between physically present gambling related to horse racing or arcades, versus the online games that promote harmful, addictive, high frequency betting that bring no engagement with or benefit to life in our communities,” the report stated.

Stewart Kenny, a former industry executive who was co-founder of Paddy Power, was among those who contributed to the inquiry, calling for tax rates to be based on the level of harm associated with each vertical.

“If there is only one message that I get through to you, it is that betting on horse racing or betting on the next general election is less harmful than betting on fixed-odds betting terminals or online slots, mainly,” he said during the October panel.

“There are two ways of seeing whether a product is highly addictive: how quick is it between investment and result, and how quickly can you repeat the dose?”

Questions over black market impact

As for the black market, the committee’s report urged the government to look at new ways to address the issue. It called on the Treasury to review whether additional anti-avoidance measures were needed to stop players migrating.

“For too many people, the highly addictive and harmful nature of online betting games has seriously impacted their lives and the lives of those around them,” said Dame Meg Hillier, chair of the committee.

The report also considered the sector’s argument that raising UK gambling tax could lead to a rise in black market gambling where offers and odds won’t be impacted by the higher tax rates.

Within the report, the committee considered the Betting & Gaming Council’s own recent report, which warned that a tax hike could see up to £3.1 billion lost from the economy. However, the committee said that as the EY-produced filing was funded by the gambling industry, it could be considered biased.

It also noted a separate “Harm Reduction Journal” paper which concluded that taxation of gambling was “unlikely to significantly direct consumption and drive consumption to offshore markets”.

Kenny had also dismissed black market threats in his inquiry panel session. “When I campaigned for the gambling industry, I always used to talk about black markets and job losses,” he said. “We saw it again when the FOBT legislation was brought in: ‘Oh, this will close all the shops,’ but it didn’t. It is a bit of scaremongering.”

What has been said so far on the potential UK gambling tax hike?

The gambling tax discussion commenced in April when the Treasury launched a consultation considering a proposal for a single rate for all remote gambling. This would replace the current, three-banded tax rate system.

Then in August, the IPPR advised the government to increase remote gaming duty from 21% to 50% and machine games duty from 20% to 50% of operator profit, with both measures expected to raise an additional £3 billion ($4 billion) in tax revenue per year. 

Since then, over 100 Labour MPs have backed potential gambling tax reforms and suggestions to increase the rate to 50%. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has also said previously that the industry must pay its “fair share” of tax.

“I do think there’s a case for gambling firms paying more,” Reeves told ITV in September. “On a personal level, I’ve never bet in my life. They make an important contribution to the economy, but they should pay their fair share of taxes. We’ll make sure that happens.”

The regulator mapped out its concerns in the fourth and final chapter of its research into illegal online gambling. The report considered the challenges of estimating the size of the market and the commission’s recommendations for further progress.

The report considered three approaches to estimating the scale of illegal online gambling in Britain, including dwell time approach, which converts data on engagement and ‘time-spent-on-site’ into expenditure estimates.

The second method is the channelisation approach, based on comparing data on legal and illegal ‘channels’ of engagement with gambling. Finally, the survey-based approach involves players responding to pre-set questions.

Of these three, the Gambling Commission only pursued the dwell time and channelisation methodologies in its four-part report. It said underlying data from surveys was unreliable as consumers’ recall of past expenditure in gambling surveys is “generally poor”.

However, the regulator said neither of the other two approaches presented enough data to allow it to form an accurate view of the illegal market, saying more work is required to make progress.

Minimal findings from dwell time approach

From the data drawn from dwell time and channelisation approaches, the regulator was able to present some findings.

Referencing dwell time results, it looked at the activity of 117 players gambling with illegal websites. Sports betting was the most popular activity with an average of 34% of players taking part, ahead of bingo on 14% and slot and instant win, both with 13%.

However, the primary limitation here was the size of the sample and it not being fully representative.

Also within this section was ‘Patterns of Play’ research on expenditure per minute in the legal market. This showed casino as the main vertical, with £1.12 gross gambling yield (GGY) per minute, ahead of slots on £0.32. However, with the data coming from 2018-19, it was seen as outdated compared to the current market.

The final piece of research looked at online slots GGY per minute between 2020 and 2025. This remained relatively steady throughout, with the most recent rate being £0.24 in March this year.

“Dwell time approach allows us to attempt to convert objective estimates of engagement data using known data from legal market,” the regulator said. “This requires several assumptions to be made – each introducing additional uncertainty to these estimates. Further work on these actions is required before we will reach a position where reliable estimates can be published.”

Channelisation rate far from clear for Gambling Commission

Turning to the channelisation approach, the regulator said while there is potential with this method, more work is needed to verify the accuracy of estimates of web traffic and app use in the legal market to allow reliable channelisation rates to be estimated.

It created a list of all websites associated with operators licensed by the commission and can use digital data company SimilarWeb for estimates of numbers of visits and duration. However, there are some limitations, including that it does not usually observe app versions of illegal websites

“Given the likely strong degree of app-based spend in the legal market, we also need to obtain web traffic data for both apps-based and website-based engagement with legal sites,” it said. “SimilarWeb provides estimates of both. Ideally, we would benefit from operators’ insights to help us verify the accuracy of these estimates.”

Then there were limitations on GGY data and using this to estimate activity within the illegal market. This, it said, related to the margins of error associated with each estimate. It gave the example of statistics covering the period April 2023 to March 2024, which showed total online GGY of £6.9 billion. If channelisation rate estimate was out by just 0.5%, this would be a difference of £34.5 million in the associated estimate of GGY.

What does the Commission plan to do?

In its conclusion, the regulator said while each method has limitations, there are options to open-up a pathway to allow a “robust estimate” of illegal online gambling in Britain.

For the dwell time approach, these options include using data from consumers who have used illegal websites to understand how they differ from legal operators. It will also consider using data from licensed operators to shed light on betting spend and engagement, as well as updating the Pattern of Play report with fresh data.

The Commission also said it could look at trends in VPN downloads to see how many players could be accessing illegal, overseas sites. In relation to this is a potential focus on key search terms for unlicensed sites and the volume of these within search engines.

“Developing this estimate is a worthwhile exercise,” the regulator said. “We recognise that several third parties have published estimates.

“While we welcome the focus on this issue, and recognise the concern stakeholders have about illegal gambling, we urge caution over use of estimates where the methodologies are not clear and levels of uncertainty are not set out.”

Ongoing commitment by the Gambling Commission

The report’s conclusion echoed comments from John Pierce, director of enforcement and intelligence at the regulator. In a recent blog, he set out the commission’s commitment to improving its approach to researching and tackling illegal gambling in Britain.

Among these efforts, Pierce said, are strengthening intelligence capabilities and forging new partnerships across technological and financial sectors and with international regulators. He also noted investment in organisational resilience such as developing new tools, equipping its teams with the right skills and targeted research and data.

“Illegal gambling is not a static threat,” Pierce said. “It is adaptive, opportunistic and increasingly embedded in digital ecosystems on the international stage. Through targeted disruption, strategic partnerships and continued investment in capability, we are building a resilient and effective framework to protect consumers and uphold the integrity of the regulated sector.

“We are making progress; and we are committed to going further.”

Back in July, the Federation of State Gaming Regulators of Nigeria (FSGRN) strongly opposed the enactment of the bill, which sought federal control over all games of chance. The first incarnation of the licensing regime was in the National Lottery Act 2005 but that was nullified by the Supreme Court in November 2024.

At the time the Supreme Court ruled the country’s National Lottery Act was void and its state legislative assemblies should regulate lottery and games of chance instead of the federal government of Nigeria.

But the House of Representatives has been pushing for a similar piece of law to pass, the Nigeria Central Gaming Bill, which largely mirrors the previous framework.

The chamber has come under fire for trying to flout the ruling of the Supreme Court – the final authority that defines federal laws or the constitution.

“Once the court has made a decision on a subject, it becomes final and binding on all persons and authorities – including the executive and the legislature,” Nelson Ekujumi, leader of the CCG group Comrade, said during its recent conference.

“We are at a loss to try and rationalise why the National Assembly, made up of the Senate and the House of Representatives, is attempting to illegally and unconstitutionally rewrite the law.

“This is nothing short of legislative provocation and lawlessness which stands condemned in all ramifications.

“If the Senate proceeds with this illegal bill, it would amount to a brazen defiance of judicial authority and a direct attack on the rule of law,” Ekujumi added.

Legal advisory calls the move unfounded

Clarifying the ongoing tussle between these bodies, gaming law expert and senior partner at Allen & Marylebone, Obinna Akpuchukwu says the move remains not just “unconstitutional” but “unfounded”.

Speaking to iGB, he is very critical of the National Assembly’s repeated moves to try and override the standing ruling on NIgeria’s

“The Central Gaming Bill, if passed into law will be unconstitutional,” Akpuchukwu says.

“The argument of the proponents of the bill to the effect that the bill seeks to regulate online/remote gaming activities in Nigeria and that the repealed National Lottery Act did not provide for the regulation of online/remote gaming activities, is with respect, unfounded.

“All the forms of gaming activities stated in sections 24(1) and 25(1) of the Central Gaming Bill which the Central Gaming Commission will regulate when the bill is passed into law are accommodated within the definition of “lottery” as provided in section 57 of the nullified National Lottery Act,” he continues.

“In other words, the provisions of the nullified National Lottery Act cover land-based, online and remote gaming activities and the Supreme Court did not make any distinction between land-based gaming and online/remote gaming activities.”

A diplomatic counsel to the matter?

Akpuchukwu suggests a formal process of amendment could be the only solution to achieve the National Assembly’s goals. Not to do so would render their current attempts null and void.

“In the decision of the Supreme Court in Attorney General of Lagos State & Ors vs Attorney General of the Federation & Ors (2025), the court emphatically declared that lottery and gaming are not matters listed in either the Exclusive or Concurrent Legislative Lists of the 1999 Constitution (as amended),” Akpuchukwu explains.

“Rather, gaming and lottery are items within the Residual Matters, meaning only state governments have the constitutional authority to legislate and regulate such activities within their territories. Neither the Exclusive Legislative list nor the Concurrent Legislative list contains ‘online gaming’.”

His opinion suggests that, if the National Assembly feels strongly that it needs to have a central regulatory body for online/remote gaming, then the best approach would be to begin the process of amending the constitution to include online gaming in the Exclusive Legislative list.

“The current attempt to enact the Central Gaming Bill into law will only be a wasted effort,” Akpuchukwu concludes definitively. “The Supreme Court is most likely to nullify it, just as it did the National Lottery Act.”

NetBet, which operates the UK’s Netbet.co.uk website, will pay the fine as part of a settlement with the regulator. All funds will go to socially responsible causes, the commission said.

Setting out the failings, identified between November 2023 and July 2024, the regulator noted several issues related to AML. All referred to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Licence Condition 2.1.1, covering preventing money laundering and terrorist financing.

Among the issues was how NetBet was “over reliant” on financial triggers, with examples of customers spending disproportionally compared to their reported net income.

In one instance, a customer was not referred to the money laundering reporting officer and remained as low-risk for AML despite depositing around £2,000 within four active days, via an e-wallet and working in a higher-risk occupation.

The regulator noted how a pay slip submitted later by the user showed monthly net pay of approximately £2,800, but disproportionate spend was not considered when they deposited £1,650 within a two-hour period.

The commission also flagged examples of “significant” gambling activity taking place where users showed concerning behaviours. However, the operator still considered them low risk, and no action was taken.

NetBet was also criticised for its money laundering and terrorist financing risk assessment, with the regulator saying this omitted some key risks. These included management of third-party business relationships, high stakes gambling and controls relating to third-country nationals residing in Britain.

NetBet failed to minimise harm risks

As for social responsibility failures, the commission focused on two primary areas of concern at NetBet.

Firstly, it said the operator had failed to implement “effective” customer interaction systems and processes to minimise gambling harms risks.

Concerns were also raised over how NetBet did not identify indicators of harm in a “timely manner”. Expanding on this, the regulator noted how signs such as overnight play, velocity of deposits, exhausting limits and escalated gameplay were not flagged until after a manual review.

In addition, NetBet was discovered to have submitted inaccurate information when filing regulatory returns. The Gambling Commission said it had breached Licence Condition 15.3.1, in reference to providing timely and accurate information to the regulator.

Commission flags ‘serious consequences’ of non-compliance

Based on these findings, the commission deemed it necessary to penalise NetBet, with the payment being in lieu of a financial penalty. The operator will also undertake an independent audit of the flagged policies, procedures and controls, as well as help cover the costs of the investigation.

John Pierce, director of enforcement at the commission, said the case should serve as a warning to other operators. He said the regulator will intervene when standards slip and rules are broken.

“This case highlights the serious consequences of failing to meet AML and social responsibility obligations,” he said. “We expect all operators to take note and ensure their systems are not only well-designed but are working effectively to protect consumers and to keep crime out of gambling.

“The operator was instructed to take immediate action and make significant improvements to its systems and controls. This included strengthening their risk assessments, improving how they identify and respond to indicators of harm and ensuring the accuracy of the data they report to us.

“Our focus is on ensuring operators meet the standards we expect and, where they fall short, we will intervene.”

Another intervention by the Gambling Commission

The commission has taken action against several operators in recent weeks over failures.

In October, the regulator suspended Spribe OÜ’s software licence for failing to comply with hosting requirements. It said this was necessary on “grounds of suitability” due to “serious” non-compliance.

Spribe was required to immediately halt all hosting activity in line with the suspension. It may not resume hosting activities until the suspension is lifted and a suitable hosting licence is issued by the regulator.

Meanwhile, the regulator suspended the operating licence of VGC Leeds Limited, which operates the Victoria Gate Casino land-based venue in Leeds, England.

A compliance assessment of the venue uncovered failures to maintain and implement effective anti-money laundering policies, procedures and controls, as required by licence.

In August, the UK Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) charged Alexander and 10 others with offences that included conspiracy to defraud and fraudulent evasion of income tax. 

The charges relate to the activities of GVC Holdings between 2011 and 2018 via a subsidiary it owned in Turkey. 

In the plea and trial preparation hearing on Monday, His Honour Judge Baumgartner stated his preference was to delay arraignment, the process where defendants are informed of the charges against them. As such no pleas were given during the session.  

The judge said the case would be split into three trials, with the first to include Alexander and former GVC chairman Lee Feldman, as well as five others, provided they didn’t plead guilty to all the charges. 

The first hearing will commence on 14 February 2028, with a trial window of four months. 

The second hearing, where Alexander MacAngus, Richard Raubitscheck-Smith and Raymond Smart will be tried, was set for October 2028.  

MacAngus is facing charges of conspiracy to defraud, while Raubitscheck-Smith and Raymond Smart will be tried on conspiracy charges to defraud and bribe. 

The final hearing will begin on 5 March 2029 and will centre on Robert Hoskin, Entain’s chief governance officer between 2020 and 2023, who was charged with perverting the course of justice. 

Questions raised over evidence, trial location and Entain commercial interests 

During Monday’s session, the defence team questioned the extensive evidence CPS is expected to provide during the trials. One lawyer described it as a “blizzard of material”. 

The judge called for dialogue between the two sides to discuss the volume of evidence being presented. 

Potential reporting restrictions were also highlighted relating to a commercial interest that Entain had in some of the materials, though no conclusion was made on this matter. 

Also discussed was the location of the trials, with many expecting the case to be moved to Leeds Crown Court after comments made at a hearing last month at Westminster Magistrates’ Court. 

On the potential move, the prosecution pointed to many of the alleged criminal activities occurring in the north of England. 

However, Judge Baumgartner said the case would remain at Southwark Crown Court. He stated the disruption in moving the case could cause “great cost for the public purse”.  

Entain’s historical operations in Turkey 

The trials will cover the CPS’ uncovering of these allegations brought against the defendants.  

The case dates back to July 2019 when GVC Holdings denied allegations it was continuing to benefit from the activities of Headlong Limited, a former Turkey-facing subsidiary it owned from 2011 to 2017. 

The company insisted all connections had been cut when the business was sold to Ropso Malta Limited in November 2017, under a deal that included a performance-based earn-out of up to €150 million ($175 million). 

However, the UK’s HMRC later requested further details on the deal from GVC and, in 2020, expanded its probe to include possible “corporate offending”. 

After rebranding as Entain, the company acknowledged that historical misconduct may have occurred, involving a number of employees and former third-party suppliers. 

As the investigation continued, Entain agreed to pay a £585 million financial penalty linked to its past operations in Turkey, relating to alleged breaches of Section 7 of the UK Bribery Act. 

As part of the settlement, Entain also agreed to donate £20 million to charity and pay £10 million to cover the legal costs of the CPS and HMRC. 

Alexander and the others were subsequently charged in August this year in relation to the investigation.

Malta regulator warns of unlicensed websites

The Malta Gaming Authority has warned that several websites are falsely claiming they hold licences in the country.  

The MGA denied any connection with PangaGames.com, Casino1bet.online, PalmsBet1.com, Flexiblesport.com and Casino-Europa.eu. It also denied links with a longer domain operating under the Memo Casino brand.

The regulator said that any reference to the MGA or licences issued by the MGA is “false and misleading”. It cautioned consumers not to gamble with any unauthorised websites or operators.

“The activities of unlicensed entities are unregulated and do not provide the necessary safeguards delineated by virtue of the framework, making transactions with such entities risky for consumers,” the MGA said.

Kambi scores Superbet deal

Kambi Group has entered into an Odds Feed+ partnership with multi-channel sports betting and gaming operator Superbet Group.

Under the deal, Kambi will provide Superbet with access to its full library of traded odds. This includes the ability to expand its odds package to meet player demand and support evolving strategic needs.

Founded in Romania in 2008, Superbet has a presence in several European countries as well as in Brazil.

“This partnership reflects the strength of our trading capability and the trust Superbet Group has placed in Kambi to support their long-term growth,” Kambi CEO Werner Becher said.

North Dakota Lottery switches with Scientific Games

Scientific Games has announced the conversion of the North Dakota Lottery’s system technology.

Scientific Games is powering the lottery with its latest central gaming system and iLottery solution. This, the provider said, will modernise both retail lottery and digital sales.

The omnichannel solution is delivered through Scientific Games’ Momentum integrated ecosystem. This also includes a player account management and CRM solution, featuring an integrated loyalty program, bonusing engine and achievement-based rewards

“We are committed to making the North Dakota Lottery relevant for generations to come and by doing so we achieve our mission to benefit programs meant to improve the quality of life in our state,” said Thomas Lawler, director of the North Dakota Lottery.

SIS lands Racing WA rights deal

Sports Information Services has agreed to a long-term international media rights deal with Racing WA.

SIS will deliver horse and greyhound racing fixtures from Western Australia to its partners around the world. This covers 283 meetings from 31 tracks across the state, including the Perth Cup.

All races will be delivered as an end-to-end solution, including livestreamed pictures, data and on-screen graphics with betting triggers. SIS already offers racing content from both Victoria and South Australia.

“By expanding our content to three major states through this deal with such a well-regarded partner, we are confident the comprehensive offering will be strongly received around the world,” said Conall McSorley, head of racing at SIS.

ENJOY extends reach with Groove Technologies

New software developer ENJOY has secured a strategic partnership with Groove Technologies.

The deal will see Groove offer ENJOY’s content to its network of operator customers around the world. ENJOY develops both slot and live game show titles.

Content such as slot games Hot Fire Coins 2, Fire Express, 3 Mariachi and Bison Strike will be made available to Groove’s partners. Also on offer will be game shows such as Enchanted Forest and Egypt Roulette.

“Our portfolio is growing every month, and to sustain that momentum, we need our titles in front of the right people in the right markets,” said Christos Zoulianitis, chief commercial officer at ENJOY. “Groove enables exactly that, and we’re confident this will be another successful collaboration that will drive both brands forward.”

In his opinion, the AG said it could be argued that Maltese law increases the risk of an operator dissipating its assets or failing to enforce a freezing order. This could result in assets based outside of Malta facing higher scrutiny.

This is particuarly relevant to any ongoing player losses cases being heard either locally or at a European level.

The opinion related to a player-losses case against Evoke-owned Mr Green, which was initiated in Austria where it does not hold an operating licence.

In this particular case, an Austrian consumer gambled and lost €62,878 ($72,419) with Mr Green between January 2017 and April 2019. They brought brought civil proceedings in Austria against the Malta-based Mr Green, arguing their contract with the operator was void.

Austrian courts agreed and ordered Mr Green to refund the consumer’s stakes, plus interest and costs.

However, the player elected to push the case further. In February last year, they applied for a European Account Preservation Order (EAPO) to freeze Mr Green’s bank accounts in other European Union member states, including Ireland, Malta, Sweden and Luxembourg.

An EAPO is a legal tool used in the EU to help creditors recover debts. This is done by freezing funds held in a debtor’s bank account in another EU member state.

EAPO uncertainties leads to concerns

At first, the court rejected the application as it did not believe there was an “urgent need” for the condition to be met.

The court’s primary concern was whether Malta’s Article 56A would block the EAPO. Article 56A is a hotly debated amendment within Malta’s gambling laws which protects local licensees from legal cases brought against them in other EU states

It also flagged the risks of enforcing an EAPO amid concerns that assets could have been moved around or further enforcement obstacles could block the effort. It also noted a delay in filing the claim from the original dispute. The AG warned judgments in other EU states, including EAPOs, could still be enforced despite the protection of Article 56A.

No automatic protection with Article 56A  

With this, the AG said licensing in Malta did not automatically protect an operator from actions carried out in other jurisdictions. He advised operators to keep clear records, avoid dispersing or hiding assets post-judgment and ensure prompt responses to legal claims. Failure to do this, the AG said, increases the risk of successful preservation orders and enforcement overseas.

In addition, the AG picked up on the issue of timing around when an EAPO is filed. In the case of Mr Green, what counted for the operator was that it had terminated its Austrian-facing payment service provider arrangement in early 2021. This, the AG, said was taken into account upon the EAGO filing.

Article 56A could cause issues rather than protect

Summing up the case, it places further pressure on the impact of Article 56A in Malta. While it can be applied in some instances, its validity could be questioned if it tried to prevent foreign court rulings.

EU states can continue to pursue EAPOs on the grounds that Malta’s Article 56A poses risks to the judicial process. As such, operators could see their assets outside Malta frozen.

Incidentally, the opinion seems to support recent comments from the European Commission that the amendment undermines judicial processes across EU member states. In June, the commission wrote to the Maltese government over Article 56A, saying it does not automatically protect Malta-licensed operators from overseas judgments.

In the commission’s letter, it argued Article 56A unfairly shielded Malta licensees against legal challenges brought by other EU markets, and therefore “undermined the principle of mutual trust in the administration of justice”.

The regulator announced the decision on 31 October, following a recent compliance assessment of the venue. It said this had uncovered failures to maintain and implement effective anti-money laundering policies, procedures and controls, as required by licence.

Serious concerns were also identified regarding the decision-making processes and responses to identified AML and counter-terrorist financing risks. This, the regulator said, raised questions about the overall effectiveness of governance and risk management arrangements.

The licence suspension was made effective immediately, with VGC Leeds required to halt all operations. It includes VGC Leeds’ remote and land-based casino licences and its land-based bingo licence.

‘Serious’ threat to licence objectives

In its ruling, the regulator said the licence would remain suspended while it carried out a broader review of VGC Leeds’ operations. This, it said, would establish whether it was still suitable to hold a licence for casino operations.

“These failings are considered significant and represent a serious threat to the licensing objectives, in particular keeping crime out of gambling,” the Gambling Commission said.

“We have made it clear to the operator that during the suspension, we expect it to focus on treating consumers fairly and keeping them fully informed of any developments which impact them.”

Located in Leeds city centre, the casino offers a range of slot machines, table games and electronic roulette games. It also features bars and lounges for watching sports events and hosting live entertainment.

This is not VCG Leeds’ first penalty from the Gambling Commission. In October 2021, the licence holder was handed a £450,000 regulatory settlement after the commission flagged a number of social responsibility and AML failures at the casino.

Another licence suspension in Great Britain

VGC Leeds was the second gaming operator in just a few days to have its licence suspended by the commission.

In late October, the regulator also suspended Spribe OÜ’s software licence after ruling it had failed to comply with hosting requirements. It said this was necessary on “grounds of suitability” due to “serious” non-compliance.

Spribe was required to immediately halt all hosting activity in line with the suspension. It may not resume hosting activities until the suspension is lifted and a suitable hosting licence is issued by the regulator.

In a statement released on Thursday the regulator said it was necessary to suspend Spribe’s software licence on “grounds of suitability” due to “serious” non-compliance.

Spribe is required to immediately halt all hosting activity in line with the suspension. It may not resume hosting activities until the suspension has been lifted and a suitable hosting licence is issued by the regulator.

Hosting is described by the Gambling Commission as a supplier housing games on its own servers, with players are able to access the titles via an operator’s website or app. This is instead of the games sitting on the operator’s own servers.

A hosting licence is required on top of a gambling software licence to carry out these activities in the UK.

Referring to Section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005, the Commission said it was a criminal offence to provide facilities for gambling in Great Britain without a licence, unless a specific exemption applies.

A person or company found guilty of an offence under this section could be liable for or a level 5 fine, as per the commission’s penalty scale, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks.

The Gambling Commission has subsequently initiated a review of the developer’s licence and activities.

Spribe filing additional application

In a comment to iGB, Spribe said it was preparing an application for a remote casino game host licence.

The company said it was taking the matter extremely seriously and was working diligently to resolve the position as swiftly as possible.

“The issue relates to an oversight in the licence application process. In 2020, Spribe applied for and was granted a remote gambling software licence. However, it has now been identified that our business model also requires a remote casino game host licence. This is a technical licensing gap that was not identified during the original application process in 2020,” the statement said.

“We are working urgently to ensure this application is submitted as soon as possible and that all technical and regulatory requirements are fully met. We hope the Commission will be able to approve the application promptly and that we can recommence operations in the UK market as soon as possible.

“As a company we remain fully committed to compliance, transparency and maintaining the highest standards of software integrity across all markets in which we operate. Throughout our five years of operation in the British market, Spribe has consistently complied with all regulatory requirements under our gambling software licence.”

Spribe said its suspension should not affect players’ ability to access their accounts or withdraw funds.

In a seperate note sent to its partners, Spribe said it expected to reinstate the delivery of Aviator to the UK market in the upcoming month.

Influence of Spribe’s Aviator

Spribe’s Aviator game has gained huge popularity across the UK and Europe more broadly since its release in 2019.

In an iGB op-ed published in February, Spribe CEO David Natroshvili said the game had more than 42 million players per month on a global scale. Up to 350,000 bets are placed at the 5,000 casinos offering Aviator each minute, he said.

Following the commission’s announcement, a blank screen showed when trying to access the Aviator product via the Paddy Power website.

Gambling Commission expects ‘highest standard’ of compliance

Commenting on the suspension, the Commission said it takes a robust approach to unlicensed gambling activity.

“We always expect the highest standards of compliance and integrity from licensees. We expect the licensee to promptly notify any parties impacted by service disruptions and to ensure that all operations are halted in line with the conditions of their operating licence until further notice,” it added.

Spribe was issued its gambling software licence in Great Britain in December 2020.

Austrac notified Entain in December 2024 that it would be taking action over what it viewed as “serious and systematic” non-compliance. It was the first time Austrac had brought civil penalty proceedings against an online betting business.

Entain commenced mediation with the regulator during the summer, with this still ongoing. Earlier in October, Entain CEO Stella David said this process would take “as long as it takes”, noting progress to date at Entain. The operator also appointed a new permanent CEO for its Australia business in August.

“I think we’re probably market leading [with the system we have in place now],” David said. She noted there was no timeline for proceedings and that the legal process could be worked out in court.

iGB has reached out to Entain for access to its full defence document.

What has Entain said in its defence?

Ina statement, published on Monday, the operator acknowledged there had been “certain deficiencies” in its previous AML/CTF compliance programme between December 2018 and August 2024. However, it disputed some of the allegations and interpretations made by Austrac in its case.

Entain also referenced certain actions it has taken in recent years to address some of the noted concerns. These included a ten-fold increase in AML/CTF staffing and significant investment in new systems and technology.

Other steps included closing higher-risk channels, such as all-cash payment channels, and shutting all customer accounts flagged by Austrac in its investigations of the operator. In addition, Entain has put in place governance, controls, processes and oversight of risks, as well as a new leadership team to oversee these efforts.

Entain added that it has fully cooperated throughout the case and that it continues to engage constructively and in good faith.

What accusations does Entain face?

In its initial filing over the matter, Austrac made several accusations against Entain. These were based on an investigation that started in September 2022.

Stand-out claims included Entain’s board and senior management not having appropriate oversight of its processes. Austrac said this limited its ability to spot risks, thus making the operator vulnerable to criminal exploitation.

Entain was also said to have allowed third parties to accept cash and other deposits on behalf of the business to be credited to betting accounts. This, Austrac said, meant people could fund gambling using the proceeds of crime.

Meanwhile, Entain also failed to carry out appropriate checks on 17 higher-risk customers. This meant a higher risk of sites being exploited by those looking to spend the proceeds of crime. As noted by Entain, it has now closed the accounts of all flagged individuals.

Entain ‘missed the mark’ with existing systems

Commenting on the case, Entain Australia & New Zealand CEO Andrew Vouris said that, while the operator fell short of expectations in the past, it has acknowledged these shortcomings and taken action to right its wrongs.

“We sincerely regret that our old programme didn’t meet expectations,” Vouris said. “We followed expert advice at the time but, looking back, we recognise the old programme missed the mark.

“We’ve acknowledged our shortcomings, taken responsibility and spent the last two years learning from them and fixing them.

“Entain has fundamentally transformed its approach to compliance. We now operate a market-leading programme, underpinned by a compliance-first culture – to win, but not at all costs.”

Criminal player activity

Further light was shed on the case when certain associated court documents were made public in March. These included accusations of Entain failing to report criminal account holders across a number of its Australian brands.

The court documents flagged a series of suspicious activities. Numerous multi-million-dollar deposits and withdrawals were detailed in the filing, between 2019 and 2022.

In one instance, an account had a lifetime turnover of over $57.3 million within the space of a couple of years. Another player account, on the Ned brand, had up to $1.8 million worth of deposits between November 2017 and April 2019 – with $1.2 million withdrawn in the same period.

The case remains ongoing but could result in a hefty financial penalty for Entain. Previous fines dished out to land-based casinos in Australia have totalled tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars.

The regulator detailed its latest actions in the third chapter of its research into illegal online gambling. This focused on the disruption of the market, with the commission running several schemes to combat illegal operators.

For the fourth quarter, ended 30 June, some 321 websites were referred to search engines for removal. This was almost 200 more than in Q3 and more than double both Q1 and Q2.

On top of this, 147 referrals were made to registrars or hosts, while cease-and-desist notices were issued to 145 illegal operators. A further 77 cease-and-desist notices were sent out to advertisers.

As for outcomes of this action, some 214 of the flagged websites were removed from search engines, while 108 other sites were geo-blocked or ring-fenced. The commission also noted 42 advertisements or affiliates linked to black market sites were removed, and 22 others suspended by registrars or hosts.

“Geo-blocking and blocks by registrars appear to be more effective methods of disruption,” the Commission said. “Removals from search engines still have an impact, but to a lesser extent. This is likely because removal from search engines make the website harder to find, but do not fully block access.

“Geo-blocking and registrar blocks are more effective, provided that consumers are not accessing these sites using a virtual private network (VPN) in the case of geo-IP blocking.” 

Long-term impact of disruption

Since April 2024, the regulator’s black market team has issued 3,140 cease-and-desist disruption notices. Cease-and-desist orders hit 2,032 by Q3, while 774 registrar referrals were made, 402 to host and three to payment providers.

In total, 447,778 URLs were referred to Bing and Google since last April. URLs differ to websites in that they are a specific web address for a single page or file, with operators able to run many URLs to the same website. Of those referred, 287,961 have been removed since April last year.

In terms of illustrating wider impact, the Gambling Commission used data from 160 websites that had disruption activities taken against them.  On average, across the 160 sites, there was a 32% decrease in engagement following disruption.

“We recognise that this work is at an early stage, but the signs of progress are encouraging,” the regulator said. “We remain committed to building our capability, sharing our approach internationally and working with industry to protect consumers and uphold the integrity of the regulated market.”

Commission aware of emerging threats

However, despite upping its actions, the Commission said illegal operators are beginning to adapt their tactics in response to interventions.

Among its primary concerns are changes to how URLs are structured, rotating domains and embedding gambling content within unrelated websites. As such, the regulator said it would continue to evolve its methods to effectively tackle illegal operations.

“These behaviours indicate our disruption efforts are having an effect and are prompting evasive action,” it said. “As the illegal marketplace evolves, we will remain alert to these changes and continue to adapt our strategy to ensure we respond quickly to emerging threats.”

What new methods is the Gambling Commission using to combat black market?

As to how the regulator is responding, it is seeking new referral routes with platforms used to host unlicensed gambling content. With this, it will continue to work with host platforms, search engines and content platforms to remove illegal content and obtain data about the operators.

The Commission also flagged evolving efforts in terms of international coordination and cross-border jurisdiction, given that many illegal sites targeting the UK are licensed overseas or have operators based abroad. It is running joint projects with other regulators, including the Dutch Kansspelautoriteit, to align disruption efforts and share intelligence.

Others steps include using machine-learning and scripting to automate scraping of data from illegal sites and compile intelligence. This, the regulator said, supports deeper analysis, helps with removal requests and offers greater insight into large-scale patterns.

The Commission is also seeking to work more closely with financial and payment providers to tackle illegal sites. In January, it made its first referral to Visa for illegal sites facilitating Visa payments. It plans to extend this to Mastercard, as well as digital wallets such as PayPal, Google Pay and Apple Pay.

In addition, it is developing a focused cease-and-desist route for digital marketing associated with illegal sites. This, it said will help tackle aggressive digital marketing and manipulation by such websites.

“We also see a valuable opportunity for industry to continue to support our efforts by sharing intelligence about illegal markets activity having an impact and to also gather insight into marketing and advertising strategies associated with the regulated sector,” the regulator said.

“Alongside our existing approach, this collaboration will be vital in ensuring we continue to tackle illegal activity causing the most harm and develop our wider understanding of the marketing and advertising techniques being deployed or copied by illegal markets actors.”

This week’s revelation that Playtech commissioned a secret and seemingly invasive investigation into Evolution proves that competition among games developers has reached a tipping point.  

 “We are seeing an upward trend in IP disputes because people see huge value in this space. There is a lot to fight over,” says Joel Vertes, partner and co-head of Intellectual Property at CMS in London. 

His team, which is one of the largest IP practices in Europe, regularly deals with disputes involving game developers, platforms and even individuals accused of IP infringements or misappropriation of trade secrets. Vertes highlights the rapid expansion, advanced technology and vast variety as key drivers. “The gaming sector as a whole has just exploded in the last 10 years,” he adds.  

How the Spribe/Aviator case broke new ground 

One case in particular crystallises how IP disputes manifest in the sector. It is the recent high-profile legal battle between the two game developers Spribe and Aviator LLC, which involves Spribe’s award-winning crash game Aviator. 

The dispute started in Georgia last year, in a case that resulted in Spribe being found to have registered Aviator LLC’s trademarks in bad faith. This year the dispute resurfaced in a UK High Court, and in August Spribe won a UK injunction against Aviator LLC, blocking it from producing a copycat crash game and the use of Spribe’s trademarks. 

Although Aviator filed for permission to appeal in the Court of Appeal on 11 September, the application was abandoned on 8 October, and the court dismissed it the same day, having criticised Aviator’s conduct as “petulant”.

The case highlights the UK’s strong enforcement of IP rights. Proceedings regarding the same case are ongoing in other jurisdictions, including the EUIPO. The UK trial is expected to be heard in either 2027 or 2028.  

Protecting IP is challenging 

Vertes underscores the importance of interim injunctions in IP disputes: “Even though temporary, they can be decisive. If granted, the defendant is blocked from acting and many disputes settle shortly after.” 

He explains that in Europe, game mechanics are difficult to protect directly. “Generally, you’re looking at a bundle of rights. So, you’re looking at the brand, and you’re looking at underlying copyright in the source code,” Vertes says. The “general look and feel” of a game, along with registered design rights over graphical user interfaces, have become key IP battlegrounds. 

“The work we’re doing a lot of at the moment is in design rights,” he adds, pointing to how in the UK and Europe, design protection offers a whole new angle to fight over. The increasing speed of game development cycles – accelerated further by AI technology capable of generating code and imagery rapidly – adds urgency to IP vigilance. 

Richard Williams, IP lawyer at Keystone Law in London, emphasises the strategic importance of brand and trademark protection in gaming: “Clearance is a critical step. If you don’t check, you might be blocked from a market or subject to costly litigation.” 

An example of this is the backstory to the dispute between Spribe and Aviator LLC. In its Georgia case Aviator LLC claimed the rights to the name and logo created in 2017.

Williams stresses that smaller markets can still have a huge impact. “This insight reveals how early trademark clearance – often overlooked – can make or break international expansion.” 

IP disputes are being weaponised 

In Europe, legal frameworks around IP protection are more uniform than in many regions, but still complex. Vertes advises that those involved in the industry must become “IP-savvy quite quickly,” ensuring their names, designs and coding practices do not infringe on others’ rights. 

There is agreement among experts to whom iGB has spoken that IP cases are being weaponised in a competitive market. “Obviously, even if the IP dispute isn’t successful, it’s a good way of trying to keep competitors out of the market for as long as possible,” says Richard Williams. 

Joel Vertes agrees that it does happen: “I don’t see any reason why you shouldn’t weaponise your IP. If you’ve filed a patent over some mechanics in a game, or you’ve registered designs over the graphic user interface, why would you not go out and enforce it?” In the end, it is all about upholding brand and technology exclusivity in a highly competitive environment.

“It’s not about squishing small companies from entering the market – they’re perfectly entitled to compete. But that doesn’t mean they’re entitled to step on others’ toes to do it.” 

Across the Atlantic is a different picture 

Across the Atlantic, the situation is notably different, as the US is largely shaped by distinct legal doctrines and litigation cultures. Steven Caloiaro, an intellectual property litigator at the Reno office of Dickinson Wright, offers a contrasting perspective. 

Caloiaro observes that patent litigation in the US gaming sector has actually declined over the last decade. He attributes this to pivotal Supreme Court decisions like Bilski vs Kappos in 2010 which narrowed patent eligibility for software innovations.  

“Bilski made it very difficult to successfully litigate software-related patent cases,” Caloiaro explains. Since many iGaming innovations revolve around software – such as progressive jackpots, reward systems and bonus mechanics – the impact has been significant, he explains. 

“For the established gaming community, litigation has been down – specifically in the iGaming sector.” 

Instead, the rising trend in the US is “softer IP” disputes covering trademarks, trade dress and trade secrets, as evidenced in recent cases like Light & Wonder vs Aristocrat. In that case, a game designer’s movement between companies raised trade secret concerns—a classic scenario in the tight knit industry.

Non-compete enforcement has also increased in the US as companies seek to indirectly protect IP by limiting employee mobility. Caloiaro notes: “Non-competes can serve as a workaround to protect IP.” Despite challenges from the Federal Trade Commission, gaming companies have actively sought to enforce these clauses, he says. 

Fundamental distinctions between Europe and the US

When it comes to enforcement remedies, Caloiaro contrasts the US and Europe: “In the UK or EU, if you win, you’ll almost certainly get an injunction. In the US, it’s not guaranteed, which can reduce the value of a win if you’re trying to keep a competitor off the market.”  

Moreover, damages awarded in US courts tend to be significantly higher, but litigation is also more costly and carries higher risk since parties usually bear their own legal fees regardless of the outcome. 

Outlining other fundamental distinctions between European and US IP enforcement, Vertes says the biggest difference is the size of damages. “US claims can be worth far more than European ones. So if you’re chasing a big monetary win, the US is [more] attractive,” he explains.  

Vertes also points out the value of “design rights” in Europe, a somewhat underutilised protection in the US, where trade secrets and trademarks dominate the softer IP landscape. The Aviator injunction highlights how UK courts actively protect registered trademarks and associated branding.  

By contrast, Caloiaro notes that US patent law’s challenges in protecting software-based innovations tend to reduce patent suits but encourage a focus on trade dress – the visual appearance of a product – and trade secret claims.  

AI’s rise complicates the IP picture on both sides of the Atlantic. Caloiaro agrees that AI lowers barriers to entry and blurs lines between inspiration and infringement, although US patent offices require a human inventor, limiting AI-generated patent claims. 

Best practices moving forward

Both European and US experts emphasise proactive IP management. Vertes urges companies to “choose a name, make sure you’ve cleared it, that you’re not infringing on others”.  

“Talk to your developers. Make sure they’re not just going online and scraping or copying. There’s no rule that says if you make five changes from a copyright work, it’s suddenly okay. It doesn’t work like that,” he says.

Caloiaro stresses the importance of understanding the different IP types – trademarks, copyrights, patents – and filing registrations and documentation accordingly.  Both lawyers are in agreement that, in today’s fiercely competitive and fast-moving iGaming market, a sophisticated IP strategy is essential for any company to survive. 

Platinum, which runs the brand, was also handed a formal warning by the regulator. In addition, it must undergo a third-party audit to ensure it is effectively implementing its AML and safer gambling policies.

Detailing the case, the regulator set out a series of failings. In term of social responsibility, it noted several examples of when the operator fell short of licence conditions.

In one case, a customer interaction system failed to identify a player as at risk of harm. This was despite the customer losing £5,000 within 24 hours of registration, then over £16,000 in less than three months.

Another player lost over £31,000 within nine months without the operator interacting with the customer. The same player reached their monthly loss limit on six occasions and demonstrated markers of harm associated with high velocity gambling.

Meanwhile, Platinum failed to identify a user who exceeded their £2,500 loss limit within 16 minutes of registering their account as being at risk of potential harm. In addition, another player staked £73,000 and lost £4,100 over a 23-day period without any interaction from Platinum.

Blocked customers opened new accounts with Platinum

In terms of AML, again the commission offered several examples. It noted how Platinum’s money laundering/terrorist financing risk assessment failed to take into account customers whose accounts had been closed due to money laundering or terrorist funding concerns prior to 2023. As such, some customers whose accounts were blocked were able to open new accounts and gamble.

Meanwhile, the commission said AML policy “lacked clarity” around customer due-diligence and enhanced customer due-diligence measures conducted and how this was determined by the level of risk displayed by a customer.

Other issues included that there was no evidence that potential high-risk factors were considered when customer reviews were undertaken. Such factors include high-risk occupations, high levels of transactions through deposits and withdrawals, and high losses.

Concluding the case, which covered the period between January 2023 and May 2024, the regulator set out the specific breaches.

These include paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of licence condition 12.1.1 on anti-money laundering and preventing money laundering and terrorist financing. Platinum also breached licence condition 12.1.2, related to anti-money laundering measures for operators based in foreign jurisdictions.

In addition, it failed to comply with several paragraphs of Social Responsibility Code Provision 3.4.3 on customer interaction.

Gambling Commission fines Unibet brand twice in two years

This was the second time Platinum has faced a financial penalty in recent years.

In March 2023, it was slapped with a fine of £2.9 million, again for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures. At the same time, Kindred’s 32Red brand was fined £4.2 million for similar issues.

Commenting on the latest case, commission Director of Enforcement John Pierce said his primary complaint was with unchecked high spending.

“The case revealed serious shortcomings in customer interaction systems, including failures to identify and act on clear markers of harm,” Pierce said. “These included consumers losing thousands within hours or days of registration, repeatedly breaching loss limits and exhibiting patterns of binge and high-velocity gambling without appropriate intervention.

“Alongside the penalty, this operator is required to conduct a follow-up independent audit and internal investigation – providing regular updates to the Commission. These added conditions are designed to drive meaningful change, reinforce accountability and embed a culture of compliance.

“Senior leaders must take ownership of compliance outcomes and ensure lessons are embedded across the organisation, supported by structured reporting and board level oversight – and further regulatory activity will remain a possibility.”

According to EUROMAT, lawmakers in Croatia failed to notify the European Commission over amendments made to the country’s Gambling Act. This, the organisation said, was in breach of European Union (EU) law.

All EU member states are required to inform the European Commission about new draft laws or regulations that affect market access, provision of services, or impose mandatory technical requirements. This is to allow for any scrutiny from the commission.

Changes to the Gambling Act were outlined in March this year. They included mandatory player ID systems, limitations on the location and layout of gambling venues and a ban on online and social-media advertising. Croatia also introduced a new, central player self-exclusion register.

EUROMAT also said providing benefits from exemptions and regulatory privileges would create an “uneven playing field” that could harm certain areas of the market.

The organisation said as the European Commission was not notified of the changes, this constituted a breach of EU law. EUROMAT had previously warned it would seek action if the changes were implemented, while both the Croatian Gaming Association (HUPIS) and European Commission issued similar warnings over the proposed amendments.

“Such open disregard for established EU procedures raises serious concerns,” EUROMAT said. “What message does it send to other member states if one country can so blatantly and openly ignore rules that all others are expected to respect?”

Croatia ‘threatens legal certainty’ for gambling businesses.

EUROMAT President Jason Frost hit out at the Croatian government over the case. He said the formal complaint marks the first step in the EU’s legal process.

“Based on EUROMAT’s complaint, the European Commission will be able to assess the evidence and decide on the next steps, including whether to open infringement proceedings against Croatia,” Frost said.

“The notification procedure exists to ensure that national measures are compatible with the principles of the single market. Croatia’s decision to ignore this obligation not only breaches EU law; it also threatens legal certainty for businesses across Europe.

“The commission must act decisively to uphold the integrity of the internal market.”

HUPIS Secretary General Filip Jelavić also criticised the government’s approach to changing gambling law. He urged the European Commission to act to ensure “fair market conditions” are upheld in Croatia.

“The Croatian government has deliberately sidelined both stakeholders and EU institutions,” he said. “By failing to notify, it has prevented scrutiny of measures that fundamentally distort competition and harm different segments of the gaming sector.

“We urge the Commission to carefully assess EUROMAT’s complaint and intervene without delay to ensure that the rule of law and fair market conditions are upheld.”

As a result, the Netherlands has been ordered to bear its own costs for the long-standing case and to pay those further costs incurred by defendant – the European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA). 

In the 2023 ruling, the EU General Court found the European Commission (EC) had failed to properly investigate whether the Netherlands had provided incumbent Dutch lotteries with unlawful state aid, by extending their monopoly lottery licences without an open tender process. 

The case, brought by the EGBA, dated back to 2016 when the trade body lodged a complaint with the European Commission, highlighting the lack of open tender process in the Netherlands.  

It said the Netherlands’ process to renew the incumbents’ licences constituted a violation of the EU’s state aid rules. 

Then, in 2023, the General Court insisted the EC should have analysed whether licence holders were mandated to pay a portion of their proceeds to certain charities, as this process could have amounted to indirect state aid.  

The Netherlands appealed that 2023 ruling and requested the EGBA pay all related legal costs. 

What’s next for the Netherlands? 

However, on Thursday, the EGBA celebrated the ECJ’s latest judgment, which dismissed the Netherlands’ appeal entirely and upheld the General Court’s previous 2023 ruling.  

As a result, the EC will be required to assess distribution of aid by the Netherlands’ gambling monopolies, including indirect charity beneficiaries. 

It will launch an investigation into whether the Netherlands’ lottery tender process facilitated unlawful state aid distribution.  

EGBA secretary general welcomes ECJ Netherlands monopoly ruling 

Reflecting on the latest result, and the ending to a drawn-out legal process, EGBA Secretary General Maarten Haijer hailed the ECJ’s Thursday ruling as “a clear victory for the proper enforcement of EU law”. 

In a statement Haijer said: “The court has confirmed what we said all along: the Commission must investigate state aid complaints thoroughly and cannot take shortcuts.  

“While this case dates back to 2014, it remains relevant today. It demonstrates that the Commission must fulfil its responsibilities as guardian of the treaties – and that there are consequences when it fails to do so.” 

Haijer reiterated that EU member states must ensure a fair and competitive process when issuing gambling licences. 

Land-based gambling was banned in Ecuador in 2011 through a referendum under then-President Rafael Correa.

But the possible return of casinos within five-star resorts has been included in the upcoming referendum, which is a typical method for enforcing new laws and economic and political measures in the South American country.

The plans come under new proposals from current Ecuador President Daniel Noboa.

On 5 August, Noboa set out seven questions to be included in the upcoming referendum, including whether to allow casinos in five-star hotels and whether the sector should be taxed at a rate of 25% of sales.

This tax revenue would go towards the financing of programmes to combat chronic child malnutrition and school feeding.

The question was at first rejected by Ecuador’s Constitutional Court because it was considered unclear for the public and included three topics in one question.

However, the question was then reformulated to focus on just the legalisation of gambling in five-star hotels. This was subsequently approved by the Constitutional Court.

Casino infrastructure is already in place, says local expert

The referendum is set to take place on 16 November and, should the re-legalisation of casinos receive the required support, Juan Carlos Loza Mendoza, head of LatAm gambling sales at ProntoPaga, predicts it won’t be long before land-based gambling makes a return to Ecuador.

“I think it will just be a couple months,” Mendoza tells iGB. “The infrastructure is ready. The culture is ready. Sports betting sites and online casinos are now working on it.

“The financial ecosystem and the payment ecosystem is ready to receive [land-based gambling]. There is a lot of protection [for] a big amount of money that will be processed. They’re ready.

“I believe it will be just a matter of couple of months, maybe three months.”

Land-based casino return in Ecuador would be ‘sensational’

Mendoza says the return of legal land-based casinos to Ecuador would be “sensational”.

Ramiro Atucha, who was CEO of platform provider Vibra Gaming between 2020 and 2025 and is an expert on LatAm gambling, believes the phrasing of the question centring gambling in five-star hotels is important.

“What’s happening now is they are working on authorisation and regulation for land-based casinos, but tied to five-star hotels which, in my opinion, is a very good start because it’s going to bring investment to Ecuador,” Atucha says.

“Ecuador is a very interesting market because their currency is the US dollar, so that simplifies things a lot. It has about 20 million inhabitants. It’s not that big, but it’s a dollar economy.”

However, Atucha notes Ecuador is currently facing social issues and political unrest, including a spate of violent protests after Noboa’s government decided to cancel fuel subsidies.

The Ecuador government claimed Noboa was the target of an alleged assassination attempt earlier this month.

Atucha says if the situation calms down, Ecuador could benefit hugely from the economic investment that comes with legal land-based gambling.

“They’re struggling with electricity, they’re struggling with social protest, et cetera,” Atucha declares. “If they manage to improve that situation and they manage to get some five-star hotels, it’s going to be very good for the economy, especially if it’s well taxed.

“Imagine if all the money that is currently being gambled with no taxes at all had some tax. The difference would be huge.”

Ecuador online reform shows progress

Notably, the 2011 referendum only strictly banned physical gambling, with online betting not forbidden.

Last year, Ecuador introduced reforms for its online betting grey market, with a 15% gross revenue tax for sports betting coming into effect on 1 July 2024.

Executive Decree No 313 also implemented a 15% withholding tax on player winnings.

The Ecuador government then lifted a ban on sports betting advertising, another signal of growing acceptance of gambling in the country.

Santiago Albán, managing partner of Ecuadorian law firm Heka, believes the online reform observed last year is an indicator the government is willing to implement a regulated land-based sector.

“The online betting reform demonstrated the government’s capacity and willingness to integrate gaming activities into the formal economy, establishing clear taxation, reporting and compliance obligations,” Albán comments.

“This development not only reflects a shift towards a controlled and transparent model of supervision but also serves as a regulatory precedent for the potential relegalisation of land-based casinos.”

On Monday, Trinidad and Tobago Finance Minister Davendranath Tancoo fired a warning to illegal operators in his budget statement.

According to Tancoo, the National Lotteries Control Board (NLCB) contributes an annual GGR of nearly TTD3 billion ($441.9 million).

However, Tancoo said illegal lotteries offering bets and payouts facilitated by third parties on the NLCB’s legal lottery games “continue to impair the NLCB’s profit margins”.

Tancoo estimates revenue from illegal lotteries in Trinidad and Tobago amount to upwards of TTD9 billion a year, which is three times the licensed market.

As a result, he proposed increasing the penalties against illegal lotteries, beyond the existing sanctions in sections 19, 20 and 21 of the Gambling and Betting Act.

Section 19 would be amended to increase the penalty to a fine of TTD250,000 and imprisonment for three years, or conviction on indictment to a fine of TTD3 million and a prison sentence of seven years.

The plans are in line with the government’s Gambling (Gaming and Betting) Control Act 2021, which is awaiting its full enforcement. Currently, only parts I, II and X of the act have been proclaimed by the government.

Trinidad and Tobago looking to stay one step ahead

Tancoo also highlighted a new form of illegal gambling in Trinidad and Tobago, in which lottery tickets issued to players resemble a receipt from a grocery store, using the results from the NLCB’s online lottery draws.

In response to this, Tancoo proposed the introduction of a new criminal offence, which criminalises the receipt of a bet, issuance of a ticket or the payout of any proceeds from NLCB’s online draw results.

This offence would carry the same penalties laid out by Tancoo in the amended Section 19 of the Gambling and Betting Act.

Under the new offence, the NLCB’s evidence of its draw results and who it believes are authorised agents will be treated as prima facie evidence, allowing the police to act upon NLCB-provided information.

The law would also broaden the definition of “ticket” to cover “grocery receipts”.

Plans for a more efficient revenue transfer

Additionally, Tancoo said a lack of audits has led to the NLCB retaining “tens of millions of dollars” that should have been transferred to the government over the years.

To stamp out this issue, Tancoo proposed quarterly payments from the NLCB to the Consolidated Fund, the main bank account for the Trinidad and Tobago government. Currently, these payments are made on an annual basis.

NLCB would also be subject to financial limits expressed by the minister of finance for various expenditures, bringing in a “hard and fast budget” that would result in better revenue retention.

The report covers the first six months of 2025, through to the end of June. Key data in the report showed that overall GGR for online gaming in the Netherlands hit €600 million ($695 million), down 16% from the final six months of 2024.

Online casino games were by far the most popular among consumers. Sports betting came next, then peer-to-peer casino games and horse race betting.

KSA said this decline was partly down to overhauled responsible gambling rules in the country. These include new deposit limit settings for online players, with players now restricted as to how much they can wager with each operator.

But the regulator also flagged a rise in player accounts. The average number of active online accounts per month reached 1.29 million in H1, up from 1.18 million in the latter part of last year. Of these accounts, an average of 7.1% were new.

KSA said players were likely creating more accounts across several different operators so that they could deposit and gamble more. Once they reach a limit with one operator, they cannot deposit again until this resets. Spreading their activity across numerous websites opens up more play options.

‘Worrying’ trend in illegal online gambling

However, of most concern to KSA was illegal website activity. While it said channelisation – the percentage of people gambling with legal operators – was stable at approximately 94%, the amount of revenue going into unlicensed sites continued at upward trend.

By the end of H1, total revenue going to legal sites dipped from 51% in H2 2024 to 49%. KSA said this could be partly explained by users shifting to illegal sites to avoid the new player protection rules. Illegal operators are not governed by the same rules as licensed sites, with customers able to spend without limits.

“KSA considers this a worrying development, as players in the illegal market are much less well protected,” the regulator said.

Another issued flagged by the regulator was in reference to the age of players. Figures for H1 showed people aged 18 to 24 accounted for 23% of all accounts used during the half. This, KSA said, was high as the group only represents 9.3% of the Dutch adult population.

However, the regulator did note that those in the group tended to lose far less than older players. On average, the loss for those aged 18 to 24 was €37, compared to €78 for adults.

Overall, an estimated 839,000 active players were active with legal providers during the first six months of 2025. This meant 5.7% of the adult population gambled legally online, up from 5.4% in H2 of last year.

HKJC hands senior role to Stylsvig

The Hong Kong Jockey Club has announced Casper Stylsvig as executive director of its sports business.

Stylsvig will focus on commercial growth across horse racing, football, lottery and emerging sporting opportunities. He also will become a board member and report directly to CEO Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges.

An experienced sports executive, Stylsvig was most recently chief revenue officer at English Premier League football club, Chelsea. Previously, he also held senior leadership roles at FC Barcelona, Manchester United, Fulham and AC Milan.

“This role represents a natural progressive next step in my career, bringing together best practices from global football to help shape the future of a truly unique, multi-sport business,” Stylsvig said.

PMU and HKJC launch new pool bet

In other news out of HKJC, the organisation has partnered with France’s Pari-Mutuel Urbain on a new common pool bet.

The International Order Couple bet will be available on all Hong Kong races. It will also cover the 95 World Pool races on the PMU calendar.

This builds on a partnership that began in October 2019 with the launch of Simple common pool bets. In 2022, PMU then joined the HKJC World Pool for International Winner and International Placer bets.

“This growing collaboration demonstrates the commitment of both institutions to offering an ever richer and more diverse betting experience to their customers, while strengthening their ties in the international horse racing world,” PMU said.

ESPN Bet fined $15,000 in Massachusetts

Penn Sports Interactive, operator of ESPN Bet, has been fined $15,000 by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission over a violation of advertising rules.

The case related to comments made by ESPN host Rece Davis during a gambling segment on “College GameDay” in 2024. Davis referred to a betting tip by analyst Erin Dolan as being a “risk-free investment”.

Massachusetts sports betting law bans terms such as “free”, “risk-free” and “can’t lose” in reference to wagering.

“Mr Davis used the prohibited language ‘risk free investment’ after he referred to a sports wager,” the commission said. “As a result of the aforementioned regulatory violations, the Commission hereby fines PSI/ESPN Bet $15,000.”

CT Interactive enters Greece with Novibet

CT Interactive has rolled out its content in Greece for the first time through a partnership with Novibet.

Customers of Novibet Greece will have access to a range of CT Interactive titles. These include Lucky Clover, Win Storm, 40 Treasures, HOT 7s X 2 and The Big Chilli.

This latest rollout follows a similar link-up between CT Interactive and Novibet in Mexico.

“Launching our content exclusively on Novibet Greece is a remarkable milestone for us,” CT Interactive Chief Commercial Officer Monika Zlateva said. “It enables us to bring our top-performing games to the Greek market.”

Wazdan builds on Canadian presence with NorthStar

Wazdan is to expand its presence in Canada through a new partnership with NorthStar Gaming.

Wazdan, an iGaming developer, will provide Playtech-powered NorthStar with a range of its content. Titles include 36 Coins, Hot Slot: 777 Cash Out Grand Diamond Edition and Mighty Fish: Blue Marlin.

The launch will also introduce Ontario audiences to engagement-boosting mechanics such as Hold the Jackpot, Cash Infinity, Collect to Infinity, Sticky to Infinity and Cash Out.

“Expanding our presence in Ontario with such a locally rooted and trusted brand as NorthStar is an exciting milestone,” said Radka Bacheva, Wazdan head of sales and business development. “Its strong position in the market, combined with our portfolio of rewarding experiences, ensures we can deliver measurable growth and enhanced entertainment to players nationwide.”

Last week the Spanish government imposed a new policy requiring online gambling operators to present tobacco-style warnings across their products, alerting players to the dangers of gambling addiction and the likelihood of losing money.

Speaking to iGB, Hinojosa said the body had found out about the new policy in the media. It was not included in any discussions with the regulator before the announcement by Minister for Social Rights Pablo Bustinduy at a safer gambling event on 1 October.  

“The only thing we know is the Ministry for Consumer Affairs said last week ‘we are going to implement these new measures’ but said nothing about how the resolution [would be included in the law].

“They didn’t share any proposal with the sector, so we are exactly like you, reading about it in the media,” he adds.  

No clear timeline for tobacco-style warnings introduction

When asked when the tobacco–style warnings must be introduced by operators, Hinojosa says there has been no clear response from the regulator.  

“This is not really [made clear] by the regulator. We don’t know exactly what it’s about. We would like, once again, a solid impact analysis.” 

According to the government’s announcement, the rule was implemented into Spain’s gambling laws as part of the Royal Decree 958/2020, which covers marketing and gambling communications.   

It also noted the influence of recent addiction data as justification for the measure. The data was published by the Spanish Ministry for Health in 2024 and formed part of the country’s National Drug Plan.   

But Hinojosa questioned the relevance of the data, saying: “[Looking at addiction statistics] and the gambling problem across the consumer, it’s not really a bigger problem than before.”   

“The data for addiction among students is similar over the last four or five years. It is concerning for us, of course, but it’s not really a bigger or different problem than before.” 

Return of strict ad measures expected in Spain  

Policymakers in Spain are considering further player protection measures, including restoring a previously withdrawn ban on the use of celebrities in gambling advertising. 

The minister said this was currently being processed through the Spanish Congress and he did not offer a timeframe for the measure to be reinstated.    

Hinojosa tells iGB that up to five policies from the original Royal Decree 958/2020, which heavily restricted gambling marketing back in 2020, are being reconsidered by the government.  

These regulations sought to reduce minors’ exposure to gambling advertising in Spain by banning aspects such as sponsorship deals with operators. 

The decree was approved by the Supreme Court in November 2020, but a number of measures were overturned in 2024.  

Other stakeholders have speculated that the full scope of restrictions could be reinforced in the short to medium term, including watersheds for TV and radio advertising and welcome bonuses for new customers.  

“Big changes in regulation must be strongly grounded in empirical evidence and temporal sequences, rather than political decisions driven by impulse, intuition, or the partial interpretation of a single data point,” he says of the government’s overall approach to gambling reform.  

““It is [difficult] to understand why there are so many regulations to protect the player, then who protects the gambling market?”   

But Hinojosa says there is no indication of a timeline for these policies to be debated, due to the current political instability in Spain.  

In June, the organisational secretary of the Spanish Prime Minister’s Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) resigned on corruption claims and the prime minister himself has faced opposition calls to resign over the scandal which extends to others within the party.  

No threat of gambling tax increase in Spain 

One challenge that Hinojosa does not expect the Spanish sector to face is that of increasing tax rates. Governments across the UK and Netherlands and further afield to Latvia and Romania are considering or are already implementing tax increases for the sector.  

But Hinojosa says Spain has not had a budget session in the last two years and is not expected to have one in 2025, meaning any potential tax rise is not on the cards in the short term.  

“We do not expect any change to the tax system,” he tells iGB. “It would be another blow to the investments and the innovation that the sector brings to the country, whether the government likes it or not.” 

In an industry bulletin dated 3 October, the Gambling Commission highlighted several areas for improvement. All operators licensed in Britain are required to have measures in place to protect against money laundering and terrorist financing.

Among the key concerns was an “over-reliance on financial threshold controls”. The regulator said in some cases licensees only began customer risk-profiling and associated risk-based due diligence procedures when a financial threshold was reached.

This, it said, was despite other, non-spend related risk factors being clearly present throughout.

It also noted how some financial thresholds were set at an inappropriately high level for the risks present. In addition, it said this reliance on financial thresholds was to the detriment of other risk factors.

The regulator said this allowed players with significant risk factors to gamble without any appropriate risk-based due diligence taking place, or only after they had deposited and withdrawn large sums.

To combat this, the regulator recommended licensees conduct ongoing risk-based customer due diligence and monitoring. It also warned that these parameters should be set at an appropriate level.

“Financial threshold controls can be a useful tool in combatting money laundering and terrorist financing,” it said.

“However, they must not be relied upon in isolation and must be set at a level that is appropriate based on the individual licensee’s risk assessment, business model and customer base and the customer risk profile.”

Gambling Commission urges more action to protect players

Other areas of concern flagged by the Gambling Commission included not compiling risk profiles in line with official guidance. It noted cases where risk factors related to a customer were not identified either at all or not early enough.

“Customer risk profiling must be informed by the operator’s wider risk assessment,” the regulator said. “Operators need to assess the extent to which a particular customer triggers the risk factors considered in the risk assessment and graduate the risk profile of the customer and the level of customer due diligence undertaken accordingly.”

The commission had similar concerns over how players’ documentation and information was scrutinised. In some cases, it said in a review of current systems, operators had failed to identify stand-out risk indicators such as bank statements with significant third-party deposits evident and/or outgoings higher than income.

“We have also seen examples where, although the documentation contained indicators suggesting the document was false or fraudulent, the required enhanced customer due diligence was not conducted,” the regulator said.

“Operators need to have appropriate controls in place to identify such cases and need to ensure that their staff are appropriately trained to assess customer documentation, including how to identify false documents.”

Also flagged was an apparent neglect of proper staff training on AML and CTF issues. This, the commission said, could lead to oversight of key protection measures for both operators and their customers.

Other concerns included poor record keeping, lack of due diligence on third-party relationships and using exterior companies to draft risk assessments.

AI remains a concern for money laundering measures

In addition, the commission noted a rise in the use of AI, algorithms and behavioural models for AML purposes. It said these technologies have been used to identify red flags for money laundering and terrorist financing within a customer’s profile and/or behaviour.

While it acknowledged these can be useful, it said not all operators understand how algorithms work as an AML control. As such, they have not been able to implement them properly, thus falling foul of their licence conditions.

“We have identified compliance concerns where, due to the configuration of the algorithm, high-risk indicators have not been identified and/or escalated by the automated control in place,” the regulator said.

“Operators must ensure that their suite of AML controls, including any algorithms, other reports and manual processes, are appropriately identifying risks so that risk-based due diligence can take place.”

Back in June, the Brazil government published a provisional measure raising the tax on operators to 18% of GGR, from the previous 12%.

PM No 1,303 is set to be voted upon by the provisional measure’s committee on Tuesday, when politicians will decide whether to make the tax rise permanent.

The vote was supposed to take place last week but was twice postponed. The deadline for the tax to be approved by the committee and the Senate and Chamber of Deputies is this Wednesday.

The tax increase has caused widespread concern among the industry and, ahead of Tuesday’s vote, the IBJR has again warned that the tax rise risks boosting black market activity.

This could lead to hugely damaging consequences for players, who will not receive the same levels of protection in the black market as they do from the licensed operators who follow Brazil’s regulations.

The IBJR assesses PM 1,303 “exposes not only the sector, but also bettors to increasing risks of migration to clandestine operators”.

The association is also calling for digital platforms such as social networks and search engines to take a harder stance on illegal betting sites, with the “same rigour already applied to other illicit content”.

Tax rise risks affecting investment into Brazil’s betting sector

Additionally, the IBJR believes the 50% rise in the tax rate at such an early stage of Brazil’s regulated betting sector will lead to hesitation regarding investment into the market.

Brazil’s licensed betting sector launched on 1 January and, alongside this tax rise, the government is also weighing up whether to implement further restrictions on advertising.

“Abruptly changing taxation, increasing the contribution rate on gross revenue from 12% to 18% just eight months after the regulation was enacted, creates legal uncertainty, undermining the confidence of companies that have invested in the country,” the IBJR said.

“This instability threatens not only the continuity of operations but also the credibility of the business environment in Brazil.”

IBJR searching for new executive president

In September, the IBJR announced that its executive president Fernando Vieira was leaving his role in pursuit of a new professional opportunity.

Vieira had been in the role since March, having first joined the IBJR in October 2024.

Over his tenure, Vieira conducted important work in fighting the black market, which is often identified as the primary concern by licensed betting operators in Brazil.

The IBJR praised Vieira for his “decisive contributions” and the trade body is now searching for his successor.

André Gelfi, one of the IBJR’s founders and managing partner of Betsson Group in Brazil, is serving as interim executive president following Vieira’s departure.

By a 3-2 vote Tuesday, the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court ordered internet service providers to block access to illegal sports betting websites in Chile.

The decision upholds a protection appeal filed by the Concepción Lottery and reverses an April lower court ruling that refused to block platforms which were operating illegally.

The court ruled that refusing to block such platforms was illegal, as only companies with legal authorisation should offer online sports betting. It found that unauthorised sites harmed the lottery’s exclusive concession rights, violating its constitutional property guarantees.

Under current law, gambling is illegal in Chile unless offered by the Concepción Lottery, Polla Chilena, racetracks or at expressly authorised gambling casinos.

Internet service providers such as Claro Chile and Empresa Nacional de Telecomunicaciones must immediately block all websites requested by the Concepción Lottery.

“It is hereby ordered that the respondents may not broadcast or promote games of chance unless they provide legal authorisation and authorisation from the administrative authority,” the Supreme Court’s ruling read.

Supreme Court ruling sends a message to illegal sites

The ACCJ believes the Supreme Court’s ruling sends a “strong signal” to illegal online gambling operators.

In its view, the ruling confirms the ACCJ’s long-held claims that online gambling operators operate outside the law, without government oversight.

ACCJ President Cecilia Valdes said on Thursday: “We deeply appreciate the Supreme Court’s clear ruling on online gambling platforms, stating that they are illegal in Chile.”

According to the ACCJ, the ruling establishes a “significant legal precedent” and sends a warning to authorities, operators and the Chilean public that illegal gambling cannot be normalised.

The body expects the Chilean Department of Telecommunications and internet service providers to fully comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Fresh calls for online gambling regulation in Chile

In addition, the ACCJ has called on Congress to advance the bill to regulate online gambling in Chile.

A bill was introduced in 2022 and passed by the Chamber of Deputies the following year. However, progress has since stalled, with the bill currently stuck in the Senate.

Valdes and the ACCJ hope the ruling marks another step in the right direction towards a regulated online gambling market in Chile.

“The next step is clear: enforce the ruling and move forward responsibly with serious regulations that respect the principle of legality and ensure fair competition,” Valdes continued. “We cannot allow legislation to be passed under pressure from actors who have operated illegally.

“Chile needs modern regulations, but ones built on compliance with the law, not pressure from those who have violated it. The most important thing today is that the discussion puts the consumer at the centre, that safeguards be set for those who legitimately seek entertainment.”

Last November, the Supreme Federal Court in Brazil upheld an emergency measure to ban gambling using social welfare proceeds.

Then in April, SPA chief Regis Dudena confirmed the ban was incoming. However, legal assessments of measures were needed before any ordinance could be published in order to formally introduce the total ban.

On Wednesday, the SPA published Normative Ordinance No 2,217/2025 and Normative Instruction No 22, regulating the participation of beneficiaries of the Bolsa Família and Continuous Benefit Payment programmes in fixed-odds betting.

Notably, the ban completely prohibits social welfare beneficiaries from betting – something that goes beyond the initial ban on betting with direct social welfare proceeds.

Dudena believes the ban will protect Brazilians from betting beyond their means, noting in a Wednesday statement: “To ensure compliance with the Supreme Court’s ruling, it was necessary to develop a robust technical tool, carefully ensuring that the measure guaranteed the protection of the rights involved.

“Protecting citizens, their security, their rights and their personal data are always objectives of the Brazilian government.”

Dudena had previously warned the ban on just the use of social welfare proceeds for betting would be difficult to implement.

It was reported by the National Secretariat of Citizen Income (Senarc) that only 1% of Bolsa Família households use the programme’s physical card. The other 99% rely on the linked online bank account, which can also receive wages and other payments.

How will the ban work?

A database of those receiving benefits from social welfare programmes has been created. Operators must consult the database during their checks, referencing player registrations and logins.

Additionally, betting operators must also consult Sigap, Brazil’s betting management system, to crosscheck bettors’ Individual Taxpayer Registry numbers to verify which users are included in the database of social welfare beneficiaries.

This process must be carried out at least every 15 days for all users registered in an operator’s betting system.

If they are included on the database, operators must block their registration, close their account and return any deposited amounts to the account holder.

The rules came into effect with the publication of Normative Ordinance No 2,217/2025 on Wednesday. Operators have up to 30 days to implement the ban.

Responsible gaming ordinance amended to include ban

In enforcing the measure, the SPA amended Normative Ordinance No 1,231, published on 31 July 2024, relating to responsible gambling regulations in Brazil.

Before closing a bettor’s account, operators must inform the user of the ban via email, messaging applications, SMS or other available means within one day of receiving confirmation from Sigap.

The operator must also inform the user they are able to voluntarily withdraw their funds within one day of the consultation, with a further two-day period allocated for the withdrawal.

If unclaimed within 180 days, the money will go to the Student Financing Fund and the National Fund for Public Calamities, Protection and Civil Defence.

If a user’s CPF number is removed from the Prohibited Persons Module on Sigap, they will once again be allowed to bet.

However, operators are prohibited from any targeted advertising or directly notifying such users about the possibility of readmission into their betting systems.

Beyond the 30-day limit for implementation of the ban, operators have 45 days from the Normative Instruction’s publication to cross-reference its list of registered bettors with Sigap’s prohibited list for the first time.

Any operators failing to comply with the ban will face the sanctions outlined in previous ordinances.

These could include licence terminations or suspensions. Additionally, they could face a fine of between 0.1% and 20% of their proceeds over the year prior to proceedings starting. This fine cannot exceed BRL2 billion.

Bolsa Família ban splits opinion

The ban has certainly been divisive in Brazil.

For instance, the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) sent a note to the SPA in October, taking issue with the complete ban on social welfare beneficiaries from betting.

According to the ANJL, this contradicts the Supreme Court’s initial decision on the matter, which only banned users from betting with their welfare proceeds, rather than banning them from gambling entirely.

Luiz Felipe Maia, founding partner of Brazilian law firm Maia Yoshiyasu Advogados, previously told iGB the ban could infringe upon the civil rights of Brazilians.

“What we’re saying is ‘Okay, if I am in a situation where I need welfare, I cannot decide where I’m going to spend my money, so I have limited freedom’,” Felipe Maia said.

“Either you give them stamps and say, ‘Okay, these stamps are for food and you can only use those for food’, or you’re giving them money and you’re allowing them to decide what they’re going to do with that money.”

Ed Birkin, managing director of H2 Gambling Capital, also warned that while the ban is well intentioned, it could lead to increased black market activity.

“There may be some who say, frankly, you should spend money on what you want,” Birkin told iGB. “But if you’ve been given benefits for a certain reason, then that’s it.

“But this idea that they can stop them betting; unless they’re able to really go down to restricting almost what they can spend it on [and say] you cannot spend it with a legal betting operator, they’re just spending with the illegal ones.”

However, the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming (IBJR) has thrown its support behind the ban, believing it’s another step in the right direction of protecting vulnerable people in Brazil.

In the bill, the government set out its proposal for a total ban on gambling with credit cards. The Swedish Gambling Act already prevents players from using credit to gamble with licensed operators.

However, the incoming bill takes this a step further, with the government having previously said that current regulations had “limited scope”. An extension of the ban would effectively close a loophole that currently allows people to use borrowed money to gamble.

From next April, licensees and gambling agents will be banned from processing transactions that involve any form of credit. This will extend to credit agreements with other actors, such as loan agreements and bank overdrafts, where they may be misappropriated for the purpose of gambling.

Licensees and agents would also be required to take measures to counteract gambling with credit. This could include blocking credit card payments and not promoting third-party lenders to customers.

However, the government said regulator Spelinspektionen could make certain exceptions to the credit ban. This may cover licensed operators that run gambling for the specific purpose of public benefit, like charity lotteries.

“The requirements shall apply to all forms of gambling subject to licensing and regardless of how the game is provided,” the government said.

Sweden aims to tackle gambling debt

The extension of the ban is aimed at tackling a rise in gambling-related debt in Sweden. In the bill, the government referenced the Överskuldsättningsutredningen — an investigation into credit use for gambling and over-indebtedness

Kronofogden, the Swedish Enforcement Authority, which said debt for consumers in the country had reached a record SEK138 billion ($14.7 billion) in January 2025, is also referenced.

The bill also highlighted a survey by the Public Health Agency on “Health on Equal Opportunities” in Sweden. This found between 3% and 4% of the population aged 16-84 experienced some degree of gambling problem. Those who played slot machines and casino games in the past 12 months accounted for 40% of these people.

Should the bill come into effect as expected, regulator Spelinspektionen would be charged with overseeing its enforcement. It would have support from both the Finansinspektionen financial supervisory authority and Konsumentverket consumer agency.

For those that fall foul of the new rules, Spelinspektionen would have expanded powers to administer penalties. These could include suspension, financial penalties and, in the more serious cases, revoking a licence.

Sweden tries again with extended credit ban

With the bill being published, this is the closest Sweden has come to extending its ban on gambling with credit. The government has tried and failed on several occasions to expand the regulation that was first introduced in 2019.

In February last year, it put forward similar legislation, again with a focus on credit from outside licensees. Spelinspektionen was supportive of the legislation, having itself called for a full ban on credit card gambling a few months prior.

However, the regulator also urged more clarity over the proposed rule changes. Concerns included how the term “credit” was classed. Ultimately, the bill did not pass into law, but the latest effort looks more promising.

Elsewhere, the Swedish government last week published a memorandum updating its gambling act to make all unlicensed operators illegal under new rules. A loophole previously enabled operators to target players in English and by using euros instead of the local currency.

While stakeholders have welcomed the changes, some have said this update will not be enough to solve dropping channelisation rates in the market.

The Gambling Commission said Petfre operated several games that failed to meet the requirements of the Remote Technical Standards (RTS). These included hosting some games that failed to display a player’s net position and other games which celebrated losses disguised as wins.

In its assessment, the commission referenced the fact that the RTS must clearly display a customer’s net position. The standards also state that games must not celebrate a return that is less than or equal to the total stake.

The regulator took issue with celebratory effects occuring when a consumer was in an overall losing position. It said this could negatively impact a player’s ability to interpret their gameplay accurately and make informed choices.

Petfre, which along with Betfred also runs the Oddsking.com brand, took immediate action and promptly decommissioned affected games. However, such was the nature of the breach that the Gambling Commission elected to proceed with a fine.

In February 2021, the commission clamped down on various online slots features, including a ban on features which celebrated losses as wins. At the time, previous Gambling Commission CEO Neil McArthur said evidence had shown this feature “increased the risk of harm to customers”, alongside others like auto-play and slot spin speeds faster than 2.5 seconds.

Slot games posed ‘unnecessary risk’

Commenting on the case, John Pierce, director of enforcement at the Gambling Commission, expressed his disappointment at the breach. He said game features that impair a consumer’s ability to make informed decisions are not appropriate and “posed a clear risk”.

“While we acknowledge the operator acted swiftly to remove the affected games, this enforcement action should serve as a clear signal to the wider industry to review and strengthen their compliance practices — and to ensure that gameplay is fair and consumers are not exposed to unnecessary risk,” he said.

Incidentally, this is the second time that Petre has been issued a financial penalty by the UK regulator. In September 2022, the operator was fined £2.9 million for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.

It also represents the latest in a series of penalties handed out by the commission. In September, Maple International Ventures, the operator of Lottomart.com, was told to pay £360,000, also for anti-money laundering and social responsibility failings.

In addition, ProgressPlay was handed a £1 million fine in August for similar breaches. Based in Cyprus, ProgressPlay owns 134 gambling sites including Acedbet.com, Casinomite.com and Playmagical.com.

Last week, more than 100 Labour MPs wrote to Chancellor Rachel Reeves calling for a new levy for online gambling operators to help raise funds for a potential increase in child benefit.

At present, families are faced with a two-child benefit cap, meaning they can only claim for their first two children. However, the government is facing increasing pressure to scrap this and do more to help lift families out of poverty.

The Labour government is yet to confirm whether it would consider making changes to the current system. However, over 100 of its own MPs put their name to a letter that backs the expansion and a proposal as to how the government would generate the funds required to meet demand. This, the MPs said, would be a “targeted” levy on online gambling operators active in the UK.

However, the proposal has been met with criticism by the BGC. The council said it “strongly opposes” higher tax rates, saying such a move would be “short-sighted” and harm jobs, investment and sports funding, while failing to deliver more revenue.

“BGC members already contribute £6.8 billion to the economy, pay £4 billion in taxes and support 109,000 jobs,” the BGC said. “Piling further tax rises onto the sector, on top of reforms that have already cost over £1 billion, risks undermining a responsible industry.

“Every time the Treasury squeezes the regulated sector, it strengthens the unsafe black market, which pays no tax, offers no consumer protection and puts UK jobs and growth at risk.”

BGC CEO sympathises with chancellor

CEO Grainne Hurst also issued a response, in which she sympathised with the task the chancellor has in raising additional funds for wider policies and growing the economy. However, she cautioned against what she described as a “quick fix” policy in increasing gambling tax.

“They have sold this policy as a quick fix, an easy solution, but the truth couldn’t be further from the truth,” Hurst said. “Each month, 22.5 million people enjoy a bet, in bookmakers on hard-pressed high streets, in casinos, which are a pillar of our leisure and tourism sector, plus in bingo halls and online.

“It’s these millions of people who will feel the hit if this government caves to the demands from those who look down their noses at people who enjoy a bet, and who have gleefully heaped more pressure on the chancellor.”

Black market warning on tax rises

Hurst also repeated earlier warnings about the impact of higher tax on illegal activity. She said further tax rises risk “degrading” the offer of regulated gambling to a point that customers could turn to the black market.

“They will be the winners if the anti-gambling lobby gets their way, not less betting, just more gambling with illegal operators,” Hurst said. “Each year 1.5 million Brits stake up to £4.3bn on the growing unsafe gambling black market.

“This black market doesn’t care about player protections, doesn’t back sports and doesn’t pay a penny in tax. And it’s growing daily. The last thing it needs is another leg up in the form of a new tax hike.”

Concluding her response, Hurst urged a “balanced” approach to gambling policies. She added the BGC would be keen to work with the government to form new regulations that benefit all parties.

“Further tax rises now will make matters worse, suppressing growth and risking jobs,” Hurst said. “We want the chancellor to succeed. We want to be a partner in the growth she is so ambitious to deliver. Indeed, we are one of the few sectors ready to deliver it both locally and nationally.

“But we need balanced regulations and a stable tax regime to do that, not more uncertainty. The chancellor faces many pressures; she needs solution, but hitting punters with more taxes won’t solve anything.”

‘Compelling’ case for additional tax, say MPs

In the letter, the MPs said the targeted levy would differ to the proposal that was tabled by the government in April. This would have seen it scrap the three-banded tax rate system and replace it with a single rate for all remote gambling.

“The Gambling Reform All-Party Parliamentary Group and others have submitted responses cautioning against the proposed harmonisation,” the letter said. “Treating all remote gambling activities under one duty fails to reflect well-established differences in risk and harm.

“A single, undifferentiated tax regime risks removing important fiscal levers that currently incentivise lower risk product design and behaviour. It would also weaken the broader public health goal of reducing gambling-related harm; an objective to which this government has rightly committed.”

The MPs acknowledged the work done on the new statutory levy on gambling. This came into effect in April, having been included in the previous government’s Gambling Act white paper in 2023.

MPs said this was an important reform that begins to align funding for research, prevention and treatment. However, they also said the statutory levy does not increase the revenue generated beyond the voluntary contributions that have been in place for some time.

“This is despite the latest Gambling Commission data showing that levels of harm, including among online gamblers, are significantly higher than previously understood,” MPs said.

“In light of the levy’s limited fiscal reach and unchanged contribution levels, there is a compelling case for an additional online gambling levy. This would be a proportionate and appropriate response to evolving public health and fiscal challenges.”

Online gambling tax rate could reach 50%

MPs stopped short of saying what the new levy should be. However, the letter did reference the Social Market Foundation (SMF) and its own work on a possible new levy.

In July, the SMF proposed raising Remote Gaming Duty from 21% to 50%. This, it said, would bring the UK more in line with other jurisdictions across Europe and the US, where online gambling tax rates reach 50% or more.

The MPs referenced some of these rates in the letter to demonstrate their belief that online gambling in the UK is “lightly taxed” at 21% of gross gaming yield (GGY).

In the Netherlands, online casino is taxed at 29% of GGY, with this set to rise to 37.8% from next January. Austria has a rate of 50%, while Pennsylvania in the US taxes online slots at 54%.

“Given these international comparisons and the scale of domestic profitability, it is clear that online gambling in the UK is taxed lightly relative to both its growth and its social cost,” MPs said.

MPs keen to protect horse racing

While there was clear support for a higher tax rate for online gambling, the same group of MPs were also keen to set out their backing for horse racing. They said they would not be behind higher rates for this sector.

“Increasing taxes on horse racing risks driving consumers toward more harmful gambling products,” MPs said. “To safeguard this unique industry, horse racing should be protected through a differentiated tax approach that reflects its social and economic importance.”

The MPs concluded: “An online gambling levy – calibrated to reflect both profit and harm – offers exactly that: a credible, fair and immediate source of revenue. It would signal a government serious about aligning fiscal responsibility with social justice and committed to tackling poverty not just with words, but with action.”

It has been an intriguing period for the LatAm gambling sector. Brazil captured most of the headlines with its regulated online market launch this year, following on from that of Peru 12 months ago.

But despite the nascent regulations in those countries, already the regulated sector is facing increased pressure from new measures, with a new consumption tax in Peru. Meanwhile Brazil has also provisionally increased its tax rate, with additional ad restrictions also seemingly on the way.

While Gomez understands new regulations aren’t perfect and need to adapt, she also hopes for more time to be given by regulators to observe how the market plays out before making drastic alterations.

“What we as a company, and I think most companies, want to see is stability,” Gomez tells iGB. “I think that’s very important from a government to be able to provide that kind of stability to companies.

“Obviously, every new regulation is not perfect. Every new regulation will need some amendments. That will happen, that’s normal. But they should wait to see how the market is working, and then give some time to talk with operators.

“I think that as a new market, yes, they should let the market establish first before starting with all the changes.”

The risk of overregulation

For Gomez, regulators need to converse with operators to listen to their concerns of overregulation. Her fear is that this overregulation could have the potential consequences of increased black market activity.

This has been a particular fear in Brazil, where the government has issued a provisional measure to increase the tax rate from 12% to 18%. Alongside the approval of a bill to introduce new ad restrictions such as watersheds, this has led to major trade bodies sharing concerns over players and operators being driven into the black market.

“I do think that there is a risk of overregulating and I really hope that doesn’t happen, because sometimes you want to cover multiple topics, but you first need to understand the operation,” Gomez continues.

“You need to let the market grow. You need to talk to the companies and understand how the operation is working.”

Gomez says the regulator in Peru, Mincetur, has been successful in discussing regulation with operators, particularly the introduction of a 1% consumption tax on bets this year.

This discourse is something she hopes to also see with the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets in Brazil.

Gomez adds: “We really look forward to having meetings with the regulators to show them our best practice in other countries, but also to ask them, ‘So, how can we comply with this? We have this situation we don’t see is in the law, can we handle it this way?’

“And that’s the way that we want to move forward, because then you understand if the regulator sees this, then this is how we’re going to comply.”

‘Business as usual’ in Brazil for KYC after tough start

During the first three months following the launch of Brazil’s regulated online market on 1 January, many operators voiced their difficulties in transitioning players to licensed platforms.

This was largely down to players not understanding the importance of KYC processes such as facial recognition technology, which have been mandated by regulation.

While Gomez says that it is largely “business as usual” now in Brazil in terms of KYC, Stake also experienced troubles with KYC in the early stages of the year.

Education has been crucial in that respect, with Stake seeking to help players understand that KYC is for their protection.

“At the beginning, customers were very worried about data protection, or ‘What are you going to do with my documents? Or what are you going to do with my data’? But we explained to them, ‘This is for the protection of your account or the information that you’re providing to us, and also for us to verify your identity’,” Gomez says.

“Being an online gambling [operator], this is one of the highest priorities. You need to be able to verify the identity of the customers playing on your platform.”

That education extends to within Stake’s internal teams, with Gomez’s responsibilities including the creation of guidelines for other departments to educate customers on certain KYC situations.

Stake optimistic in LatAm

Gomez is keen to emphasise that, despite regulatory instability in LatAm, there is still an exciting future in store.

“I think the LatAm market obviously has a lot ahead and it’s obviously the place to be right now, 100%, in comparison to other markets,” Gomez concludes. “These are new regulated markets.

“So it’s a very good market and, being newly regulated, it’s very nice to be able to start fresh operations, and establishing those relationships with the regulators and basically build a reputation in LatAm.”

Some 101 MPs – nearly half of Labour’s backbenchers – signed a letter asserting there is a “compelling” case for a “targeted levy on harmful online gambling products”. The letter, written by MPs Alex Ballinger and Beccy Cooper of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Gambling Reform, suggested that the money raised should be used to scrap the two-child benefit cap.

Ballinger and Cooper called on Chancellor Rachel Reeves to introduce changes recommended by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown made the same call last month.

What gambling tax changes does the IPPR propose?

The IPPR proposes increasing the tax rate on gross gambling yield, with Remote Gambling Duty lifted from 21% to 50%. Machine Games Duty on cash-prize slot machines would rise from 20% to 50% under its proposal, while General Betting Duty on sports betting, online or in betting shops, excluding horse racing, would rise from 15% to 30%.

The IPPR estimates these measures would together raise an extra £3.2 billion ($4.3 billion) in 2026-27 – enough to remove the cap that allows families to claim benefits only for their first two children. The think tank said this would lift 500,000 children out of poverty.

“No child should be growing up in poverty while gambling companies continue to enjoy record profits,” Ballinger wrote. “Harms from gambling place a huge burden on our public services, costing the exchequer over £1bn a year.

“It’s time to confront these excessive profits, reduce gambling-related harm, tackle poverty and ensure gambling is taxed fairly.”

The Betting and Gaming Council, which represents the industry, said increasing taxes on the licensed sector would only strengthen black market operators.

In a statement, a spokesperson said: “We strongly oppose proposals to raise taxes on the regulated betting and gaming industry. Such a move would be short-sighted, harming jobs, investment and sports funding, while failing to deliver more revenue.

“Every time the treasury squeezes the regulated sector, it strengthens the unsafe black market, which pays no tax, offers no consumer protection and puts UK jobs and growth at risk.”

Dutch rate hike has led to tax revenue decline

Supporters of the industry also point to international examples. A recent increase in gross gambling revenue rates in the Netherlands has triggered a decline in revenue collected by that nation’s exchequer. After a rise from 30.5% to 34.2% was introduced in January, regulator Kansspelautoriteit (KSA) released a report in August revealing the measure will likely result in a €40 million drop in iGaming revenue. This was in contrast to government forecasts of a €100 million rise in GGR for 2025.

Earlier this month, Dutch State Secretary for Taxation Eugène Heijnen ruled out introducing a new policy to make up for an expected decline in online gambling revenue due to tax increases.

Speaking in parliament, he said: “It is true that the estimate for revenue has been revised downwards this year. This picture is broadly consistent with the expectations communicated by the KSA in a recent report.”

The Licensed Dutch Online Gambling Providers trade body suggested the revenue fall was due to several new restrictive measures enacted over the last year. These include bans on untargeted advertising and sponsorships, new deposit limits and the increased tax burden. It called for the government to act on this and revise the current tax framework.

Isgren’s report has proposed scrapping the Gambling Act’s current “directional criterion” for online gambling and replacing it with a new rule that prohibits illegal sites from providing access for Swedish players, regardless of whether operators are actively targeting the market.

What are Isgren’s key proposals?

Under the current regime, online gambling falls under Swedish law only if it is considered to be “directed” at Sweden. This standard has allowed many unlicensed companies to avoid oversight by structuring their services in ways that avoid obvious Swedish markers, such as language, currency or local marketing. The proposed shift to a “participant criterion” would instead apply the law whenever Swedish residents are able to access and play.

Additional recommendations would broaden the prohibition on promoting illegal gambling in Sweden. Beyond advertising, this would extend to payment processors, financial services and other support providers that support unlicensed operations.

A presumption rule would apply, so that if a provider processes payments to or from an unlicensed operator, it must assume Swedish participation unless there is clear evidence to the contrary.

The memorandum also proposes adjustments to criminal provisions, meaning unlicensed gambling and the promotion of unlicensed services would be made illegal and subject to criminal charges.

Collectively, the measures aim to strengthen Sweden’s channelisation target – ensuring at least 90% of gambling takes place with licensed operators, in order to protect consumers and safeguard tax revenues.

Earlier this month, Sweden’s Gambling Authority estimated that channelisation is currently 85%, down from 86% during the prior year.

Minister welcomes proposals

Finance Markets Minister Niklas Wykman announced the Gambling Act review in February 2025, with a view to enforcing tougher policies against illegal operators.

Industry stakeholders have long debated the shortcomings of the current framework. The online gambling trade association BOS has repeatedly warned that unlicensed operators exploit the directional test to reach Swedish consumers, often offering services in English and using euro currency.

Minister Wykman welcomed Isgren’s submission, calling it “a crucial step in creating a safer and fairer gambling market”. In a press statement, he said the government would now prepare the proposals within the Regeringskansliet (Government Offices) before a formal referral round and parliamentary debate. If approved, the reforms would come into force on 1 January 2027.

Isgren’s proposals were welcomed by Svenska Spel president and chief executive Anna Johnson, who repeated  a call for DNS blocking of illegal sites.

“The investigator’s proposals are long-awaited and welcome,” Johnson said. “This is about improved protection for consumers, but also about safeguarding trust in the entire Swedish gambling market.

“It is absolutely necessary to continue with more measures to combat illegal gambling. DNS blocking of illegal gambling sites is a natural next step to take. It would further strengthen the Swedish licensing market as well as the protection of Swedish consumers.”

BOS demands new gambling inquiry

BOS – a longtime critic of the Gambling Act – welcomed the proposal that would force unlicensed companies to take active measures to exclude Swedish gamblers.

Secretary General Gustaf Hoffstedt said: “This is an important contribution to the possibility of strengthening the Swedish gambling licence market, which is now proposed to criminalise almost all unlicensed gambling in Sweden. I foresee the government shortly submitting a bill to the Riksdag in accordance with the investigation’s proposal.

“Good job Mr Investigator and with the hope of equally good job from the government and the Riksdag to now proceed with legislation on the matter. Unlicensed gambling in Sweden must be smoked out.”

In early September, the group called for a new broad gambling inquiry, with the task of proposing measures that strengthen channelisation in the Swedish gambling market. Among the proposals that should be considered, BOS mentioned a less rigid regulation of loyalty bonuses, which are currently completely prohibited.

Hoffstedt said at the time: “The appointment of a broad inquiry tasked with preventing leakage to the unlicensed gambling market would undoubtedly be this government’s most important measure to protect and strengthen the legal regulated gambling market, before Sweden goes to the polls in September next year.”

IG Group to acquire Independent Reserve

IG Group has struck an agreement to acquire Australia-based cryptocurrency exchange Independent Reserve.

The deal, billed as a bolt-on transaction, has an initial enterprise value of AU$178 million (US$117.3 million). IG Group said it will accelerate its entry into cryptocurrency markets in the Asia Pacific region.

The transaction is subject to regulatory approvals from authorities in Singapore and Australia, with completion expected in early 2026.

“This acquisition marks an important step in our crypto strategy in a key region,” said Matt Macklin, managing director Asia Pacific and Middle East at IG Group. “Independent Reserve is one of Australia’s largest and fastest-growing digital asset exchanges. I am delighted that the Independent Reserve team will join IG as they embark on their next phase of growth.”

Genius Sports snaps up Sports Innovation Lab

Also making an acquisition is Genius Sports, which has purchased sports fan data specialist Sports Innovation Lab.

Financial details of the agreement were not disclosed. However, Genius said it fast-tracks the expansion of its media business, combining official game data with deep fan intelligence.

Genius also said the combination will create the most comprehensive fan database in sports and entertainment. This, Genius added, will track billions of annual transactions, including purchases, attendance and viewership.

“By integrating the most comprehensive official sports data with unmatched fan intelligence, we are strengthening our foundation and providing partners with a powerful new way to understand and engage fans at scale,” Genius CEO Mark Locke said.

Police rescue men kidnapped over casino debt in Vietnam

Police in Vietnam have rescued two Chinese men who were kidnapped after accumulating debts at a luxury casino.

According to VN Express International, the men borrowed hundreds of thousands of yuan to gamble at Hoiana Casino. Wang Xiaoci and Li Yao Zong were named as the two men that gambled at the venue in Quang Nam Province.

After being unable to repay the money, it is alleged a group of men forced them to sign debt papers. They were also said to have been assaulted and given death threats if they did not pay the money back.

Police were alerted to Wang being forced into a car outside the casino. Shortly after, police tracked the car to a nearby apartment complex and carried out a raid. As well as locating both men, police made five arrests at the same location.

FDNY uncovers illegal gambling den in New York

The Fire Department of the City of New York reported it has uncovered an illegal gambling den in Manhattan.

Officers from the FDNY Bureau of Fire Prevention found a gambling parlour with slot machines. Lithium-ion batteries were found charging throughout the illegally converted cellar, which also had storage space filled with counterfeit designer bags and accessories.

“Dangerous and unlawful conditions” were also noted at the location. These included cellar hallways converted into single room occupancies, crowded with mattresses, hot plates and space heaters.

“Illegal living conditions and unsafe battery charging can create deadly conditions for residents and for firefighters responding to emergencies,” FDNY Commissioner Robert Tucker said.

FanDuel secures online market access in West Virginia

Flutter Entertainment-owned FanDuel has secured online market access in West Virginia with Delaware North.

FanDuel will deliver online sports betting and iGaming in the state through Delaware North’s Mardi Gras Casino & Resort.

The operator will also continue to run the sportsbook at the Greenbrier Resort in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia.

“Delaware North’s been a respected name in gaming and hospitality for decades,” FanDuel Business Development Senior Vice President Jonathan Edson said. “They are an ideal partner as we continue to operate in West Virginia.”

An investigation led by the Gambling Commission discovered several breaches of licence conditions. Maple was also found to have fallen foul of the Social Responsibility Code.

The Gambling Commission said that between June 2023 and July 2024 Maple’s risk assessment efforts were not up to scratch. It noted how several key risks were omitted from the assessment and that its policy was lacking in sufficient detail.

Setting out its findings, the regulator flagged failings within the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP) 12.1.1 (1). This refers to assessing the risks of a business being used for money laundering and terrorist financing.

Failings led to ‘significant’ player loss

Also of issue was LCCP 12.1.1(2), covering the policies, procedures and controls to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. Between May and October 2024, the Gambling Ccommission said Maple had failed to ensure it had appropriate policies in place

The regulator noted controls for detecting and taking action regarding duplicate and linked accounts were not always effective.

It gave one example of how a user had evaded automated controls by switching the order of one of their first names and surname. Lottomart and Maple only identified the issue the following day after the player had already made “significant” deposits and losses.

Maple was also found in breach of LCCP 12.1.1(3), which also references AML and social responsibility policies. The commission said Maple failed to ensure policies and controls were implemented effectively.

The regulator noted a delay between a money laundering risk being identified and action being taken. In turn, this meant users could transact beyond some intended thresholds. Offering an example, customers whose identities had not been fully verified were able to continue transacting beyond the financial threshold set for customer due diligence checks.

However, there was no evidence of criminal spend or the acceptance of funds from people subject to financial sanctions.

Social responsibility failings at Lottomart.com

Meanwhile, the commission said Maple did not always ensure customer monitoring efforts were implemented effectively.

The regulator also took issue with SRCP 3.4.3 paragraph 4 on monitoring customer activity for potential gambling harm. Again, it said Maple’s processes were not always effective and flagged various “weaknesses” in its systems.

One example of this was a player being able to open a second account despite rules intended to prevent players from doing so. The same player then made “significant” deposits before their second account was identified.

Another failing was flagged in reference to SRCP 3.4.3 paragraph 5, which requires licensees to use indicators to identify harm. The regulator said Maple’s controls were “inadequate”, highlighting how some large wins were followed by high staking.

Finally, the Gambling Commission noted SRCP 3.4.3 paragraph 11 on acting on strong indicators of harm by implementing automated processes. It said Maple’s policies did not adequately define what it considered to be “strong” indicators, with no associated automated actions.

Maple faces payment despite acting on failings

Concluding its findings, the commission said Maple agreed to a £360,000 payment in lieu of a financial penalty, including a divestment of £50,000. The money will be divested to socially responsible purposes and to cover the costs of the investigation.

The Gambling Commission noted how Maple “swiftly” put in place an action plan designed to remedy the failings. It also co-operated fully with the investigation and accepted the failings at an early stage.

The regulator also confirmed that Maple was aware of certain issues with its systems prior to being contacted over the issue. However, an effective fix was only implemented after discussions held during the assessment. Ultimately, this led to the payment agreement.

“The cornerstone of every licensed business must be the proper implementation of effective policies and procedures aimed at making gambling crime free and safer,” said John Pierce, director of enforcement at the Gambling Commission.

“This operator is now being held to account for anti-money laundering and social responsibility failings uncovered during a compliance assessment.

“We would advise all operators to read the Maple International Ventures public statement and consider whether their own policies and procedures are both effective and are being successfully implemented.”

For the Eurojackpot draw on 27 June this year, some 47,000 people were told they had won a large prize. In addition, 30,000 of these players received SMS or push notifications on their phones about the supposed prizes.

The issue was caused by an error in a formula used to convert prize from euros to kroner. Prizes were mistakenly multiplied by one hundred instead of dividing by one hundred. There were no issues with the Eurojackpot draw itself.

Lottstift in July ruled Norsk Tipping had violated the country’s Gambling Act. However, the regulator stopped short of taking action while it carried out a review of the operator – although this remains ongoing.

Now, Lottstift said Norsk Tipping will be ordered to pay up to NOK10 million for the failing. This represents 0.1% of Norsk Tipping’s turnover, which was just over NOK10.2 billion in 2024.

The operator will have up to three weeks to respond to the ruling and set out any case it may want to raise to have the fine reduced. Norsk Tipping has already implemented several measures to avoid similar errors in the future.

Norsk Tipping to reduce charity contributions

In response to the fine, Norsk Tipping’s acting CEO Vegar Strand said the company is taking the violation of gambling regulations very seriously.

He apologised for the failing and said extensive measures have been taken to strengthen routines, monitoring and processes across the company.

“Our most important task going forward is to ensure that our games and services work as they should, and that customers can trust us,” he said.

As a result of the fine, Norsk tipping would reduce its charity contributions.

‘Serious breach of trust’ by Norsk Tipping

Lottstift Director Atle Hamar hit out at Norsk Tipping over the Eurojackpot scandal. He said players should be able to play games knowing that they can trust the operator.

“Players should be able to trust Norsk Tipping, and this is a serious breach of trust,” Hamar said.

“Of course, it must be brutal when you receive a notification that you have won a large prize, and then it is not true. This case is harmful to trust in Norsk Tipping.

“It is reprehensible that the error was not discovered in connection with either testing or controls, but only after the message about the incorrect prize amount had been sent to the players.”

In addition to the penalty, Lottstift will have “extensive” monitoring of the Lotto, Eurojackpot and Vikinglotto games offered by Norsk Tipping. This will form part of its ongoing review of the operator.

Gambling trade bodies across Scandinavia banded together to condemn a “lack of action” from the Norwegian regulator following the scandal. They deemed the incident “exhibit A in the case against state gambling monopolies”.

Previous Norsk Tipping CEO Tonje Sagstuen resigned from her post when the incident was revealed in June.

Multiple issues at Norsk Tipping

The Eurojackpot prize case was just one of several issues flagged at Norsk Tipping in recent months.

Earlier in September, Norsk Tipping was handed a NOK46 million penalty over a technical failing related to Eurojackpot and Lotto. The regulator found players in cooperatives, gaming clubs and cooperative banks had a greater chance of winning than they should have had.

Users who played alone had a lower chance of winning, with the error having been present since 2015. Norsk Tipping first became aware as early as November 2024 of possible errors but did not investigate it further.

In March, a NOK 36 million fine was also issued after a bug prevented self-excluded players from blocking themselves from their accounts. This followed a NOK2.5 million fine in 2024 after the company mistakenly paid a player NOK25 million in incorrect winnings.

Hadar said each case revealed “serious errors” at Norsk Tipping that need to be addressed.

“Norsk Tipping has too poor control over its games, and the cases show a fundamental problem in both the system and controls,” Hamar said. “These are serious errors, and they have not been discovered until the consequences are major.”

The Champions League gets underway on Tuesday, with the tournament the second most bet-on in Germany following the Bundesliga.

According to a DSWV press release on Monday, the volume of betting has “skyrocketed” around the start of the Champions League, with players needing to be particularly vigilant to ensure they bet with licensed operators.

The DSWV claims there are at least 382 illegal German-language websites offering sports betting, compared to just 34 legal betting sites.

DSWV President Mathias Dahms says this 11:1 ratio “puts players at risk”, warning of the impacts from illegal betting.

“In the legal sports betting market, players benefit from guaranteed player protection, reliable payouts and tax revenue for the common good,” Dahms said.

“Illegal providers in the black market, on the other hand, do not adhere to any rules, offer no security and have a higher risk of gambling addiction.”

The DSWV stressed players are also at risk of criminal proceedings, with a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment or a fine applicable to those found participating in illegal sports betting.

Advertising crucial for identifying licensed operators

In the view of Dahms and the DSWV, advertising is crucial to make it easier for sports bettors to differentiate between licensed and unlicensed operators.

Dahms noted the importance to licensed companies of being visibile during Champions League matches, particularly on advertising hoardings around stadiums and through TV ads.

In the Champions League and the Bundesliga, only licensed operators are allowed to advertise in the arena and on TV.

The DSWV also highlighted the white list of licensed operators, which is available on the website of the regulator, Gemeinsamen Glücksspielbehörde der Länder (GGL).

Additionally, legal providers display a clearly visible GGL logo on their sites, while only licensed operators offer comprehensive player protection measures.

Dahms concluded: “It is in the common interest of regulators, providers and players to strengthen the legal market and push back the black market.

“This is the only way to ensure player protection, integrity and tax revenues.”

While online gambling regulation was launched on 1 January this year, land-based betting remains illegal.

This is despite Brazil’s Justice and Citizenship Committee approving PL 2,234/2022, which includes land-based casinos, bingo, jogo do bicho and betting on horse racing.

The Senate vote has been postponed on numerous occasions, most recently in July, but Irajá hopes legalisation of land-based gambling arrives sooner rather than later in order to reap the financial rewards.

“Without a doubt, this discussion is about an economic and social agenda, not just entertainment for the country,” Irajá told Brazilian news outlet ND Mais. “We will create a new business environment in Brazil, which will generate more than a million new jobs for the Brazilian people.

“In taxes alone, there is a prospect of collecting at least BRL20 billion and these resources will be used to benefit the population, divided between the states, Brazilian municipalities, health, education, public safety.”

Could tourism double with land-based casino legalisation?

Beyond taxes and job creation, Irajá also cited enhancing Brazil’s underperforming tourism sector as a reason to legalise land-based gambling.

In 2023, Brazil welcomed around six million tourists. The Dominican Republic, on the other hand, received over 10 million tourists, despite its land mass fitting into Brazil’s around 175 times.

“We’re facing a topic that will boost Brazilian tourism, which is what’s happened worldwide,” Irajá continued.

“Countries that have legalised responsible gambling have doubled their tourist flow in just five years. Meanwhile, Brazil watches all these tourists from Europe, Asia and the United States, visiting Argentina, Chile and Uruguay, but not coming to Brazil to generate wealth, circulate resources within our country and generate foreign currency.”

Irajá also stated that land-based gambling, despite not yet being legal, is already widespread in Brazil.

“The big truth is that bingo, casinos and jogo do bicho, which are activities of Brazilian culture, already operate outside the law, operating in almost all cities in Brazil, in the capitals, in short, on street corners,” Irajá explained.

“And the government does not collect, the Brazilian people do not collect a single cent in taxes, the government does not monitor and we are unable to protect citizens from this game that I call gambling.”

AB 831 will now head back to the Assembly for concurrence after the 36-0 vote. The bill, which originated in the lower chamber, was amended with sweepstakes casino prohibition language after it reached the Senate. After the bill was amended, it passed through multiple committees, all unanimously.

The California legislature runs until Friday.

Prior to its third reading, senators amended the bill to exclude state lottery games and traditional sweepstakes promotions run by major companies like McDonald’s and Starbucks. Opponents of the bill had used those sweepstakes as examples of what would be included in the ban if the bill was passed.

Multiple state legislatures have passed sweepstakes casino bans this year, including Connecticut, Montana and New Jersey. Also, multiple state regulators have opted to send cease-and-desist letters to operators.

Opposition lines up for sweepstakes casino operators

The California Nations Indian Gaming Association and the Tribal Alliance of Sovereign Indian Nations support AB 831. The powerful gaming tribe the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation also supports the bill. San Manuel operates the Yaamava Resort and Casino in Highland, California and the Palms Casino Resort in Las Vegas.

California tribes have been successful in keeping outside gaming interests out of the state in order for gambling to operate by law only under tribal sovereignty. In 2022, the tribes defeated Proposition 27, a sports betting ballot initiative led by FanDuel and DraftKings. A combined $463.3 million was funnelled into the ballot fight, which saw Prop 27 receive just 18% of the vote.

Still, there are four tribes that have aligned with sweepstakes casino operators:

• Big Lagoon Rancheria
• Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation
• Mechoopda Indian Tribe of Chico Rancheria
• Sherwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians

Along with the four tribes, sweepstakes industry groups the Social and Promotional Gaming Association and the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance also strongly oppose the legislation. They said it is a rushed proposal and are unhappy about the “gut-and-amend” process by which it was introduced in the legislature.

“California voters didn’t sign on for backroom deals dictated by powerful political interests,” an SPGA spokesperson said. “With the state facing wildfires, a housing crisis and a full federal assault on Californians’ rights, it’s astounding that any lawmaker would make banning mobile games a priority.”

Suppliers leave California sweepstakes casino market

Since sweepstakes have garnered more attention from lawmakers in California, multiple suppliers and operators have left the state.

At the end of August, Los Angeles City Attorney Hydee Feldstein filed a civil enforcement action against Stake.us. Soto’s office alleges the operator violates several state laws and the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

Multiple suppliers, including Playtech and Evolution, have removed their games from sweepstakes sites still active in the Golden State.

Prediction markets and DFS drawing eyes

California stakeholders have also recently taken issue with prediction markets and daily fantasy sites. That comes as more prediction market operators launch despite growing scrutiny by state and federal regulators.

Meanwhile, three California tribes are seeking a preliminary injunction against Kalshi and Robinhood. The Blue Lake Rancheria, Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians and the Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians filed a lawsuit against Kalshi in July and asked for the preliminary injunction this week. A hearing is scheduled for 9 October in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. 

The tribes argue Kalshi is offering illegal sports betting in all 50 states, including on tribal land. Robinhood now offers Kalshi’s football event trading markets. While Kalshi’s prediction markets are federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, gambling on tribal land is protected federally by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.

There are multiple other federal lawsuits involving Kalshi, with opponents contending it is offering illegal sports betting.

Earlier this year, California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued an opinion that daily fantasy sports games are betting. Governor Gavin Newsom did not agree with Bonta’s opinion.

While there has been no enforcement following Bonta’s opinion, DFS operators PrizePicks and Underdog went exclusively peer-to-peer in the state.

On 5 August, Ecuador President Daniel Noboa laid out seven questions to be included in the upcoming referendum. The final one focused on whether citizens would support the reopening of land-based casinos.

Ecuador is somewhat unusual in that the country holds referenda relatively frequently. Questions can focus on a wide array of topics.

The referenda give the public a chance to be involved in key decisions on topics including defence, finance and criminal law.

Casinos were banned in a 2011 referendum, but Noboa’s questions proposed the reopening of land-based casinos based within five-star hotels, taxed at a rate of 25%. This would go towards the financing of programmes to fund school meals and combat chronic child malnutrition.

However, last week the constitutional court ruled the question didn’t meet its parameters for two reasons.

The first was that the preamble to the referendum question wasn’t clear enough to readers and would create confusion among voters as they lacked the required information to be able to answer properly.

The second reason for the exclusion of the question was that it touched on three topics, which were the reopening of land-based casinos, the creation of a new gambling tax and the specific allocation of tax proceeds.

With the three topics included in just one question, voters would have had limited freedom to disagree on certain aspects of the proposed law.

The constitutional court rejected the question in its current form, although the proposal could yet be amended to ensure it falls in line with Ecuador’s constitutional limits.

“With these decisions, this body ensures that proposals for amendments to the constitutional text and those for referendums respect constitutional limits and are formulated with clarity and loyalty to the voters,” the court said.

Another blow to land-based casinos prospects in Ecuador

This isn’t the first time Noboa has floated the idea of reopening casinos in Ecuador.

Last January, he scrapped a question for a 2024 referendum that again enquired about the possibility of reopening casinos.

According to Noboa, the president felt it was inappropriate to include the question due to the rising levels of civil unrest in Ecuador, with other questions on topics such as fighting organised crime remaining on the referendum.

However, Ecuador did make changes to its online sector during 2024, with 65 companies registering in H1 to pay the new 15% gross revenue tax, which came in on 1 July last year.

Under Executive Decree No 313, player winnings are now also subject to a 15% withholding tax.

Henrique was sentenced on Thursday by the First Disciplinary Committee of Brazil’s Superior Court of Sports Justice (STJD), after being found guilty on a majority vote of intentionally getting a yellow card in a 2023 game between Flamengo and Santos.

It follows an investigation from the Federal Police, which uncovered an “overwhelming number of bets” placed on Henrique getting the yellow card, with all 19 of these bets placed from accounts in the Belo Horizonte region, Henrique’s hometown.

Sportradar submitted a report to the investigation, which flagged the same suspicious behaviour.

Alongside Henrique, four other amateur athletes were also charged, including three of his friends, as well as Henrique’s brother, Wander Nunes Pinto Junior, who was found to be the organiser of the bets.

The three friends were suspended for between six and seven matches, while Henrique’s brother was banned for 12 games. With the sentencing handed down by a lower court, the decision can yet be appealed in front of the full court.

Henrique, who has played two games for Brazil, denied the charges, saying: “I never committed the offences I am accused of.”

Henrique not guilty of deliberately harming Flamengo

Initially, the Prosecutor’s Office charged Henrique with two articles of the Brazilian Judicial Code.

The first was Article 243, which relates to harming his own team, while Article 243-A is acting to influence the outcome of a match.

Following the conclusion of the arguments in the STJD, reporting judge Alcino Guedes announced the acquittal of Henrique on Article 243, saying: “I do not see in the conduct of the accused Bruno Henrique any evidence of deliberately acting in a way that harmed his team.”

But Guedes did find Henrique guilty of Article 243-A, handing down the minimum penalty of a 12-match ban and a BRL60,000 fine.

Henrique’s brother Wander was described by Guedes as the “mastermind” and “coordinator” of the betting, applying the maximum penalty of a 24-match suspension, although he reduced this by half due to Wander being an amateur athlete.

Guedes also granted the Prosecutor Office’s request to send a letter to the Brazilian Football Confederation regarding the decision, which will then be forwarded to Fifa.

The letter will seek to extend the effects of the penalties handed down by the STJD to the athlete’s registration with Fifa so that the sanctions apply internationally.

Notably, Henrique was defended by attorney and Flamengo representative Michel Assef Filho, who reiterated the club’s support for the player over the betting controversy.

“If Flamengo believed that Bruno Henrique took any action to harm the club, I wouldn’t be here,” Filho said. “We’re here because we understand there was no violation. There was no action by Bruno Henrique that could have affected the outcome of the match.”

However, the opinion deemed the court had been provided with sufficient information to assess the compatibility of German law with EU law. 

It also ruled that courts of EU member states are allowed to review the compatibility of the law of another member state with EU law. 

The opinion relates to a case brought before the ECJ in April by a civil court in Malta (C‑440/23). Opinions are typically delivered by an advocate general during the final part of the oral stage of proceedings. Although it is not a formal ruling on a case, it analyses the legal aspects and provides answers to questions posed by a case.  

In this instance, the opinion concluded that a number of questions brought by the Maltese court were valid, including whether it was reasonable for locally regulated markets (like Germany) to prohibit online casinos licensed only in Malta. 

Another question raised was “whether European courts had jurisdiction to review the compatibility of the law of another member state with EU law”. 

Players can bring losses cases against Malta-licensed operators  

However, the opinion did rule that a player bringing a civil claim against an operator without a local licence to operate does not constitute an abuse of EU law.  

This point clearly addressed the core question of whether EU law supports player losses claims made against Malta-licensed operators by players in Germany and Austria.  

In this case the advocate general agreed with the claimant that the contract between a player and operator in this case was deemed void under contract law.  

This point could have huge implications for the hundreds of similar player losses cases being addressed in regional courts across Germany and Austria. 

These were put on hold when four prominent litigations, including case C‑440/23 were progressed to the ECJ, as regional courts were unable to resolve complex questions around German gambling law and the sector’s interpretation of European laws. 

Sector looks to Tipico case for clarity on Germany’s gambling laws

However, Claus Hambach, managing partner at German law firm Hambach & Hambach, tells iGB that cases will remain on hold until the ECJ addresses the core question of whether Germany’s previous State Treaty, which placed a total ban on internet games of chance, was compatible with EU law. 

“Such as anticipated from the hearing, the advocate general mainly dealt with procedural questions. This was an explicit request by the ECJ. The advocate general did not address the key question of whether the internet ban in Germany is compatible with EU law,” Hambach says. 

He says the sector will now look to the next player losses case to be heard by the ECJ on 24 September, for clarity on whether German gambling laws are in line with the EU’s Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).  

Case 530/24 involves prominent German betting operator Tipico and was referred to the ECJ in May by the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (BGH). 

“The focus now shifts to the Tipico case. The first in-depth legal examination of the German Interstate Treaty Gambling (ITG) by the ECJ will now concern a sports betting case and not betting on lotteries and casino,” says Hambach. 

Minutes earlier, Bowyer learned he will spend roughly a year in prison in connection with his vast illicit sports betting enterprise. That time falls shy of the 15 months recommended for the ex-bookie by federal prosecutors earlier this month and reflects Bowyer’s cooperation with federal authorities leading to charges against others in the case. U.S. Federal Judge John W Holcomb also ordered Bowyer to pay $1.6 million in restitution.

Bowyer expressed dismay for at least temporarily tarnishing the reputation of the world’s most famous baseball player. Bowyer, the bookmaker for Ohtani’s former interpreter Ippei Mizuhara, remained calm when a federal judge imposed the sentence on Friday morning.

Last summer, Bowyer pleaded guilty to three charges related to his multi-year gaming operations. The sweeping case has ensnared several prominent casinos on the Las Vegas Strip and has led to minor reforms on how the properties deal with sophisticated bookmakers.

A co-founder of an Orange County jiu-jitsu studio, the toned Bowyer learned his fate on Friday in Courtroom 9D of the Ronald Reagan Federal Building. The courthouse is the same building where Holcomb imposed a 57-month sentence against Mizuhara for embezzling nearly $17 million from Ohtani. As expected, Holcomb gave Bowyer a considerably lighter sentence than Mizuhara. Nearly two years after 29 FBI agents raided his villa, Bowyer has sought therapy for his gambling addiction and has served as a voice for compulsive gamblers on social media.

“I stand before you a completely changed man,” Bowyer told Holcomb.

Bowyer’s clientele of prominent bettors beyond Ohtani aide

Besides Mizuhara, Bowyer appeared to have serviced doctors, lawyers, professional athletes, a legendary baseball manager, the wife of an ex-pro sports owner and the boyfriend of a Hollywood A-list celebrity.

Some of the bettors often ran up a weekly six-figure tab, underscoring their massive appetite for betting on sports. Bowyer’s enterprise, which spanned both coasts nationwide, moved about $7 million to $9 million on a given week, according to sources.

None were as big as Mizuhara, who placed approximately 19,000 wagers with Bowyer’s operation over a period of several years. All told, Mizuhara bet about $325 million, with wagers ranging between $10 and $160,000. While Mizuhara accumulated net debts of $40.6 million, he repaid nearly 40% of his tab by embezzling millions from Ohtani.

Last August, Bowyer pleaded guilty to several charges, including transactional money laundering and running an illegal gambling operation. The operation contained a call centre and a Costa Rica-based website where Bowyer funnelled his customers offshore. At his peak, Bowyer handled illegal sports wagers from a Rolodex of 1,200 clients.

Before a scrum of print and broadcast journalists, Bowyer asserted on Friday that he does not believe Ohtani bet on baseball, which would violate MLB rules. Bowyer took it one step farther, reiterating that he is confident that Ohtani did not wager on any sports with his enterprise.

When asked if he has a message to Mizuhara, Bowyer noted that he would give him a hug as a sign of empathy. Bowyer indicated that he feels badly that Mizuhara fell into the throes of addiction.

Why was Matt Bowyer’s sentence lighter than Mizuhara?

Following Bowyer’s plea hearing last August, his attorney Diane Bass told reporters that he faced a potential sentence of 30-37 months. Had Bowyer gone to trial, the potential convictions may have landed him in jail for as many as 18 years.

Bowyer pleaded guilty to laundering millions of dollars at a Las Vegas casino, identified in court filings as “Casino A”. Based on the fact pattern of the case, the casino is widely presumed to be Resorts World Las Vegas.

At times, ill-gotten from funds from Ohtani’s account siphoned by Mizuhara were wired directly into a casino cage, according to court filings.

As the case has garnered worldwide attention, Bowyer claims he has been blacklisted by every major casino around the globe. Bowyer, according to sources, received multimillion-dollar credit lines at numerous casinos, including Hard Rock Punta Cana, which is conducting an internal investigation on its anti-money laundering (AML) protocols.

When contacted by iGB last month, Bowyer responded, “I was running a big operation, I knew the risks. I have to be a man and deal with it.”

At Friday’s hearing, Bowyer appeared contrite in a short address to Holcomb. Bowyer addressed the court for roughly five minutes, his voice mostly remaining firm as he stood before the judge.

Wide sentencing latitude in illegal gambling cases

In federal court, sentencing guidelines have varied widely for illegal bookmaking charges. Moreover, federal judges have demonstrated a history of departing considerably from the standards.

Since 2010, more than a dozen US bookmakers have been sentenced for running major offshore operations through servers located in Costa Rica. For the most part, the sentences have ranged from home confinement to several years of imprisonment.

Along with the money laundering charges, Bowyer also had unreported income of $4.03 million in tax year 2022, including $3.8 million from wire transfers into one of his bank accounts, according to the US Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. Given the severity of the offences, a probation officer recommended a sentence of 41-51 months in federal prison. In assessing the sentence, Holcomb placed considerable weight on the tax charges.

Ahead of the hearing, however, prosecutors asked the court to impose a sentence of 15 months due in part to Bowyer’s “substantial assistance” to the government. Bowyer’s cooperation included assistance on Mizuhara and Damien Leforbes, another bookmaker in the case, prosecutors wrote.

Prosecutors also gave Bowyer credit for taking responsibility for his actions. While Holcomb handed down a sentence of 12 months and one day, he described an eight-level downward departure from federal sentencing guidelines as a “remarkable” motion from the government.

After his release from prison, Bowyer pledged to serve as a role model for responsible gambling, informing young people on the pitfalls of compulsive gambling. Bass pushed for a sentence of home confinement, followed by a period of probation.

At a press conference outside the courthouse, Bass expressed disappointment that Holcomb disagreed with her argument given the preponderance of “mitigating factors”.

Where Ohtani interpreter bookie made his big bets

During a 14-month span ending October 2023, Bowyer gambled at Resorts World Las Vegas at least 80 times, a period when he lost about $6.6 million at the casino, according to the federal complaint. Bowyer, according to prosecutors, lost at least $7.9 million in total at the property.

Scott Sibella, a former president at MGM Grand, later served in the same capacity at Resorts World. The executive avoided prison time last May when he was sentenced on federal AML charges. Sibella received one year of probation for failure to file a Suspicious Activity Report.

Resorts World Las Vegas is one of three Las Vegas casinos that have reached settlements with the Nevada Gaming Commission over the last six months.

Busy period for Nevada regulators

At a March hearing, the Nevada Gaming Commission approved a $10.5 million fine against Resorts World for a spate of AML deficiencies. The casino agreed to the second-largest fine in state history without accepting any wrongdoing.

Weeks later, the NGC finalised an $8.5 million agreement with MGM Resorts, another casino where Bowyer gambled. While most of the regulatory charges against MGM involved Wayne Nix, another illegal bookmaker, one of the 10 pertained to Bowyer. Agents for Bowyer placed sports wagers with the California operation maintained by Nix, sources told iGB.

MGM had suspicions of Bowyer’s illegal bookmaking activities as early as 2015, then banned him three years later, according to the complaint.

Kristen Williams, an assistant US attorney, told Holcomb that Bowyer created harm to the Internal Revenue Service, a societal harm and a harm to clients. In the case of Mizuhara, Bowyer increased the limits on his lines of credit on numerous occasions, providing an incentive for him to make larger wagers. He also laundered money through multiple accounts and failed to report a considerable tax payment to the government, she noted.

Williams was not available for comment after Friday’s hearing.

How Ohtani case led to watershed reform

The illegal sports betting case could be a watershed moment for reforming AML compliance across the US casino industry. Brian Krolicki, a commissioner with the Nevada Gaming Commission, described the cases as a “clarion call” to casinos on The Strip to clean up a culture of non-compliance.

The Las Vegas cases have also been watched closely by Joseph Martin, CEO at Kinectify, a risk management company that helps casinos simplify their AML compliance operations. US fines are relatively low compared to other jurisdictions, Martin told iGB this week, adding that gaming operator licences are almost never on the line.

Outside the US, in Australia and the UK, the fines are truly crippling, he notes, which is rarely the case in North America.

In some cases, licensees are suspended because the casino is assessed as “unsuitable” to operate until financial crime compliance issues are resolved, which could take years, he added. By comparison, Nevada regulators reached settlements with the casinos less than a year after Bowyer pleaded guilty.

“This level of enforcement sparks true rethinking of compliance,” Martin told iGB.

When will Matt Bowyer go to prison?

Holcomb ordered Bowyer to surrender to federal authorities by 10 October, within a period of 45 days from Friday’s sentencing. Bass made a request for her client to be incarcerated at FCI Lompoc, a Southern California facility.

Holcomb lauded Bowyer for his work in community service and the level of support he received from friends and family. The husband of Bowyer’s former wife teared up inside the courtroom when the court heard an anecdote of how Bowyer paid for a series of her IVF treatments. Bowyer’s wife, Nicole, his mother and several of his children also attended the hearing.

As part of his sentence, Bowyer is prohibited from wagering on online gaming platforms and must continue gambling addiction treatment. Asked outside of the courthouse on his plans after his release, Bowyer told reporters he wants to become a motivational speaker. The bookmaker is determined to help those who are suffering from all forms of addiction, not just gambling.

“I want to do something where everyone wins,” Bowyer said. “I’m tired of taking a side where someone will lose. I want to win and want someone on the other side of the table to win.”

Since the Brazil online market regulated on 1 January, many industry stakeholders have shared concerns over the prevalence of the illegal market.

Just this week, Genius Sports’ head of integrity for Latin America, Tiago Barbosa, told a government committee that 70%-80% of bets placed in Brazil are illegal.

Birkin believes the size of the illegal market in Brazil is “hugely overblown”, with H2 estimating it’s more likely to be around 30% of the total market.

He warns that overstating the size of Brazil’s illegal gambling market could mislead policymakers into viewing the sector as overly harmful, which may result in stricter regulations on the legal industry.

In his view, operators are looking to deflect from their own shortfalls.

“I think actually, the narrative is being led by a number of operators who are underperforming and it makes it easier to say that the illegal market is bigger rather than they’re just not competing as well in the legal market,” Birkin tells iGB.

Birkin explains the first concerns of the illegal market share standing at 60%-70% were raised in January, when licensed companies were still struggling with onboarding players due to the new KYC restrictions.

According to H2 estimates, the Brazilian market’s January revenue was BRL2.2 billion. By April, the market almost doubled, generating BRL4 billion in monthly revenue.

However, with some still perpetuating the narrative of illegal operators accounting for 60%-70% of the market, Birkin says this doesn’t make sense.

“People are still talking about 60%-70% being illegal,” Birkin declares. “You’ve doubled the size of the legal market, so the illegal market has therefore doubled since January as well?

“It’s just not true or possible. And that would put the total market size at $20 billion, which again is just not true.”

The threat of new restrictions in Brazil

Less than eight months have passed since regulation started, yet already the sector is facing additional regulatory pressure.

A preliminary tax rise on operators’ GGR from 12% to 18% is awaiting a Congressional vote on whether it will be made permanent. Meanwhile new ad restrictions such as watersheds are also seemingly on the way.

While some in the industry have fought those new measures by arguing they will only serve to boost the illegal market, Birkin believes that this point is falling on deaf ears with the government.

“In Brazil, the government doesn’t really care about the legal or illegal market or the split, they just see gambling as a huge social problem,” Birkin explains. “They just sit and go, ‘People are spending too much, we need to crack down on it’.

“Someone told me when the data came out the legal market had hit BRL3 billion in a month, there was a lot of people saying in the news, ‘Wow, that’s a big number that’s just got out of control’.

“It then goes to BRL4 billion in April, and then at that point you say 60% of the market’s illegal. Guess what? You’re saying that’s a BRL10 billion market size in April.

“Now you think the right narrative to protect you and not have them clamp down on your advertising and what people can play is to claim that it’s BRL10 billion? That is just stupid, especially when there is zero evidence.”

Cautionary tale in the Netherlands 

Birkin argues the exaggeration of the illegal gambling market in Brazil could backfire, misleading policymakers into thinking the overall sector is far larger than it is and therefore more harmful to the Brazilian population.

This ultimately could lead to more, rather than fewer, restrictions being imposed on the regulated industry.

Birkin observed a similar situation in the Netherlands, where heavy advertising after the legal online market launched in October 2021 quickly grew the market, but also concerns over gambling harms.

In response to those rising fears, the Netherlands has taken a hardline stance, curbing advertising and introducing higher taxes and deposit limits for players.

H2 now estimates illegal operators account for around 50% of the Dutch market.

“The same thing happened in the Netherlands,” Birkin adds. “There’s a new market, everyone just advertised too much, the market grew, people thought it was too much advertising and they shut it down and put spend limits in. And yeah, the market’s screwed.  

“I think the same thing is going to happen in Brazil, and it’s not as if this story hasn’t happened over and over again elsewhere.”  

Birkin: Brazil licensed industry must take responsibility

Birkin concludes by claiming if the new regulatory measures are implemented in Brazil, licensed operators will be partly at fault.

The top-heavy nature of the Brazil market means if you take the top 19 brands out of the equation, H2 estimates the remaining sites hold an average market share of approximately 0.1% each.

“I think people need to stop blaming the illegal market when it’s because they’re not performing themselves in the legal market,” Birkin says. “They’re not seeing the revenues that they were wanting.

“As an industry, if you get behind this falsehood talk of the illegal market is bigger than the legal market, then it’s just going to lead to more restrictions on the legal market.

“And actually, I think the industry, they won’t like it, but they will have to take some responsibility for that.”

Alexander and 10 others, including former GVC chairman Lee Feldman, have been charged with offences between 2011 and 2018, ranging from conspiracy to defraud and fraudulent evasion of income tax.

Additionally, Robert Hoskin, Entain’s chief governance officer between 2020 and 2023, has been charged with perverting the course of justice in February 2024.

The charges were announced on Thursday by the CPS and relate to the historic activities of GVC, now called Entain, in Turkey between 2011 and 2018.

In November 2023, Entain announced it had reached a deferred prosecution agreement with the CPS, in which it would pay a financial penalty of £585 million ($790.6 million) after an investigation by the HMRC.

In the CPS’ statement, HMRC’s director of its fraud investigation service Richard Las said it has been a “complex and international investigation”.

“These are serious charges that relate to conspiracy to defraud, bribery, cheating the public revenue, evasion of income tax and perverting the course of justice among others,” Las said.

Who else has been charged?

Those charged with conspiracy to defraud and conspiracy to bribe include Richard Cooper, GVC’s CFO until 2016, and the company’s former group director of trading, James Humberstone.

Scott Masterston faces the same two charges, along with counts of fraudulent trading, cheating the public revenue, and acting as a company director while an undischarged bankrupt. Masterton is director of e-Technologies Global, which is currently in the process of liquidation.

Payments provider Ilixium’s co-founder and CEO, Richard Raubitscheck-Smith, is accused of both conspiracy offences, while Raubitscheck-Smith’s fellow co-founder and director Alexander MacAngus faces a single charge of conspiracy to defraud.

It’s understood Ilixium are not a defendant in the case.

Also charged with conspiracy to defraud and conspiracy to bribe are Conexus director Robert Dowling, Inteliqo Limited’s financial director Raymond Smart and Caroline Patricia Roe, who is listed as a director of Loki Europe, Harliboo Limited and Valhalo.

Roe also faces additional charges of fraudulent trading and fraudulent evasion of income tax.

Entain’s historic activities in Turkey

In July 2019, GVC denied media reports it was continuing to profit from its former Turkey-facing subsidiary Headlong Limited, which it owned between 2011 and 2017.

GVC claimed all ties were severed when it divested the business in November 2017, selling the business to Ropso Malta Limited for a performance-related earn-out of up to €150 million ($175 million).

Nonetheless, HMRC sought additional information from GVC, before widening its investigation so that it covered “potential corporate offending” in 2020.

Following its rebrand to Entain, the company then conceded there may have been historical misconduct involving former third-party suppliers and group employees.

In December 2023, Entain received approval for its £585 million financial penalty for its historical activities in Turkey, with the penalty relating to alleged offences under Section 7 of the Bribery Act.

Alongside the financial penalty, Entain also agreed to make a charitable donation of £20 million, while also contributing £10 million to CPS and HMRC costs.

Just days after the agreement with the CPS was approved, Entain CEO Jette Nygaard-Andersen resigned from her role with immediate effect, although her departure was unrelated to the financial penalty.

Conspiracy charges carry maximum 10-year terms

The maximum penalty for both the charges of conspiracy to defraud and conspiracy to bribe is 10 years and/or an unlimited fine.

In February, the Financial Times reported both Alexander and former GVC chairman Feldman had launched legal action against Entain, as well as the law firm Addleshaw Goddard, which represented the company in the Turkey case.

According to the Financial Times, Alexander and Feldman were suing Entain and Addleshaw Goddard for sharing “privileged information” with investigators.

In a March interview with BettingJobs, Alexander stated he would not return to the gambling sector after 24 years in the sector.

The statutory levy came into effect on 6 April this year, having been proposed during the previous government’s Gambling Act white paper in 2023. It has replaced the previous voluntary system, with the commission overseeing the collection of funds.

Operators will face varying rates, based on GGY. These depend on the types of gambling offered by an operator and whether they are online or land-based. Levy rates will range from 0.1%, primarily covering land-based activity, up to 1.1% for operations offering online casino.

For almost all licensees, the statutory levy will be based on regulatory returns data from July 2024 to March 2025, multiplied by one and one-third. The exception is society lottery licences, with this to be based on data from to 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025.

The new levy will thereafter be invoiced on an annual basis, on 1 September, based on the activity from the previous financial year. Payment across all licensees will be due, in full, by 1 October each year.

Those that do not comply, the commission said in a detailed report on the statutory levy, could face losing their operating licence in Britain.

“Payment of the statutory levy is a licence requirement,” the regulator said. “Therefore, non-payment, or late payment of the statutory levy could result in operating licence revocation, unless the Gambling Commission is satisfied that this is due to administrative error.”

The regulator added it will invoice operators separately for British and non-British leviable activity. However, licensees must notify the commission of any errors on calculation related to this before the 1 October payment deadline.  

Voluntary payments will not contribute to statutory levy

Meanwhile, the commission’s report sought to address any confusion over the existing voluntary levy. It said licensees are no longer required to make annual financial contributions to research, prevention and treatment.

Operators can still make voluntary contributions to bodies involved with this line of work. However, it would not count towards their statutory levy, with the statutory levy invoice remaining payable in full.

This ties in with GambleAware’s recent announcement that it will halt all activities by the end of March 2026. GambleAware will transition its work to the British government, as a direct consequence of the new statutory levy.

GambleAware has been supportive of the levy since it was proposed in the white paper. However, with voluntary funding now a thing of the past, the organisation will lose out on funds it previously drew from the industry.

The government hopes the new approach will raise £100 million ($135 million) for gambling-related harm prevention.

Stakeholders have warned the statutory levy needs a robust regulatory framework behind it. In May, Better Change founder Victoria Reed said in an iGB op-ed there must be a fair and unbiased process to determine how levy funding is spent.

“Without this, we run the risk of not only misusing public funds but losing the experience and progress made through decades of work to prevent harm,” she said.

The Norwegian monopoly’s CEO resigned. Then public trust collapsed. And yet, Eurojackpot and Norsk Tipping continue as if nothing has really happened. 

Who regulates the Eurojackpot draw?  

Eurojackpot is a transnational lottery draw run by 19 national monopolies, but without a proper supervisory mechanism. All operate the draw under the same brand, but without a shared regulator or any form of supranational oversight. Each monopoly guards its own turf.  

When the system fails in one country, the others simply carry on. In practice, Eurojackpot regulates itself. It can make severe mistakes without consequences for anyone but the players, who carry all the risk on behalf of the monopolies. 

On 27 June, Norwegian players experienced firsthand what this structure means in practice. Finland, which coordinates the Eurojackpot draw across all the participating countries, sent the results file to the 18 other participating countries.  

How did Norsk Tipping respond to the Eurojackpot scandal? 

Due to an error, the prize amounts in Norway were multiplied instead of divided. For example, a prize that should have been €3.50 was calculated as €350,000. Immediately, thousands of Norwegians received text messages claiming they had won millions, when in reality the winnings were only a few hundred kroner.  

The error was not immediately communicated, and many families began planning a new life – only to learn from the media they had been deceived and made fools of by the state monopoly they thought was trustworthy. 

The disaster unfolded on a Friday evening. Norsk Tipping did not send an apology until Monday morning, explaining officials had “not had time” to prioritise informing the players directly affected. Hardly credible. Such handling is unforgivable.  

And it is made worse by the fact that Eurojackpot’s structure is designed to push for ever-higher jackpots, selling the dream that anyone can win big. For many Norwegians, that dream spectacularly crashed on 27 June.  

An argument against gambling monopolies

State lottery monopolies were once sold to the public as guardians of responsibility and player protection. The reality is different. Shielded from competition, protected from meaningful oversight, they answer to no one – until scandal forces their hand. 

As long as Eurojackpot is run by national monopolies this must not remove the fundamental demand for better and more transparent supervision. No one should be their own supervisor. 

Under licensing, multiple operators compete under strict, enforceable rules. Oversight is continuous, breaches are punished swiftly and no operator can hide behind political protection or national borders.  

For players, for society and for the integrity of the industry, licensing means accountability. 

As we write this, another message arrives from Norsk Tipping: today’s (19 August) Eurojackpot prize forecast is postponed due to “a delay at the control centre in Germany”. Results will be published “as soon as everything is ready”, according to the Norwegian monopoly.  

It’s yet another example of Eurojackpot running the shop entirely on its own terms. There is no authority to set deadlines, impose quality standards or sanction failures. 

The Norsk Tipping Eurojackpot scandal should raise serious questions about the suitability of gambling monopolies in 2025. If 19 countries can share profits without sharing responsibility, the model is broken. And when a system is broken, you either replace it or repair it. 

Contributors:  

Mika Kuismanen – CEO, Finnish Trade Association for Online Gambling 

Gustaf Hoffstedt – secretary general, Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) 

Peter-Paul de Goeij – former managing director for Dutch trade body NOGA / managing consultant Quod Bonum 

Carl Fredrik Stenstrøm – secretary general at the Norwegian Trade Association for Online Gambling (NBO) 

Headquartered in Cyprus, ProgressPlay owns 134 gambling websites including Acedbet.com, Casinomite.com and Playmagical.com. It holds a licence in Great Britain, as well as in Ireland and Malta.

Detailing the case, the commission said ProgressPlay had breached several licence conditions. It had also failed to comply with certain social responsibility code and ordinary code provisions. Breaches took place between August 2021 and August 2024.

As such, it was ordered to pay the fine and handed a formal warning by the commission. It will also undergo a third-party audit to ensure it effectively implements AML and social responsibility policies, procedures and controls.

What did ProgressPlay do wrong?

Setting out some of the AML failings in the case, the regulator said ProgressPlay had failed to conduct an appropriate money laundering and terrorist financing (MLTF) risk assessment. It also did not implement suitable controls to minimise the risk of MLTF.

ProgressPlay was also found to have not considered all risks associated with its business. As such, the commission said it had failed to take a “sufficiently risk-based approach” to AML.

In addition, the regulator said ProgressPlay did not sufficiently scrutinise transactions carried out during the course of customer relationships. This included verifying the source of funds to ensure transactions were consistent with the understanding of a customer, their business activities and risk profile.

Failings with customer interaction at ProgressPlay

As for social responsibility failures, these included not having in place sufficient systems and processes to monitor customer activity when opening an account. The commission said this meant early identification of potential gambling-related harm or implementing appropriate interventions was at risk.

The regulator also noted issues with ProgressPlay’s customer interactions policy. It said this did not properly address requirements set out in the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP).

In addition, concerns were raised over how ProgressPlay carried out interactions and actions with individual customers. This included the continued risk of gambling harm and if further action was needed.

Specifically, ProgressPlay breached paragraphs one, two and three of licence condition 12.1.1 on AML, covering the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing. It also breached licence condition 12.1.2, referencing AML measures on operators based in foreign jurisdictions.

On top of this, the commission flagged failings of paragraphs one, four, nine and 12 of social responsibility code provision 3.4.3 for customer interaction. This was also considered a breach of licence conditions.

In addition, the regulator said ProgressPlay failed to adequately consider ordinary code provision 2.1.2 paragraph one and OCP 2.1.1 paragraph two, covering AML.

Commission hits out at ‘unacceptable’ failures

This is the second occasion on which ProgressPlay has faced enforcement action. In May 2022, it was ordered to pay £175,718, again for social responsibility and AML failures.

“Failure to meet AML obligations, along with the gaps identified in its social responsibility processes, are unacceptable,” said John Pierce, director of enforcement and intelligence at the commission.

“Gambling businesses must have robust policies and procedures in place to protect consumers. They must ensure appropriate anti-money laundering controls are maintained. These measures must be actively implemented and regularly tested to confirm their effectiveness.

“Operators should be in no doubt: repeated regulatory breaches will result in increasingly severe enforcement action. We urge all operators to examine the failings identified in this case and take proactive steps to strengthen their own systems and controls.”

ProgressPlay accepts fine as part of ‘transformation’

Responding to the announcement, ProgressPlay said it accepted the fine. It said the case relates to historical activity and has made changes to its processes since the breaches took place.

ProgressPlay said it now operates with a dedicated responsible gambling and AML team, supported by an independent monitoring team.

“Rather than simply remediating past findings, we’ve invested £1.5 million in player protection technology and better AML handling,” ProgressPlay CEO Itai Lowenstein said. “This transformation goes far beyond compliance, it’s fundamentally changed how we understand and serve our customers.”

Stenstrøm has called for someone to be held accountable for recent errors at Norsk Tipping. He said despite pressure from opposition parties, the government has not given a “proper answer” concerning the monopoly operator.

Writing for regional Norwegian newspaper Østlendingen, Stenstrøm referenced several recent issues at the monopoly operator, particularly a lottery scandal discovered in June in which a major technical error resulted in around 30,000 Eurojackpot players receiving an SMS or push notification claiming they had won a prize, when they hadn’t.

Norsk Tipping CEO Tonje Sagstuen resigned shortly after the error was discovered and gambling regulator Lotteritilsynet ruled Norsk Tipping had broken the law. The regulator then placed Eurojackpot Norsk Tipping under review, specifically its Lotto, Eurojackpot and Vikinglotto games.

The monopoly operator has been responsible for two additional failings in recent months, including a NOK45 million ($4.4 million) fine for errors in Norsk Tipping’s “Eurojackpot extra draws” and the “Lotto super draws”. This gave players in cooperatives, gaming clubs and cooperative banks a greater chance of winning than they should have had.

Norsk Tipping’s additional failings

In March, a NOK 36 million fine was handed out after a bug was found to have prevented self-excluded players from blocking themselves out of their accounts. This followed a NOK4.5 million fine in 2024 after mistakenly paying a player NOK25 million in incorrect winnings.

“When neither the owner (Norway’s minister for culture), the chairperson, nor the CEO takes responsibility, the Gaming Authority must step in,” Stenstrøm insisted in the op-ed.

“The Gambling Act is clear: Norsk Tipping must operate responsibly and prevent harmful consequences. When legal breaches are repeated year after year, fines are no longer sufficient. The sanctions must be stronger.”

NBO plays down potential closure of Norsk Tipping

Stenstrøm acknowledged the strongest course of action that could affect Norsk Tipping would be for it to cease operations. But as it is the country’s monopoly operator, he accepted that the likelihood for this was “slim”.

However, Stenstrøm said Norsk Tipping should still face action and “rectify its wrongdoing”.

“The main issue is that Norsk Tipping has little to no incentive to improve,” he said. “They face almost no competition, the consequences for making mistakes are nearly non-existent and the owner, the ministry of culture and equality, has traditionally allowed Norsk Tipping to chart its own course and destination.

“This is a strong argument for regulating the Norwegian gaming market more responsibly. With a licensing model, one could set clear requirements for all operators, including Norsk Tipping, and ensure that serious errors actually lead to meaningful consequences.”

Could Norway’s Norsk Tipping monopoly come to an end following the general election?

Stenstrøm uses Norsk Tipping’s failures to once again urge the government to consider liberalising the online gambling market in Norway. The market is one of the only remaining monopolies in Europe.

But liberalisation could be on the horizon as Norway goes to the polls on 8 September and two of the main political parties are actively supporting opening up the market.

In June, during a conference hosted by NBO, Progress party MP Silje Hjemdal reiterated the party’s desire to end the country’s gambling monopoly. She said the party was looking to its Nordic neighbours for inspiration.

The Conservative party also called for the monopoly to be eliminated in its manifesto, which was launched in September last year.

Norway man faces jail over Lottstift Covid-19 support fraud

Elsewhere in Norway, the Oslo District Court has sentenced a man to more than one year in prison after finding him guilty of aggravated fraud over financial support from the Norway Lottery and Foundations Authority (Lottstift) during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The man, who has not been named, applied for approximately NOK1.3 million in support. This, he said, was for six events that had been cancelled as a result of pandemic measures.

However, his attempt was unsuccessful when Lottstift requested documents for each of the events. An investigation found that each of the events for which support had been applied for were fictitious. As such, Lottstift rejected the applications and reported the case to Økokrim Norway’s National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime.

Oslo District Court ruled on the case in July 2025, with details now being made public. The individual in question was also found guilty of gross social security fraud of approximately NOK500,000.

The man was sentenced to one year and two months in prison.

“The support schemes that were developed during the pandemic were important in a crisis situation, but they were also vulnerable to fraud and exploitation by criminals,” said Senior State Prosecutor at Økokrim, Petter Nordeng. “The convicted person submitted the applications to receive support that he was not entitled to.”

PL 3,754/2025 seeks to amend several articles in Law 14,790/2023, Brazil’s fixed-odds betting law, implementing a ban on gambling advertising outside the hours of 10pm-6am through radio, television and internet video-sharing platforms.

The bill includes a ban on gambling sponsorships and brand displays at public sporting, cultural, artistic and festival events made accessible to the public.

Additionally, there would be an explicit ban on gambling marketing in schools and universities, with advertising targeted at those aged under 21 also prohibited.

Costa’s bill also proposes a maximum monthly betting limit per player, capped at the equivalent of the minimum wage for one month or BRL1,518 ($276). This would be in place across all licensed operators.

“This project is not just a piece of legislation; it’s a wake-up call against a true social epidemic, which affects, above all, our young people, the most vulnerable, those who should be focused on studying, working and building their dreams, and not trapped in screens that promise easy fortune, but deliver ruin, debt and despair,” Costa told the Senate on Tuesday.

The bill is awaiting despatch. If it is converted into law, the effects of PL 3,754/2025 would come into force 90 days after publication.

Licensed Brazil gambling sector feeling the heat

Costa’s bill is the latest example of the growing pressure on the licensed gambling sector, which only became regulated on 1 January this year.

The tax rate on legal operators’ GGR has been provisionally increased from 12% to 18%, with a Congress vote expected by 9 October on whether to make the rise permanent.

Additional advertising restrictions, which include a watershed similar to the one proposed in PL 3,754/2025, are also undergoing review after being approved by the Senate.

Meanwhile, Brazil’s finance minister Fernando Haddad recently said he would vote to approve a ban on gambling if such a bill were to appear in the Chamber of Deputies.

Costa echoed Haddad’s sentiments in Tuesday’s speech, claiming betting “does nothing good for Brazil”, instead fostering addiction, debt and suicide.

“Not a single cent of the meagre tax these companies collect compensates for the enormous social harm they cause,” Costa said.

“Betting has become one of the biggest tools of emotional and financial manipulation of our time.”

With the licensed gambling sector feeling the squeeze, the industry is concerned that overregulation could lead to adverse consequences, boosting the black market by harming the viability of regulated operations.

Fernando Vieira, executive director of the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming, previously told iGB: “The only way operators will be sustainable in Brazil is to increase the channelisation level and, for that, the fight against the illicit market becomes even more important.”

The research, conducted by the Dutch-based Quality Mark Responsible Affiliates (KVA), focuses on the risks of illegal online gambling sites directly accessible to players in the Netherlands.

KVA is a Netherlands-based advisory board created by legal firm XY Legal Solutions which demarcates affiliate sites’ compliance with Dutch regulation.

The study analysed six offshore operators that can be found through illegal affiliate websites or are organically searchable via the term “casino without Cruks”. Among them were Booms Bet, Vegas Hero and Tomb Riches.

Cruks is the national self-exclusion register for players in the Netherlands. Illegal operators have been found to be deliberately targeting players who have sought to exclude themselves from licensed gambling operators in a number of markets.

In its investigation the KVA anonymously created player accounts with each illegal provider to check whether it was possible to register and bet without identity verification. It also sought to clarify a number of other discrepancies, including whether offshore sites share personal data with third parties.

A subsequent content analysis found all six of the illegal operators’ privacy policies allowed for the sharing of players’ personal data with third-party companies located in countries outside the EU, which indicated inadequate levels of data protection.

In its conclusion, the report states one of the most common risks faced by players betting with illegal operators is “extensive and unlimited data sharing with commercial partners”.

Terms and conditions policies of illegal gambling operators

The research also considered other aspects of the illegal operators’ legal and policy documents, including their general terms and conditions and available information on any offshore licences held by the operator.

It found a number of the operators had inconsistent terms and conditions that KVA described as “one-sided and unreasonable”. Some operators noted the potential to close accounts and withdraw player winnings without explanation, as well as delay or refuse payouts.

Additionally, the KVA warned that illegal operators’ lack of an approved gaming system means there is no guarantee of fair gaming, with black market companies able to manipulate game results.

Three of the six operators also allowed for deposit via a youth bank account, meaning players under the legal gambling age of 18 could bet illegally.

With illegal operators not supervised by the KSA, the KVA warned that players in the black market could not rely on legal safeguards or policies to prevent addiction.

The KSA has taken significant strides to protect bettors in the Netherlands, including the introduction of player deposit limits and a ban on sponsorship, although some industry stakeholders feel these measures are mainly benefitting illegal operators.

Are the new player protection measures helping or hindering?

The KVA’s new research follows the March release of findings from its study on illegal gambling domains, in which it revealed traffic to illegal sites has “increased significantly” since the 2024 introduction of deposit limits.

New measures were brought in last October, with monthly net deposits limited to €700 ($817.86), while this limit is reduced to €300 for those aged between 18 and 25.

The KVA’s research found traffic to illegal domains totalled 172,576 in October, climbing to 294,255 in November. This then rose to 412,997 by February.

The KVA also found the number of domains linked to illegal operators appearing in the top search results for “casino without limits” or “casino without Cruks” rose to 72 in March this year, from 19 last October.

Detailing the case, the regulator said Crown allowed customers to use poker machines without having installed pre-play gambling limits. These limits are required by state law.

In Victoria, licensees are required to install the government’s YourPlay programme on all poker machines. Furthermore, mandatory carded play and pre-commitment applies to poker machines inside casinos.

YourPlay enables players to set limits to time or money spent on the machine and lets them keep track of their own gaming machine play across the entire state of Victoria.

According to the VGCCC, the flagged breaches took place between December 2023, when mandatory carded play and pre-commitment was introduced in Victoria, and July 2024. Crown was found to have allowed 22 customers to continue using machines after reaching their nominated time or spend limit.

The VGCCC also found another 10 customers had gambled using a card linked to a YourPlay account not in their name. These incidents occurred between December 2023 and August 2024.

Crown Melbourne avoids financial penalty

Concluding the case, the VGCCC elected to formally censure Crown. It noted the operator’s cooperation with the investigation and evidence that the breaches were isolated. The regulator also acknowledged remedial efforts had been undertaken to address the issue, including additional monitoring and staff training.

However, the VGCCC emphasised the reprimand will remain on Crown’s record. It added that it could take “more serious disciplinary action” should similar or further breaches occur.

“Poker machines are a high-risk, high-harm product,” VGCCC Chairman Chris O’Neills said. “This is why we place so much emphasis on holding the industry to account when they fail to honour their legal and social licences to protect customers from gambling harm.

“Pre-commitment programmes empower people to manage gambling by making decisions before they start gambling, about the amount of time and money they will spend. Research has shown that well-designed pre-commitment systems with binding limits can be effective in preventing harm from poker machine use.

“It is imperative, therefore, from both a legal and ethical perspective, that the casino is vigilant about meeting its pre-commitment obligations.”

The warning comes after the VGCCC recently fined QuestBet for accepting bets from a user displaying signs of gambling-related distress. The online bookmaker was fined AU$80,000 (US$51,928) over the matter.

Arizona targets unlicensed website

The Arizona Department of Gaming (ADG) has issued cease-and-desist orders to four unlicensed and unregulated gambling operators.

The operators are accused of offering access to illegal online platforms, including sweepstakes casino-style models and event wagering sportsbook betting options.

Fliff Online Gambling and Thrillzz Mobile Gambling have been flagged for event wagering. The ADG also identified BettySweeps Casino and Pulsz Casino as offering sweepstakes options to players.

“Unlicensed operators operating outside the law and without regulatory safeguards pose serious risks to consumer protection and financial security across the state, undermining the integrity of Arizona’s regulated gaming industry,” the ADG said.

Kambi pens betting deal with Oneida Indian Nation

Kambi Group has signed a long-term sports betting partnership with the Oneida Indian Nation.

Kambi will provide its retail sportsbook solution to Turning Stone Enterprises’ three locations in upstate New York. The solution will replace the current offering from a third-party sports betting supplier.

Turning Stone Enterprises is the parent organisation for all business operations of the Oneida Indian Nation. Its venues include Turning Stone Resort Casino, YBR Casino & Sportsbook and Point Place Casino.

Werner Becher, CEO of Kambi, said: “Oneida has a proven track record of offering best-in-class gaming experiences and we look forward to working with them to ensure they have an unparalleled sportsbook offering for years to come.”

RubyPlay partners second Ondiss brand in Argentina

In South America, RubyPlay has expanded its presence in Argentina by partnering with Ondiss-powered Casino Club.

RubyPlay content is now available to Casino Club users. Titles include Volcano Rising SE, Zeus Rush Fever Deluxe and Elephant Stampede.

The deal follows the launch of RubyPlay with Ondiss-powered Casino Magic last year.

Eyal Loz, chief product officer at RubyPlay, said: “This launch with Casino Club reflects our deep commitment to Argentina’s vibrant iGaming market.”

Parimatch nets Manchester United deal

Parimatch has entered a new partnership with English Premier League football club Manchester United.

According to Insider Sport, Parimatch branding will feature on LED perimeter boards at every home match. This began with the match against Arsenal on Sunday.

Parimatch will also work with United on a series of fan-focused regional campaigns. These will include VIP matchday tickets and interactive fan competitions.

Betway Scores announces first global ambassador

Betway Group-owned Betway Scores has named Italian football journalist Fabrizio Romano as its first global ambassador.

Romano will offer updates, behind-the-scenes insights and commentary via the Betway Scores app. A Betway Scores spokesperson said: “We’re thrilled to welcome Fabrizio as our first global ambassador. His reputation for accurate information from the football world is second to none. He’ll bring tremendous value to our users.”

Betway Scores offers fans access to live scores, results, fixtures and other sports content.

The AGU announced on Wednesday that it had sent an extrajudicial notice to Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram.

The notice called for Meta to remove ads for gambling sites lacking the required authorisation from the Brazil regulator, the Ministry of Finance’s Secretariat of Prizes and Bets, to operate in the federal online market.

The notice was sent after a search of Meta’s ad library that identified “hundreds” of results for active ads from profiles without authorisation to advertise gambling.

The AGU seeks removal of the illegal gambling ads within 48 hours of the notice being issued, while also instructing Meta to refrain from promoting unlicensed gambling sites in the future.

The notification to Meta reads:

“This is, therefore, a clearly illegal activity (given that these profiles are not authorised by the Ministry of Finance), which may also be linked to tax evasion, money laundering, crimes against consumer relations, fraud and other illegal practices, constituting their advertising as an equally illegal activity.”

Digital platforms liable for illegal gambling ads

In the document, the AGU notes the recent Supreme Federal Court (STF) ruling on Article 19 of the Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet.

The STF ruling on 26 June found Article 19 to be partially unconstitutional, meaning digital platforms are now presumed to be liable for illegal ads, unless they can prove they acted diligently and within a reasonable time to make the content unavailable.

In the AGU’s notice to Meta, it stated the company’s recent updates to its ad policies that made it mandatory to apply for permission to promote online gambling on its sites still include flaws that must be corrected.

Some ad relief for licensed operators?

This move from the AGU will likely be welcomed by licensed operators in Brazil, who are under fire themselves for their advertising.

In May, the regulated sector was stunned when the Brazil Senate approved a raft of proposed ad restrictions, including a ban on betting ads during live broadcasts of sporting events, as well as a blanket ban on print advertising.

The use of celebrities, such as athletes, artists and influencers, would be prohibited, while advertising on TV, streaming and social media sites and the internet would only be allowed between the hours of 7.30pm and midnight.

Radio ads, meanwhile, would only be permitted between 9am and 11am, and between 5pm and 7.30pm.

It will now fall upon the Chamber of Deputies to vote on whether to implement the measures.

Many in the licensed sector reacted furiously to the proposals, warning they risked further confusing bettors over which sites are legal and illegal, with black market operators set to profit.

In a letter directed to 50/50 CEO Elisa Greaves, the agency cited multiple breaches, including failing to undertake customer due diligence and a lack of compliance oversight when onboarding customers.  

The letter, signed by FIA boss Hon. Mohammed Ali Nasser, was dated 8 August and published on the agency’s website this week. Nasser said the FIA’s investigation was part of a broader AML/CFT inspection across Liberia’s gaming sector conducted in October last year.  

Citing the major breaches identified during the FIA’s risk-based investigation, it said 50/50 Casino had failed to undertake enhanced customer due diligence measures required by section 15.3.2 of the AML/CFT Act 2021. 

Additionally, it deemed the operator’s AML/CFT policy and procedures were not risk-based. There was also a lack of compliance oversight in the customer onboarding process. Possible unusual or suspicious transactions were detected in the operator’s system. 

50/50 AML remediation plan expected by September

Following the ruling, 50/50 Casino has been ordered to pay a monetary fine for failing to meet the requirements of the AML/CFT Act of 2021. 

iGB reached out to the charged operator, but had not heard back at the time of publishing.  

In addition to the fine, 50/50 Casino has been mandated by the FIA to submit a detailed remediation plan by 1 September laying out systematic improvements. It must also provide the FIA with its planned steps to address these deficiencies by 1 November. The agency warned it would take further supervisory action if compliance is not achieved. 

Peru’s nascent licensed gambling sector was thrown into stormy waters last year, when a 1% selective consumption tax (ISC) on the value of every bet was reintroduced. It had originally been scrapped from proposed legislation in July 2021.

The consumption tax was approved in mid-December, with the Peru government confirming it would come in from January. The initial tax rate would be 0.3% of every bet, before the full 1% rate kicked in from 1 July onwards.

Nicolás Samohod Rivarola, founding partner of local law firm Samohod Lawyers, warns the impact of the current consumption tax on the regulated market will be “catastrophic”.

“We are talking about the future, about the very permanence of the activity in the market,” Rivarola tells iGB.

“That is how apocalyptic the impact of the ISC would be on the Peruvian market if it remains as it is currently.”

Operators forced into lose-lose position

Gonzalo Perez, CEO of the market-leading operator Apuesta Total, previously told iGB the consumption tax, alongside the existing 12% tax on GGR, would lead to the tax burden on operators doubling.

In neighbouring Colombia, operators have looked to offset the effects of a new temporary 19% value-added tax (VAT) by giving players bonuses. However, this has heavily impacted profitability in the market, leading Codere Online to reduce operations there “to the bare minimum”.

The situation is similar in Peru, with operators sitting between a rock and a hard place. The question is whether they should risk their profitability to try and maintain market share by absorbing the tax’s impact themselves.

When asked what operators are concerned about with regards to the tax, Rivarola says bet amounts for players will decrease once the tax costs are passed on to them.

“The portfolio of customers to whom the tax is transferred will see the initial amount of their bet decrease, a fact that is unacceptable for the player. [It creates] a situation in which the temptation for the end consumer to direct their gaze to unregulated gambling scenarios is very risky and highly contingent,” Rivarola warns.

“On the other hand, if the operator directly assumes the burden and impact of the ISC, the margin of the business will be so small that investment will be discouraged as well as the economic-financial planning of any business model.”

Is the consumption tax in Peru unconstitutional?

Ultimately, the additional consumption tax could harm the government’s revenue collection aims. Rivarola says there will only be one winner – the illegal market.

“There is no other way or alternative to save our market than to repeal this disastrous tax.”

One way out for the licensed Peru market could lie in the tax being deemed unconstitutional. Rivarola is unsure whether the current structure of the tax is compatible with the sector in the long-term.

“In my opinion, the ISC for sports betting and/or remote gaming in Peru, as structured by the Congress of the Republic and by the Ministry of Economy and Finance, constitutes an unconstitutional tax because it is anti-technical and confiscatory,” Rivarola explains.

If the government does persist with the tax, Rivarola says it must at least assess the consumption tax’s impact on operator net win or GGR.

Dent in Peru’s gambling ambitions

Much of the frustration around this new tax relates to operators being largely happy with the market before this policy emerged.

With its regulation coming into effect last year, Peru is considered to have a very strong framework in comparison to some neighbouring LatAm markets.

The market was expected by many to become a podium player in the region. However, that optimism has been thrown into doubt by this unsettling tax measure.

Rivarola warns it could “destroy” the decades-long work and efforts to arrive at a regulated online market in 2024.

Rivarola puts the blame for the tax firmly on the government, praising the regulator – the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism (Mincetur) – for its lengthy work in developing and establishing the market.

“We have one of the best regulatory authorities in the world,” Rivarola adds.

In his view, the licensed sector must continue to “fight to survive, to protect its investments and companies, to preserve the jobs of its thousands of workers”.

“The operators are heroic businessmen (national and foreign), who seek to make formal companies despite obstacles and adversities, who know how to work in a highly regulated and supervised market like this,” Rivarola concludes.

“Please do not abuse them, do not destroy their investments, do not leave their workers on the street without formal employment.”

An independent review led by retired Supreme Court Justice Brian Martin acknowledged the mistakes SkyCity Adelaide made in the past. However, the report said changes to its systems have allayed many of its concerns.

The report did note that SkyCity must further improve its processes related to AML and CTF. But the operator’s immediate future in Adelaide has been secured with confirmation that it can keep hold of the licence.

The case dates to September 2019, when an industry-wide compliance campaign was launched in Australia. SkyCity was notified of alleged wrongdoing in June 2021, while an investigation led by Martin began soon after.

Following this, the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) launched federal court proceedings against SkyCity Adelaide for AML failings in December of 2022. Martin continued his independent review of the operator and this week the report was published in full.

“If I’d been asked to determine suitability of the licensee and SCEG (SkyCity Entertainment Group) at the end of October 2021, the inevitable answer would have been that neither were suitable,” Martin said. “Since then, the situation has changed.

“The significance of past failures needs to be considered in the context of the licensee’s subsequent behaviour, changes in personnel and the licensee’s current corporate culture and governance.

“I am satisfied that, today, the licensee is a suitable person to hold the licence and operate the casino.”

What did SkyCity Adelaide do wrong?

Setting out its initial concerns over the casino, AUSTRAC said SkyCity Adelaide demonstrated a pattern of “serious and systemic non-compliance” with AML and CTF laws.

This included not having risk-based systems and controls in its AML and CTF programmes. It also failed to establish a proper framework for board and senior management oversight for these projects.

Other issues included not creating a monitoring programme for transactions and identification of suspicious activity that was appropriate to the nature, size and complexity of SkyCity. In addition, AUSTRAC said SkyCity lacked an “appropriate enhanced customer due diligence programme” for additional checks on higher risk customers.

In May 2024, SkyCity settled its initial case with AUSTRAC with the operator agreeing to pay a penalty of AU$67 million (US$44 million). It had set aside $45 million in anticipation of a civil penalty over the matter, but the final amount was substantially higher.

Will SkyCity be ready for 2027 remediation?

As for Martin’s findings, these have been set out in a 541-page report. He referenced a “poor and inadequate culture” in the past, but accepted the efforts made to rectify such issues.

According to Martin, this culture and management’s approach to AML and CTF did not fully change until April 2024 when Jason Walbridge joined as CEO. Other changes included Julie Amey resigning as CFO and Andrew McPherson joining as chief information officer.

Martin also noted that progress from mid-2024 continues, with remediation set to complete by June 2027. However, he raised doubts as to whether this time frame is realistic, given the volume of work to carry out.

“Notwithstanding good intentions, experience has demonstrated that the magnitude and complexity of the tasks is such that full remediation by June 2027 will be difficult to achieve,” the report said.

“Although full remediation by June 2027 appears unlikely, the significance of the change in culture and ongoing progress should not be underestimated. Further, there exist strong reasons for concluding that as remediation progresses, the licensee will successfully comply with its primary obligations under the regulatory regime.”

As Martin was satisfied SkyCity is suitable to maintain its licence, the Adelaide casino will remain open for the foreseeable future.

SkyCity committed to further improvements

Responding to the findings, SkyCity’s Walbridge accepted its past failings. He also reiterated the operator’s commitment to continuing to improve and strengthen its systems.

“We fully accept and acknowledge the findings of the report that we did not measure up to the standards required, and we apologise for those failings,” Walbridge said. “We further acknowledge that we still have work to do.

“We’ve made significant enhancements in terms of leadership, resourcing and systems. This includes a commitment to invest $60 million over three years to transform our culture, uplift our financial crime and host responsibility practices.

“Our team has worked hard to rise out standards, better meet obligations and improve how we look after our customers.”

‘No clean bill of health’ for SkyCity

South Australia Liquor and Gambling Commissioner Brett Humphrey also commented on the report. He said while SkyCity will retain the licence, he could not rule out further action or measures for the operator.

“I accept Mr Martin’s findings that SkyCity Adelaide is suitable to hold and operate the casino licence and SkyCity Entertainment Group is suitable to be SkyCity Adelaide’s close associate,” he said. “But let me be clear, this is by no means a clean bill of health for SkyCity Adelaide.

“Even though many of the issues raised have either been addressed or are being addressed through a programme of work being supervised by the independent monitor since August 2023, the deficiencies and breaches uncovered are deeply concerning.

“I am considering Mr Martin’s findings as well as ongoing work by Consumer and Business Services to determine what enforcement action I may take in light of these breaches.

“I will also be looking at what measures may be required for the ongoing future operations of the licence,” Humphrey concluded.

According to local news outlet Metrópoles, the working group between the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA) and the government’s Federal Revenue Service (RFB) is discussing the possibility of taxing companies active in the grey market.

This grey market period lasted much longer than expected, with former president Michel Temer first signing online legislation into law in December 2018, with five years passing before the Chamber of Deputies gave the final green light.

With full online regulation coming into force on 1 January this year, the working group, named the GTI-Bets, was announced the following week to ensure the betting sector in Brazil adheres to its tax requirements.

The creation of GTI-Bets seemingly alarmed a number of operators, especially among those who had invested heavily in jockeying for position to gain brand awareness ahead of regulation.

Robinson Barreirinhas, special secretary of the RFB, told the parliamentary inquiry commission on betting in March that the government should pursue the taxes that would have been paid in the grey market.

And it now appears the government will do exactly that, with Metrópoles reporting the retrospective taxes could raise up to BRL12.6 billion ($2.3 billion) for government coffers.

More tax pressure for operators in Brazil

Despite less than eight months having passed since regulation began in Brazil, it appears the gambling sector could soon be facing higher taxes, alongside any retrospective charges.

On 11 June, the government published a provisional measure increasing the tax rate on operators’ GGR from 12% to 18%, a 50% hike.

Initial attempts to generate tax revenue by increasing the rate on financial transaction taxes were scrapped due to political pressure. The government subsequently turned its attentions to the gambling sector to plug the financial gap.

The provisional measure came into effect immediately after its publication. However approval by both the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies is needed before the measure is made permanent.

The tax rise pushes the overall burden on operators to around 50%, with many industry stakeholders warning it’s an excessive rate that risks making licensed operations unviable.

This could aid the black market, with the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming stating the market share of illegal operators could increase from 50% to 60%.

The dispute originated in the two companies’ native Georgia but spilled over into the UK after Aviator LLC initiated proceedings in late 2024. However, Spribe struck the first blow with a counterclaim, filed in April, which resulted in Judge Anthony Mann issuing an interim injunction on 31 July to block Aviator LLC from launching a competing crash game in the UK market.

Spribe founder David Natroshvili claimed the interim injunction shows the UK court supports the supplier’s position.

“Spribe created the Aviator crash game in 2018 and is the sole owner of the game globally,” Natroshvili said. “We will continue to take all necessary steps globally to protect Spribe, our partners and players from any third parties who seek to undermine or infringe our rights.”

The ruling means Spribe does not face any competition from a “copycat” title launched by Aviator LLC ahead of a trial. Sources close to the case suggest the trial will start either late next year or early 2027 and is likely to last a number of weeks.

Aviator LLC is looking to highlight that Spribe was required to give an undertaking to provide compensation if the interim injunction was later found to be wrongfully granted. However, this is normal and expected under UK civil procedure. It is used as a safeguard to balance the fact that interim injunctions are granted before a full trial where complete arguments are heard.

Aviator LLC claims it was not planning on launching a crash game

Spribe’s response to the ruling has been widely shared in industry media. It centres around Aviator LLC intending to release its “copycat” crash game in the UK under the Aviator brand and engaging in what Spribe claims are “promotional communications” targeting Spribe’s UK customers.

“This copycat game is not authorised by Spribe,” the supplier said. “It blatantly infringes the copyright works which Spribe owns in its game and seeks to misappropriate the goodwill which Spribe has created in its Aviator brand.”

This necessitated the interim injunction to “prevent the clear risk of reputational and financial damage” from Aviator LLC, Spribe added.

Aviator LLC said it does not intend to launch a competing crash game in the UK, although it continues to assert its ownership over the Aviator-branded crash game.

No GB licence for Aviator LLC … yet

As first reported by Law360, Aviator LLC’s argument against the interim injunction focused on the improbability of it applying for a licence before the case went to trial.

Aviator’s Malta-based subsidiary of Aviator Studio Holding Limited (Malta) has not yet applied for a Gambling Commission licence and argued the process would not be completed before the IP trial.

“The restriction imposed on Aviator LLC aligns with the fact that Aviator had already decided it was not going to launch a game in the UK anyway, nor will its licensee at this time,” the company said.

“The judge accepted the evidence presented by Aviator LLC confirming that the licensing process typically takes around a year,” it continued. “No such licence has been applied for, and no company has yet been formed for that purpose. It is therefore highly likely that the trial will conclude before any licence application is processed, rendering the interim injunction commercially irrelevant.”

However, Aviator LLC did point out that there was nothing to stop it from applying for a Gambling Commission licence ahead of the trial.

More details on the case

In its statement, Aviator LLC also looked to highlight several elements rejected from Spribe’s counterclaim by Judge Mann.

It claims Spribe also requested that Aviator LLC be blocked from: 

• Offering and/or promoting the Aviator Studio crash game to UK consumers.
• Distributing any emails or press releases in the UK.
• Making any statements – public or private – asserting Aviator LLC’s ownership of the Aviator IP.
• Stating that Spribe isn’t the rightful owner of said IP.
• Posting any of the above-mentioned statements on the aviator.studio website.

Sources close to the case wouldn’t comment on the specifics of the claim but said Judge Mann believed the supplier was adequately projected by the interim injunction. The judge’s full written decision is expected to be published later this week.

Spribe is represented by Benet Brandreth KC and Christopher Hall of 11 South Square, instructed by Bird & Bird in the case. Aviator LLC is represented by Simon Malynicz KC and Gwilym Harbottle of Hogarth Chambers, instructed by Allen Overy Shearman Sterling.

Georgian IP dispute spills over into other markets

The ongoing dispute began in Spribe and Aviator LLC’s home country of Georgia. It became widely known after the Court of the First Instance ruled in favour of Aviator LLC, the former owner of the country’s leading gambling operator Adjarabet, since acquired by Flutter. It awarded the claimant €330 million in damages and invalidated trademark registrations for the Aviator crash game.

That €330 million figure is the same amount Flutter paid to acquire Adjarabet in 2019.

Spribe launched the game in 2019 and it quickly became a hugely successful product across the world. The Aviator game is certified in more than 40 jurisdictions and played by more than 35 million players every month across more than 4,500 brands, according to the supplier.

However, the Georgian judgment, according to sources at the time, stemmed from an agreement for Adjarabet to offer the Aviator crash game in Georgia and Armenia under an exclusive agreement. 

This agreement only covered those two markets and did not stop Spribe from launching Aviator – and registering its trademark – elsewhere, sources told iGB. Furthermore, Aviator is no longer available in the Georgian market.

Aviator LLC later announced a settlement with Flutter, under which it would supply Aviator-branded crash games to the gaming giant. Flutter has been contacted for clarity on the agreement.

At the time the news broke, individuals familiar with Georgia’s legal system said the case, which Spribe continues to fight, could take up to three years to conclude. They also pointed out the First Instance judgment came after around eight months, far quicker than the usual 16-18 month turnaround for similar cases.

Aviator LLC claims to have filed similar suits in other markets, although it has not yet said where.

Rank is hoping to launch retail sports betting across its casino portfolio in the UK from September, after new regulations were passed into law on 22 July. 

Mark Harper, MD of Rank Group’s Grosvenor Casinos, tells iGB the opportunity to offer betting to casino customers will drive customer acquisition efforts and enable its venues to compete against the growing threat of Adult Gaming Centres (AGCs). 

The government passed into law a number of land-based casino reforms, including increasing the number of gaming machines within a venue and enabling casinos to offer betting via SSBTs.  

Harper says applications are currently under review and the Gambling Commission is likely to start approving those by September.  

Betting now allowed in UK casinos

Previously, bettors could place a bet on their mobile phone while in a casino, but not via an SSBT within the actual venue itself. 

While the number of terminals will be limited according to the size of the gambling area, Minister for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Baroness Fiona Twycross told the House of Lords in June that new regulations would broaden the scope for investment by casinos. 

“The current regulatory framework prohibits these casinos from offering betting products, whereas venues licensed under the 2005 Act can do so. The prohibition makes little sense, as a casino customer can place a bet on their mobile phone while in the venue but not with the casino itself,” Twycross said during a debate on the amendment. 

“This change will allow converted casinos not only to offer a new gambling product but to invest in other parts of their venues, such as sports bars.” 

Additionally, under land-based reforms, licensed converted casino premises can install up to 80 gaming machines, provided the gambling area is no smaller than 280sqm and the number of machines doesn’t exceed five times the number of gaming tables used in the casino. 

Land-based reforms ‘transformational’ for Grosvenor 

Harper believes the land-based reforms will prove “transformational” for the UK casino sector and Grosvenor is well positioned to capitalise. 

“I think we are particularly well placed because of our scale, because of our locations, because of our square footage within our venues,” Harper tells iGB.  

“We will be able to maximise the opportunity of increased slots to satisfy customer demand at the same time as we will introduce sports betting, which will widen the appeal of casinos. That has triggered investment within our business during the last 12 months.” 

The timeline of land-based casino reform in the UK 

The DCMS set out to modernise UK gambling regulation in its 2023 white paper, with a number of proposals specifically centred on the land-based sector. 

Changes to increase the number of gaming machines and allow betting in casinos were published in May, with the regulations passed by both parliamentary houses in June, before their 22 July implementation.  

Harper believes licences will be granted towards the end of August, with Rank then hoping to roll out additional slots and SSBTS from September onwards. 

“We would anticipate an immediate uplift in revenue as a result of those extra slots, because for the first time, customers will actually be able to get onto a slot machine on a Saturday night, as well as broadening the appeal through sports betting,” Harper says of the benefit of land-based reforms.  

Land-based reforms spark heavy Rank investment 

Rank made seven significant upgrades to its casinos in 2024, with a further six venues to receive similar investment this year. 

“We are investing a lot of money and that is on the basis that land-based reform provides the catalyst to satisfy customer demand and broaden the appeal of casinos,” says Harper.  

“We’re using that at the same time as a way of modernising and creating warm, welcoming, compelling, exciting environments.” 

In May 2024, Paquetá was charged with four breaches of FA Rule E5.1, with the FA alleging he purposely collected four bookings on Premier League matches while playing for West Ham between November 2022 and August 2023.

Rule E5.1 states: “A participant shall not, directly or indirectly, seek to influence for an improper purpose the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of, or occurrence in or in connection with, a football match or competition.”

Paquetá, who has played 55 times for his national side Brazil, has consistently denied purposely gaining bookings to affect the betting market.

The FA has now said it’s not been able to prove the match-fixing charges against Paquetá, who was reportedly facing a lifetime ban if found guilty.

The association now awaits written reasons from the regulatory commission on its decision.

Paquetá thanks his team and his family for their support

In an Instagram post, Paquetá thanked his family and legal team, as well as West Ham, for their support during the investigation.

“I can’t say anything more now, but I also can’t express how grateful I am to God and how eager I am to return to playing football with a smile on my face,” Paquetá said.

Although he avoided punishment for match-fixing, the FA did find Paquetá guilty of two breaches of FA Rule F3, for failing to comply with the obligation to answer questions and provide information for the investigation.

The regulatory commission will decide on the appropriate sanction for those charges at “the earliest opportunity”, it said.

What next for Paquetá?

West Ham is reportedly furious with the impact this investigation has had on both the team and Paquetá.

In a statement following the FA’s announcement, West Ham vice-chair Karen Brady welcomed the decision and praised Paquetá for his conduct during the process.

“Despite the incredible pressure on him, Lucas has performed week in and week out for the club, always giving everything,” Brady said.

“It has been a difficult time for Lucas and his family, but he has remained absolutely professional throughout and he is now looking forward to drawing a line under this episode, as is everyone at West Ham United.”

Just hours before the announcement, Paquetá scored in West Ham’s 2-1 pre-season friendly victory over fellow Premier League side Everton.

According to a statement from the US Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, Arenas is facing three charges. They are one count each of conspiracy to operate illegal gambling, operating illegal gambling and making false statements to federal investigators.

Five other men were arrested alongside Arenas: Yevgeni Gershman, Evgenni Tourevski, Allan Austria, Yarin Cohen and Ievgen Krachun.

Per the US Attorney’s Office, Gershman in particular is “a suspected organised crime figure from Israel”. In addition to the gambling charges, Gershman and his wife Valentina Cojocari face three additional counts related to marriage fraud. The duo allegedly entered into a “sham marriage” for the sake of granting legal status for Gershman, an Israeli citizen.

The maximum sentence for each of the gambling charges is five years in federal prison. Arenas was arraigned and pleaded not guilty on Wednesday in federal court in Los Angeles. He was released on $50,000 bond with a trial date of 23 September. Federal prosecutors declined to comment further.

A complex operation

Arenas and the co-conspirators allegedly operated an illegal poker ring out of the Encino mansion from September 2021 to July 2022. During that time, Arenas rented the house to his associates “for the purpose of hosting high-stakes illegal poker games”, per the statement.

Arthur Kats, 51, who was not named as a co-conspirator, reportedly served as a property manager of sorts. He was said to have staged the house for games, recruited people to host the games and collected rent for Arenas.

Four of the men – Gershman, Tourevski, Austria, and Cohen – were said to be the primary operators of the games. They collected rakes, or a percentage of the pots during each game, and solicited potential players. Krachun was said to be the accountant or “chip runner” of the operation, tracking wins and losses, distributing chips and facilitating payouts.

Young women were also hired by Gershman to staff the games. The women reportedly served drinks, “provided massages and offered companionship to the poker players”, although no sexual-related charges are listed. Arenas’ co-conspirators kept a percentage of the earnings given to these women. Other accomplices include hired chefs, valets and armed “security guards”.

Under California law, poker is only legal at state-licensed card rooms or at tribal-owned casinos.

Unclear if incident is part of other scandals

Arenas is among several athletes named in gambling scandals this year, some of which are connected to one another. For example, multiple athletes are ensnared in an investigation by the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York. They include Jontay Porter, who was banned from the NBA for life last year for intentionally underperforming to cash prop bets.

Current Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier is also connected to that case, and new information related to similar allegations and suspicious bet patterns was reported by ESPN this month. Former Pistons guard Malik Beasley is part of that investigation as well.

In MLB, two pitchers for the Cleveland Guardians – Luis Ortiz and All-Star Emmanuel Clase – have been placed under investigation in recent weeks. Few details have emerged about Clase, but Ortiz faces prop-bet manipulation allegations for pitches that badly missed the plate in two June starts. MLB last year banned former infielder Tucupita Marcano for life for betting on baseball and umpire Pat Hoberg was fired for sharing a betting account with a friend.

It is unclear at this time whether Arenas’ case is connected to any other high-profile sports betting investigations.

Top prosecutor’s term extended the previous day

On Tuesday, US President Donald Trump extended the term for Bill Essayli as the interim US Attorney for the Central District of California, just before his term was set to expire. 

In addition to the Arenas case, the Central District has conducted a multi-year investigation into the illegal sports betting market in Southern California. Next month, Matt Bowyer is scheduled to be sentenced in Santa Ana on charges of illegal bookmaking, money laundering and federal tax evasion. Bowyer is the bookmaker that handled $325 million in sports wagers from Ippei Mizuhara, the former interpreter for baseball star Shohei Ohtani. 

Trump appointed Essayli in April for an initial 120-day term. Essayli succeeded acting US Attorney Joseph McNally. The extension allows Essayli to serve an additional 210 days without Senate confirmation. 

Besides Bowyer, two other illegal bookmakers are awaiting sentencing in the district. The office has delayed the sentencing of Damien LeForbes, a pro poker player, several times this year. Another bookie, former A’s minor league pitcher Wayne Nix, has seen his sentencing continued on multiple occasions since his 2022 guilty plea.

Rocky road for Agent Zero

The 43-year-old Arenas, known by NBA fans as “Agent Zero” for his jersey number, has fallen from grace over the last 20 years. Arenas played in the NBA from 2001-2012 for multiple teams, most notably the Washington Wizards. He was a three-time All-Star and three-time All-NBA honoree for the franchise.

But in late 2009, Arenas’ career was derailed by an incident involving teammate Javaris Crittenton. Both men brought guns to the Wizards locker room, which was later revealed to have been due to a dispute from a card game. A documentary chronicling the incident titled “Untold: Shooting Guards” is currently streaming on Netflix.

Over the years Arenas has worked to rebuild his image and became something of a media personality. His online sports talk show “Gil’s Arena” is sponsored by Underdog Fantasy, which just renewed the show’s contract in January.

Arenas’ son, Alijah, is also a highly recruited young player who is signed to play at the University of Southern California. The younger Arenas earlier this year survived a severe car crash that left him in a medically induced coma.

Matt Rybaltowski contributed to this report.

Meanwhile pokies giant Mount Pritchard District and Community Club also faces civil action from AUSTRAC over anti-money laundering failures.

An Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) investigation found Betfair had sent 148 emails and text messages between March and December 2024 to players who had either not consented to, or had withdrawn consent to receive messages.

The ACMA highlighted the incident in a statement on 30 July.

The investigation also found Betfair sent six text messages and emails without an option for customers to unsubscribe from them.

All messages during the period were sent to Betfair VIP customers, offering inducements including account deposits and free event tickets.

Ruling on the case, ACMA ordered Betfair to pay the AU$871,000 financial penalty. The operator also entered a two-year court-enforceable undertaking.

This requires it to invest in an independent review of its marketing messages and implement improvements. It must also undertake staff training, quarterly internal audits and report to ACMA regularly.

ACMA’s ‘zero tolerance’ approach to spam breaches

Authority member Samantha Yorke hit out at Betfair over the case. She said spam laws have been in place for 20 years and it is “unacceptable” not to respect customer rights.

“VIP programmes are generally designed to attract and retain customers with high betting activity, however this doesn’t mean VIP customers are well off or can afford losses,” Yorke said.

“Sending promotional gambling messages to these customers without consent or with no option to opt-out is incredibly irresponsible in addition to being non-compliant.”

This marks the second occasion ACMA has taken action against a gambling operator over a VIP-related spam issue. In June, ACMA ordered Tabcorp to pay $4 million for sending over 5,700 marketing messages to VIP customers.

Tabcorp sent 2,598 messages to users between 1 February and 1 May 2024, without an option to unsubscribe. A further 3,148 messages, across SMS and WhatsApp, did not contain “adequate sender information” during the same period.

In addition, 11 SMS messages were sent without consent between 15 February and 29 April last year.

AUSTRAC takes action against Mounties

In other news, the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) has launched Federal Court civil penalty proceedings against Mount Pritchard District and Community Club (Mounties).

The case relates to “alleged serious and systemic non-compliance” with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) laws.

Mounties is one of the largest and most profitable club groups in New South Wales. It owns 10 venues, eight of which operate approximately 1,400 poker machines.

AUSTRAC regulates AML and CTF in Australia. It said Mounties contravened the AML/CTF Act by providing gaming services to customers in circumstances when it did not have an AML/CTF programme in line with national law.

Mounties, based in Sydney, was ruled to not have an adequate risk assessment in place. It also did not carry out appropriate staff training, nor did it have suitable, risk-based systems and controls across transaction monitoring and enhanced customer due diligence.

Other failures included not being subject to an independent review and failing to monitor certain customers with a view to identifying, mitigating and managing money laundering risks. In addition, Mounties was accused of failing to appropriately maintain its AML/CTF programme.

The Federal Court of Australia will now determine whether Mounties contravened the Act and, if so, what action it faces. 

AUSTRAC: Mounties has responsibility to manage risks

With such a large network, AUSTRAC CEO Brendan Thomas said the business has a responsibility to manage risks.

“This is a big company with an even bigger responsibility to ensure its clubs are managing the risks that criminals can run dirty money through its gaming machines,” Thomas said on the actions from AUSTRAC.

“Our 2024 Money Laundering in Australia National Risk Assessment identified pubs and clubs as a medium risk sector. But when those businesses are exposed to cash, especially in circumstances where known money laundering risks are not being managed, the risk increases.

“A business operating at this scale, in a cash intensive sector, is exposed to a high degree of risk.”

Earlier this month, it was announced Hanzbet would halt its activities in the licensed Brazil betting market after a clash with its licence holder in Brazil, EA Entretenimento e Esportes Ltda (EA).

But on Monday, Hanzbet announced the company had formalised an agreement to operate alongside BigBet, one of the three brands working under Big Brazil’s licence.

Big Brazil is also the licence holder of the Apostar brand, as well as Caesars Sportsbook.

The companies assert the move will strengthen the brands’ presence in the regulated market and boost the options available to bettors in Brazil.

“This merger represents more than a collaboration between the two companies – it’s a firm step toward strengthening the Brazilian regulated betting market,” Big Brazil/BigBet CEO Rodrigo Cariola said. “We remain committed to compliance, responsible gaming and delivering a high-quality experience for everyone.”

Hanzbet CEO Gabriel Martins added: “We know the credibility HanzBet has earned within the iGaming industry, partners, affiliates and service providers.

“We have always conducted our actions with clarity, seriousness and loyalty. We will continue, now stronger than ever, alongside a great brand like BigBet.”

It’s currently unclear what the merger will entail, although it could potentially mean Hanzbet’s customer base and operations are simply absorbed into BigBet.

The companies say they plan to announce further operational details soon.

What happened to Hanzbet?

Hanzbet claims the EA statement announcing the closure of the brand was published without its consent, with founder and CMO Eduardo Peres stating he and his team had been suddenly excluded from all internal communication channels and decision-making.

Peres published a statement on his LinkedIn, labelling the relationship with EA as a “true operational dictatorship” and alleging the licence holder was intentionally diverting Hanzbet users to another of EA’s brands, BateuBet.

Even more seriously, Peres accused EA of withdrawing liquidity from the company while simultaneously telling customers they had to extract funds from Hanzbet ahead of its closure on 31 July, making withdrawals impossible.

iGB reached out to both Hanzbet and EA regarding Peres’ accusations, but is yet to receive a response from either.

Despite the recent challenges, Peres welcomes the new chapter with BigBet, thanking Big Brazil for its belief in Hanzbet.

“After everything we have been through with the HanzBet case, today we turn around, with our heads held high and strengthened,” Peres said on LinkedIn. “They did everything to bury HanzBet. They forgot that the end only comes to those who give up and that was never our case.”

Cromwell failed to report more than $177,000 in income on federal tax returns between 2014 and 2017, authorities said. About two-thirds of that was connected to the tribe’s First Light Resort and Casino project in Taunton, Massachusetts, which is a decade in the making and still ongoing. The other income came from side deals not related to the casino scandal.

Sentencing is set for 5 November before US District Court Judge Nathaniel M Gorton. Cromwell could face up to three years in prison, a year of probation and a $100,000 fine for each charge. But in addition to the tax counts, the 60-year-old Cromwell will also face sentencing for three extortion charges and one charge of conspiracy to commit extortion. Those charges were originally dropped by a lower court in 2022 but were reinstated by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in September 2024.

The extortion charges carry sentences of up to 20 years, three years of probation and a $250,000 fine, per count.

From bribery to extortion

Originally, Cromwell was indicted in November 2020 alongside David DeQuattro, CEO of prominent development firm RGB Architects. Authorities alleged that Cromwell conspired with RGB to be the “owner’s representative” for the casino project and that he received more than $57,000 from DeQuattro between 2014 and 2017 in exchange for a lucrative development contract. This was in addition to about $45,000 of other unreported income from a previous architectural partner who is not named.

According to prosecutors, Cromwell received a home gym and a hotel suite vacation from DeQuattro in addition to the money.

“Instead of working honestly on behalf of the Mashpee Wampanoags as their duly elected representative, Cedric Cromwell is accused of using his position as chairman of the tribe to enrich himself by extorting tens of thousands of dollars in bribes and engaging in a conspiracy with David DeQuattro to commit bribery,” Joseph Bonavolonta, special agent in charge of the FBI Boston Division, said at the time.

Both men were convicted of bribery in May 2022, although the trial court severed the tax charges and ruled only on the extortion and bribery charges. However, after appealing to the First Circuit, DeQuattro was ultimately acquitted of all charges in 2024, whereas all of Cromwell’s charges were reinstated.

Now back to work, DeQuattro has emerged as a victim, with Cromwell now pegged as the extorter and ringleader. He will now face his dual sentencing for both sets of charges this fall.

“One of the greatest things that has happened throughout this whole thing is it’s almost like you wear a set of X-ray glasses, where you can see people for who they are,” DeQauttro told GoLocalProv in March. “And I think I did that at a young enough age, where you know who your real friends were.”

Casino saga just as complicated

As Cromwell’s legal troubles have played out, his former tribe has had no better luck in its quest to develop the casino project without him.

The Mashpee Wampanoags were federally recognised in 2007, and the city of Taunton in 2012 signed an Intergovernmental Agreement with the tribe for a massive casino development that came to be known as First Light. The first phase of the project alone was slated for 3,000 slots and 150 tables.

More than a decade of legal battles ensued after the original agreement, keeping the project at a standstill. Several court rulings during that time flip-flopped on the legality of the project and the original agreement.

A detailed breakdown of these rulings, compiled through mid-2023, is available on PlayMA.com. In 2024, the tribe finally came out victorious in its legal defence of First Light and announced plans to build a temporary “welcome centre” in Taunton.

From 10 to 50 to 250?

Adding to the complexity of the case is the fact that Genting is funding the casino project and is partnered with the tribe to operate it. That relationship was rocky in previous years due to the project’s legal troubles but seems to have improved. When the temporary welcome centre was opened in January, Kevin Jones, chief strategy officer for Genting Americas, was on hand.

He told the Taunton Daily Gazette that the facility was meant to educate the public about the tribe and its future casino plans. It also included a “sampling” of gaming, in the form of 10 slots.

In the months since, the small facility has continued to expand. It has grown from 10 to 50 slots, lengthened its operating hours and obtained an alcohol licence. An updated agreement with the city could allow the centre to further expand to 250 slots.

The Daily Gazette has also noted the tribe is now directly referring to the center as a “casino” instead of a welcome centre, as it did previously. If the tribe does intend for the facility to become a permanent casino, it would still be far below the scope outlined in the original 2012 agreement under Cromwell.

ADM, the government agency responsible for gambling regulation in Italy, will continue to process applications until 12 November. This, it said, will enable its staff to carry out full checks of applicants.

The process had initially been due to conclude by 17 September, after which successful operators would have six months to launch.

However, the agency did not clarify whether this extension would impact plans for existing licensees. Previously, ADM said current licence-holders could continue to offer gambling until March 2026, after which only those with new licences will be able to operate.

Who is in the running for a new licence in Italy?

ADM concluded its tender process to award remote gambling concessions on 30 May. In total, 46 applications have secured initial approval in Italy.

Among the successful applicants were Betfair, Snaitech and Sisal, all of which are owned by Flutter Entertainment. 888 Italia (Evoke), Hillside (Bet365), LeoVegas, Betsson and William Hill also secured initial approval from ADM.

For the next stage, those given the green light must now pay a licence fee of €7 million ($8.2 million). This fee applies to each vertical per brand.  

However, this licence fee has proved a major stumbling block for many operators. In the last round of licensing, the fee was set at €200,000, some way short of the new amount.

While 46 applications were put forward this time, the last licence procedure in 2018 drew a total of 93 submissions. Of those that applied, 81 were granted approval to offer online gambling in Italy.

What other new rules do online gambling operators face?

The latest round of reforms are likely to drive consolidation in Europe’s biggest online gambling market, experts have suggested.

Additional regulatory changes are planned under the new system.

One such amendment is the tax rate, which is now set at 24.5% and 25.5% of GGR for online sports betting and casino operators, respectively. This is on top of an annual fee of 3% of GGR.

Licensees must also spend at least 0.2% of their GGR on responsible gambling campaigns, with a cap of €1 million.

In addition, operators must ensure they are in line with new player protection rules. New laws require licensees to offer players the option to set limits on deposits, spend and playing time, as well as to self-exclude from online platforms.

On 24 July, the RFB released its monthly presentation detailing the total monthly tax collection of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s Brazilian government.

In comparison, the UK, a much more mature market, generated £1.62 billion ($2.2 billion) in gambling taxes in the six months between 1 April and 30 September 2022.

Collections from the Brazilian gambling sector in June stood at BRL764 million, falling 6.1% short of May’s figure of BRL814 million.

Udo Seckelmann, head of gambling & crypto at Brazilian law firm Bichara e Motta Advogados, believes the figures reaffirm the market’s strong potential for generating significant public revenue.

“I am not surprised by the tax collection figures,” Seckelmann tells iGB.

“While the market is still in its initial phase of consolidation, the data already demonstrates that regulation is a more effective path than prohibition or informality, both from an economic and public policy perspective.”

A key point made by gambling advocates ahead of online regulation was how much tax the Brazilian government could collect from the sector.

Seckelmann feels tax revenues will increase as the market grows. He notes the first six months of the market are focused on laying a solid legal and technical foundation, rather than full optimisation of tax collection.

“Given that the regulatory framework is still being implemented and many operators are in the process of adapting or applying for licences, I believe the government understands that tax revenues will increase progressively over time,” Seckelmann continues.

Overly restrictive measures could harm Brazil tax collection

Despite the promising early figures, there could be challenges down the line for the Brazilian gambling sector, with the Senate approving new ad restrictions in late May. A provisional measure to raise the tax rate on operators’ GGR to 18% was also issued.

These developments have raised concerns among stakeholders, including fears over the long-term viability of regulated activities, particularly for smaller operators.

Seckelmann warns new regulations must be carefully balanced, or they’ll risk disrupting the market’s ability to reach its huge potential.

“If well-calibrated, these measures can strengthen the credibility and sustainability of the regulated sector,” Seckelmann explains.

“However, excessive burdens or disproportionate restrictions could push consumers and operators back toward unregulated alternatives, ultimately reducing tax revenues.

“The goal should always be high channelisation – keeping players within the regulated environment – and that requires a competitive and attractive legal market.”

While he believes fluctuation is natural during the early months of a regulated market, Seckelmann says a new, increased tax rate could cause a drop in tax revenue as operators adjust their strategies.

When will land-based gambling be legalised?

The RFB’s figures only cover online gambling, as the legalisation of land-based betting is still in limbo after the Senate again postponed its vote on PL 2,234/2022 earlier this month.

The vote had been expected to take place prior to the July recess, but Senate President Davi Alcolumbre withdrew the vote from the agenda due to low attendance in the plenary.

The government’s recess is set to end on Thursday, so it remains to be seen if the momentum again builds for a vote.

If legalisation does happen, though, Brazil’s government will likely benefit hugely from a tax perspective beyond the existing online revenue.

A DataSenado survey in April reported 60% of the Brazilian adult population was in favour of legalising land-based betting, with 58% agreeing it would increase tax collection.

It has previously been estimated that the approval of land-based gambling could provide around BRL20 billion in revenue per year, with massive benefits to Brazil’s faltering tourism sector.

The first headwinds emerged near Memorial Day when Illinois legislators passed the nation’s first-ever tax on sports wagering handle. Then, to compound matters, Republican lawmakers tossed an amendment into US President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” that eliminates a percentage of write-offs that gamblers can deduct on their annual taxes.

For sports bettors in Illinois, the tax changes present a “double whammy” to their earnings potential. Several operators have responded to the new tax by announcing plans to pass the costs along to customers. At the same time, sportsbooks have been challenged by a new competitor in prediction markets, which have fewer tax burdens and less regulatory hurdles.

The tax changes raise serious questions of whether top sportsbooks will need to bolster their VIP programmes to incentivise play for high rollers. Across the pond, in the UK, VIP programmes have come under pressure from regulators that have established strict standards to curb rates of compulsive gambling. All in all, the last-minute policy shifts have left C-suite officials with a busier calendar than expected this summer.

An outsized percentage

While VIP sports bettors only comprise a sliver of an operator’s total customer base, high-value customers represent an outsized portion of a book’s overall handle. Last March, Fanatics ranked second in New Jersey with a market share of 23.5%, topping gross gaming revenues from DraftKings in the month.

Multiple channel checks from Eilers & Krejcik Gaming ascribe the figures to losses from one customer described as the biggest losing customer “by a mile”.

There are other instances where VIP activity prospered at leading US books. Prior to its acquisition by Fanatics, PointsBet generated about 70% of its 2019 annual revenue from VIP customers, the Wall Street Journal reported. Those customers, according to the Journal, only represented roughly 0.5% of its customer base.

By joining a sportsbook’s VIP programme, customers can receive certain perks such as boosted bets, free wagers and rebates. But leading books have faced increased competition from prediction markets, which can offer more favourable odds due to the exchange-wagering model.

A tax advantage?

Kalshi, a prediction market that offers event contracts on sports, saw multiple six-figure trades on the Eagles to win the Super Bowl in February. Then, in April, some high rollers flocked to the site during Masters week. One individual purchased $665,000 in buy contracts on Collin Morikawa to not win the Green Jacket. Morikawa finished eight shots behind champion Rory McIlroy, resulting in a payout for the customer of $30,000.

Those who trade with Kalshi can capitalise on a tax advantage under the new rules. Vijay Dewan, co-founder of Pine Sports and a former senior counsel at Deutsche Bank, discussed the implications of the federal tax policy in a LinkedIn post.

Sweeteners for VIPs

The dynamic created a lively debate at this month’s National Council of Legislators from Gaming States summer meeting in Louisville. Chad Beynon, head of US gaming research at Macquarie, served as a panellist for a session on major topics impacting the industry.

Asked if operators can offer new incentives as enticements for their VIPs, Beynon pointed to perks for high rollers in Las Vegas such as concerts at Caesars Palace and the MGM Grand.

Over the last several weeks, Beynon held a call with a top 10 sportsbook. One option under consideration is arranging meet-and-greets for VIP customers with athletes from their favourite teams.

“You can have dinner with someone on the Knicks like Josh Hart,” Beynon told iGB.

VIP restrictions in the UK

Legislators on the state and federal level are still digesting the findings of last week’s UK Gambling Commission report on VIP modifications, in order to gauge whether changes are needed in the US.

The report, issued on 17 July, found that customer volume for VIP programmes has plunged at least 90% since the imposition of strict regulations in 2020 aimed at ending predatory treatment of high-risk gamblers.

The stricter regulations require operators to conduct mandatory affordability checks for any customer interested in becoming a VIP. Additionally, operators are now mandated to have updated information on a VIP customer’s sources of funds

In March, US Representative Paul Tonko of New York and Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, both Democrats, released a new version of the SAFE Bet Act, a proposed bill that seeks to create a federal framework for sports betting. The latest incarnation contains a provision that would establish certain restrictions on VIP sports bettors.

Fair Bet Act update

Under the Big Beautiful Bill, gamblers can only deduct up to 90% of their annual losses from their federal income taxes. Previously, federal law allowed gamblers to write off 100% of their losses in a given year.

Phil Galfond, a professional poker player, roundly criticised the tax policy on social media.

“A pro who earns $200k a year might have $3 million in winnings and $2.8 million in losses,” Galfond wrote. “This means earning $200k and being taxed as if they earned $480k. This new amendment to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would end professional gambling in the US and hurt casual gamblers, too.”

US Representative Dina Titus of Nevada has introduced a bill that would restore the full deduction. The bill, the Fair Bet Act, has received bipartisan support, with sponsors from both sides of the aisle.

On Friday, the House Ways and Means Committee was to hold a field hearing on the federal bill in Nevada. There, Titus planned to state her case for reinstating the full deduction in 2026.

The BCLB’s licensing shakeup is aimed at significantly raising the standards for licensed market participation.

Kenya’s BCLB previously clamped down on the use of influencers, celebrities and media outlets in promoting gambling within the state, ruling that such practices went against the Code of Conduct for Media Practices, 2025.

That was after the regulator moved quickly in the early months of the year to shut down more than 50 betting firms that had long thrived on illegal gambling operations.

Under the BCLB’s licensing shakeup, even stricter rules and regulations are planned. The BCLB, which operates under the office of the presidency, is set to introduce a licensing fee hike for all gambling operators, a move which would require substantial capital investment.

Currently, iGaming operators typically pay just over Ksh10,000 ($77) for an application and around Ksh400,000 to a million in licensing fees per annum, but they will now be made to pay significantly higher than those sums.

Newly proposed licensing fees could run into millions

A parliamentary debate on Tuesday addressed the licensing fee hike, which will see operators required to pay the below amounts, depending on the type of licence required:

★Betting shops and online lotteries: a minimum of Ksh50 million ($387,000)

★Online operators: a minimum of Ksh200 million ($1.5 million)

★Land-based casinos: up to Ksh5 billion ($38.7 million)

“For a small-scale betting shop (muaka), we are proposing a minimum capital investment of Ksh50 million. For public gaming operators such as casinos, the proposal is to raise the requirement to Sh5 billion,” BCLB Director Peter Mbugi recently told the National Assembly’s Finance and Planning Committee.

Stricter identity checks for players and centralised monitoring of operators will also be introduced by the regulator as part of these developments.

In the bid to ensure responsible betting and put an end to underage gambling, all new online bettors will be required to submit a selfie photo showing their national IDs.

Stakeholders will then brace themselves for tighter monitoring efforts, aimed at improving transparency and compliance within the Kenya iGaming market. Tech tools will be introduced for real-time monitoring of all iGaming activities, as well as to prevent fraud.

Will small operators survive BCLB’s licensing fee hike?

There is very little to suggest firms with less capital will survive the heat, and stakeholders have suggested this move might trigger more unregulated market activities.

“This will only give way to a negative outcome. If operators are having to shell out [much more in licensing fees] the whole thing will only open the floodgates for the black market”, Job Weku, a Kenyan iGaming analyst and B2B business strategist, tells iGB.

“Those locked out due to this punitive capital requirements need to just invest in URL mirroring and save on taxes as well as operational expenses.”

Improved gambling bill awaiting President’s approval

However, David Sarinke at well-respected legal firm McKay Advocates tells iGB the BCLB is in tune with the regulatory framework passed a couple of years ago in the market.

“We have reviewed the mediated version of the Gambling Control Bill 2023 and can confirm that it proposes a significantly more structured framework for the licensing and regulation of gambling activities in Kenya”, Sarinke notes.

“And some notable provisions with potential implications for operators include a tailored licensing framework, a public lottery licence, extended licence validity (from 12 to 36 months), local ownership requirements, capital adequacy requirements, mandatory security deposits and a minimum stake threshold.”

“While this bill is reflecting a clear policy shift aimed at tightening regulatory control, we understand it can bring both opportunities and challenges,” David adds.

The mediated bill has passed through both Houses of Parliament and will be forwarded to the president for assent once approved. It represents significant legislative momentum, but the precise timing for enactment remains unclear.

In an explosive interview with ICL Notícias, released on 21 July, Haddad and economist Eduardo Moreira discussed the regulated gambling sector in Brazil, which launched on 1 January this year.

When asked by Moreira how Haddad and the government planned to alleviate concerns over family financial troubles caused by gambling, the finance minister described the situation as a “disaster”.

“Families are suffering. I’ve seen things that are unspeakable, as they say,” Haddad said. “I’ve heard of horrifying cases involving bets, people I know who even lost family members because of it. It’s a real tragedy.

“If a project came up in the Federal Chamber to continue or to stop [betting in Brazil], I’d press the stop button. There’s no amount of tax revenue that justifies this mess we’ve gotten ourselves into. What’s happening is really bad.”

Haddad’s anti-gambling stance raises industry eyebrows

The SPA, which regulates gambling in Brazil, is a department within the ministry of finance. In response to the interview, many industry stakeholders noted the irony of the ministry’s leader appearing to lobby for the shutdown of a sector it regulates.

Haddad is not the only official seeking a shutdown of licensed betting in Brazil. The sector is still awaiting the outcome of a November Supreme Federal Court hearing to clarify whether the betting laws are unconstitutional. This was expected to be due in H1 2025, but has not been addressed in a number of months.

Haddad has already attracted the ire of the licensed Brazil gambling sector, as he is one of the key proponents of the bill to increase the gambling tax rate from 12% to 18% GGR.

That measure is now undergoing a review by the National Congress, with the provisional measure extended to 8 October, by which time a vote will occur to decide whether to make the tax rise permanent.

Haddad comments draw furious reactions from trade bodies

The ANJL expressed its “surprise and dismay” at Haddad’s statements, describing them as defamatory against the betting sector.

“This surprise comes from the fact that the sector, which has been diligent in complying with all the regulations of the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA), did not expect to be the target of such an attack from the minister,” an ANJL response read this week.

“It also expresses dismay because of the highly detrimental potential for the market, stemming from this assessment by the head of the department under which the sector’s regulations are being developed.”

According to the ANJL, the issues of family debt and predatory advertising mentioned in the interview largely relate to illegal operators, rather than their licensed counterparts.

“It is also crucial to clarify that cases of addiction are rare in the regulated market,” the ANJL continued.

“The core problem of gambling addiction lies in the widespread activity of illegal websites, which adopt no mechanisms to protect bettors and do not collect any taxes for the country.”

The Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming (IBJR) echoed the ANJL’s view that Haddad’s comments were misguided, targeting the legal sector when the illegal alternative is the primary issue.

“The minister’s view diverts attention from the real problem: tax evasion in the illegal market, which dominates 51% of the sector and generates annual losses of BRL10 billion for the country,” the IBJR claimed.

“Statements that downplay the importance of the regulated environment create legal uncertainty, discourage investment and, in practice, strengthen the illegal operations that the government should be combating.”

Treating gambling as a public health issue in Brazil

Haddad says the four years between legislation first being approved and full regulation coming in meant Brazil missed out on BRL40 billion ($7.2 billion) in taxes.

The finance minister also said the government was working with the Central Bank to target fintech companies, which he feels are being used as vehicles for gambling-linked organised crime, such as money laundering.

In Haddad’s view, gambling must be treated as a “serious public health issue” and the government should be utilising data from the first six months of the regulated market.

The ANJL somewhat agrees with this comment, though the association also stressed that licensed operators are funding most of the development of responsible gaming programmes in Brazil.

“Regarding Minister Fernando Haddad’s understanding that gambling addiction should be treated as a public health issue, the association agrees and has already expressed this opinion several times,” the ANJL added.

“It is important to emphasise, however, that currently, the tax paid by legal betting houses already allocates a portion of these funds to health.”

The bill, which has sought to establish a national regulatory framework for all online and remote gaming in the country, has already cleared its third reading.

This is not the first time the body has had a bill like this invalidated by the court. Thus, it has been deemed “ultra vires”, meaning beyond one’s legal power or authority. The move aimed to repeal a law that has already been nullified.

“The proposed Central Gaming Bill 2025 is nothing more than a repackaged version of the now- nullified National Lottery Act 2005. Both acts seek to establish federal control over the same subject matter, games of chance through licensing, regulation and enforcement by a federal commission,” a statement from the FSGRN read.

The FSGRN is a constitutional authority made up of 24 state governments in Nigeria to regulate gaming.

The Supreme Court ruled against the country’s previous national gambling legislation, the National Lottery Act. It invalidated the act’s claim to regulate gaming and lotteries across Nigeria.

It instead determined that state legislative assemblies should regulate lottery and games of chance instead of the federal government of Nigeria.

In December, the FSGRN welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision.

What is covered in the Central Gaming Bill?

The Central Gaming Bill seeks to establish a national regulatory framework for all online and remote gaming activities, including provisions for conducting gambling in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), and generating iGaming revenue both nationwide and across state borders.

Key components of the bill include a regulatory framework for controlling all iGaming activities, including retail, lotteries and online. It also calls for a National Gaming Commission which would retain licensing powers.

A key argument advanced by proponents of the Central Gaming Bill is that the gaming industry has moved online and therefore requires a centralised regulatory framework.

Bill already faced major backlash

In a country with a written constitution where the rule of law prevails, legislative actions that ignore explicit rulings of the Supreme Court are unlawful and risk undermining constitutional principles.

With that, a number of notable agencies clearly opposed to it have argued that this should have been taken into consideration before the bill’s reintroduction.

“We are confident that the leadership of the current National Assembly is very much aware of their statutory obligation to uphold the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999,” chartered tax professional, Chief Dr Francis Ubani told The Nigerian Post.

“We therefore, urge and implore the National Assembly, through the House of Representatives, not to go ahead with passing into law the Central Gaming Bill 2025, as doing so would be in total contravention of the 1999 constitution, and would be void and of no effect whatsoever. Finally, do not reintroduce the nullified National Lottery Act, through the back door, by change of nomenclature.”

Despite these setbacks and delays to formal regulation, key operators in the country such as Bet9ja, 1xbet, BetKing, NairaBet and Betway have experienced significant growth in Nigeria.

This is thanks to increased mobile accessibility and fintech advancements. Nigeria’s iGaming sector is predicted to grow by at least 16% and reach approximately $500 million in revenue by the end of 2025.

An ACMA-led investigation found Victoria-licensed ReadyBet sent 273 texts and push notifications from its mobile app to self-excluded individuals. Communications were sent between 23 August 2023 and 21 December 2023.

All licensed operators in Australia are required to comply with rules related to the BetStop national self-exclusion register. BetStop launched in August 2023, around the time the identified issues began at ReadyBet.

Regulations state that Australian licensees may not market their services to those registered with BetStop. As ReadyBet breached these rules, ACMA proceeded with remedial direction for the operator.

Breaches included 250 contraventions of subsection 61LA(2) of the Interactive Gambling Act 2001. This relates to sending electronic messages to registered individuals. ACMA also found 23 contraventions of subsection 61LA(4), which refers to “reckless” action by an operator by contacting excluded players.

In addition, ACMA flagged 2,342 contraventions of subsection 61JP(5). This is in reference to failing to promote the BetStop service to customers.

What will ReadyBet have to do?

Setting out the remedial direction for ReadyBet, ACMA said the operator must take a series of steps.

First, it is required to commission an independent review of marketing systems, including its use of third-party suppliers. Any recommended changes should be implemented within six months of receiving the auditor’s report.

ReadyBet must also engage a provider to deliver training to staff to avoid messages being sent to self-excluded individuals. This must take place within 120 days of the remedial direction notice.

ACMA also ordered ReadyBet to self-report any potential or alleged non-compliance with the highlighted sections of the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 for 12 months. In addition, it must comply with record-keeping requests from ACMA for a 12-month period.

Should ReadyBet not fulfil these directions, ACMA could seek civil penalties.

ACMA clamping down on self-exclusion failures

ReadyBet is the latest operator to feel the wrath of ACMA for violating regulations on self-exclusion.

In June, ACMA flagged Buddybet, Ultrabet, VicBet and Topbet for also breaching regulations on gambling self-exclusion. Ultrabet was told to review its compliance systems while VicBet and Topbet were issued formal warnings. Buddybet had already exited Australia and therefore faced no further action.

The quadruple ruling came after ACMA in May also penalised Unibet over self-exclusion failures. Unibet was ordered to pay AU$1 million (US$661,207) for more than 100,000 contraventions of the Interactive Gambling Act 2001.

ACMA said Unibet failed to close 954 user accounts in a timely manner after they registered with BetStop.

The sanction followed a request from the Philippine Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center and Digital Pinoys, a network of “Filipino digital advocates, for the people by the people”.

Digital Pinoys spokesman Ronald Gustilo thanked Meta “for swiftly acting on our joint request… to take down the pages of influencers blatantly promoting illegal online gambling. We hope the remaining pages flagged in our initial report will be removed in the coming days.”

Senator Joel Villanueva hailed the move as “a significant step forward in our campaign to push for a total ban” on iGaming. Villanueva authored Senate Bill No 47, the Anti-Online Gambling Act, which would prohibit all forms of iGaming in the Philippines.

The list of influencers includes Sachzna Laparan, with 9.7 million followers; Boy Tapang, with 5.5 million followers; and actor Mark Anthony Fernandez, with 242,000 followers.

“Some of these influencers thought they were untouchable – that we were bluffing,” said Gustilo. “They gambled with the law and now they’re facing the consequences.”

Philippines clergy calls for iGaming ban

The Catholic Church continues to urge an online gambling ban. The Manila Standard cited a letter from Pablo Virgilio Cardinal David, president of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines.

“Why do many in the government, the media and business world seem to be silent [about iGaming]?” David asked. “They choose to stay silent because of the considerable profits that this industry generates. What is sad is that in many cases families, communities – as well as the church – remain silent in the lamentation of those seeking help due to their enslavement.”

In 2024, legal iGaming generated gross gaming revenues of PHP154.51 billion ($2.7 billion), up 165% year-on-year. Illegal iGaming also continues to proliferate. Last July, the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp reported that it had blocked 5,793 illegal iGaming websites and apps.

That same month, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr banned Philippine Offshore Gaming Operations due to reports of money laundering, human trafficking and other crimes.

Survey: Online gamblers prefer regulations over ban

In related news, a survey of 1,000 online gamblers in the Philippines suggests they prefer stronger industry regulations over a total ban.

According to research firm The Fourth Wall, most of those gamblers describe themselves as “casual, low-stakes and self-regulating”. They see the pastime as “social and recreational” and say safety and legitimacy are top priorities. They oppose an outright ban, which they say could drive players to unregulated gaming sites.

Some 36% of respondents said they are “break-even optimists” who gamble moderately while 85% said they don’t borrow money to support the activity. But 12% admitted to being “risky borrowing high-frequency bettors” who play often and may incur financial trouble.

Collectively, those polled said “curiosity, boredom and peer influence” were the reasons they first tried online gambling.

“Our study reveals greater preference for safer and regulated platforms among Filipino online gambling players,” said John Brylle L Bae, Fourth Wall research director. “There is an understanding among them that an outright ban won’t stop online gambling, but instead push it underground, increasing risks like scams and addiction through unregulated channels. This suggests their call for regulation is rooted in safer options and better consumer protection.” 

For the full report, visit www.fourthwallglobal.com/phonlinegambling.

On 20 July, the DPRJ announced it had filed a Public Civil Action (ACP) seeking damages of BRL300 million ($53.9 million) from operators, claiming their advertising had omitted essential information about the risks associated with betting.

The Consumer Defence Centre, a specialised department within the DPRJ dedicated to representing consumers, called for measures to be urgently implemented to protect bettors and ensure greater transparency from betting companies.

The ANJL has hit back, however, asserting the claims made in the ACP are unfounded. It warns the action could in fact harm bettors by making it harder to distinguish between licensed and illegal operators.

The ANJL highlighted the creation of a working group, established by the National Advertising Self-Regulation Council (Conar) in 2023, which aimed to clarify ethical standards for betting advertising in Brazil.

“All necessary measures for responsible and transparent gambling advertising are already adopted by regulated betting houses,” ANJL President Plínio Lemos Jorge said.

“Therefore, the Public Defender’s Office’s claim in the lawsuit makes no sense, as its arguments only apply to the illegal market. Therefore, the ANJL will act to provide the necessary clarifications in the proceedings.”

The DPRJ’s lawsuit

The defendants in the lawsuit include some of the largest licensed operators in Brazil, including Betano, Bet365 and Esportes da Sorte.

The BRL300 million figure represents 1% of the estimated BRL30 billion in monthly betting transactions in Brazil, according to Central Bank data. The money is set to go towards prevention and treatment of betting addictions.

One of the DPRJ’s requests is a ban on the exclusive use of the phrase “Play responsibly” in betting advertising, with the belief this is insufficient and too vague.

Instead, the DPRJ is calling for companies to be clearer in their warnings of the potential harms associated with gambling.

Public Defender General Paulo Vinícus Cozzolino Abrahão said: “Many people view gambling as a kind of investment, with the idea that there will be a return, which is a completely misguided notion, the result of a lack of financial education and misleading advertising.

“Gambling is a game of chance, not luck. We need to raise this awareness. It’s the same movement that occurred with cigarettes in the 1990s, and today there is a collective awareness that smoking is not beneficial to health. The issue needs to be addressed with the utmost speed and seriousness.”

The ANJL takes exception to claims operators aren’t advertising responsibly, dismissing the lawsuit’s argument that the “responsible gaming” warning is just a “decorative expression” and objecting to the assertion that companies are trying to frame betting as a reliable source of income.

Betting ads a hot topic in Brazil

Betting advertising continues to be a hugely controversial issue in Brazil.

Such is the concern that, in May, the Senate approved a number of new restrictions on betting ads in Brazil.

These include a ban on betting ads during live broadcasts of sporting events, as well as prohibiting use of celebrities such as athletes, artists and influencers.

Additionally, adverts on open and subscription television, social media, streaming and the internet would only be allowed between the hours of 7.30pm and midnight.

Meanwhile, radio ads would only be permitted in the morning between 9am and 11am and in the evening between 5pm and 7.30pm. Print media ads would be banned entirely.

It will now fall upon the Chamber of Deputies to review the bill, although the industry warns further ad restrictions would only serve to empower the black market.

Udo Seckelmann, head of gambling & crypto at local law firm Bichara e Motta Advogados, warned the push for fresh ad restrictions “lacks evidence-based support”.

“The motivations, although well-meaning, must be weighed against real-world outcomes – and the evidence suggests that informed, responsible regulation is more effective than prohibition,” Seckelmann told iGB. 

The US Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry had listed Quintenz on its website earlier Monday as one of four nominees from US President Donald Trump who were scheduled for a vote. The committee abruptly pulled Quintenz from the list later in the day, according to a congressional staffer who told iGB they were not authorised to provide additional detail explaining the delay.

Sources told iGB afterward that the delay apparently stemmed from flight trouble by Mississippi Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, a Republican. Without Hyde-Smith present, Republicans may have lacked the votes needed to advance the nomination. The committee is now expected to hold a business meeting to advance the nomination for Quintenz to the Senate floor before the August recess.

The delay is the latest wrinkle in arguably the most contentious issue to impact the sports wagering industry since the historic PASPA decision. There has been ongoing controversy and litigation over the entrance of the prediction markets overseen by the federal CFTC into the sports betting space, which has been overseen by regulators in dozens of states since 2018. 

A public affront on tribal sovereignty?

Quintenz, an Ohio Republican, is a former CFTC commissioner who left the post in August 2021 after serving a five-year term. Trump now wants him to lead the agency.

Quintenz appeared before the committee last month for his confirmation hearing. There, two Democratic senators — Adam Schiff of California and Corey Booker of New Jersey — pressed him on the possibility of federal overreach when it came to the regulation of sports event contracts. The contracts, which possess characteristics of a financial instrument (i.e. an oil or wheat futures trade), give individuals the ability to invest on a sports outcome.

Schiff asked Quintenz directly if the CFTC should prohibit the contracts if it is determined that the derivatives violate tribal sovereignty.

The issue has particular relevance for the California senator since his state contains more than 100 federally recognised tribes, many of them with casinos. Major California tribes such as the Pechanga Band of Indians in Riverside County derive a sizable amount of revenue each year from gaming.

Quintenz: A clear explanation on derivatives, price discovery

In response, Quintenz noted that the CFTC has an obligation to abide by the Commodity Exchange Act, a 1936 law that regulates commodity trading nationwide. Quintenz stated further that he believes the CEA is “very clear” about the purpose of derivatives markets, risk management and price discovery. Event contracts, in his view, “can serve a function” in that mandate.

The topic generated a fiery debate this month at the National Council of Legislators From Gaming States Summer Meeting in Louisville. Michael Hoenig, an attorney for the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation, argued that the contracts are a “profound affront” to tribal sovereignty, in part because they are practically the same as wagers on sports.

Josh Sterling, an attorney who has represented Kalshi in federal court, retorted that while the activities are enumerated in the act, the contracts are not explicitly illegal.

In addition, Sterling indicated that the activities are subject to review if the CFTC determines that the contracts are contrary to the public interest. Following the panel, Sterling told iGB that he has high regard for Quintenz and his handling of policy matters on prediction markets.

Meaningful clarity on sports event contracts

Last week, a group of national, state and tribal organisations submitted a letter to the top senators on the agriculture committee, Republican John Boozman and Democrat Amy Klobuchar, urging that the vote on Quintenz be delayed. The group, which includes the American Gaming Association, asserts that Quintenz failed to provide “meaningful clarity” on questions raised by the committee surrounding sports event contracts.

Numerous states, sovereign tribes, sports leagues, responsible gaming advocates and gaming industry stakeholders have expressed concern to the CFTC about the contracts, they wrote. Though the group claimed that numerous arguments have spelled out why the contracts violate state and federal law, the CFTC has not conducted a review on the financial instruments, according to the letter.

Separately, AGA President Bill Miller wrote an op-ed in the Kansas City Star earlier this month on why the association believes that the regulation of sports event contracts should be left to the states. Miller reiterated his position that sports event contracts by Kalshi and others share many of the same properties as wagers offered by traditional sportsbook operators, underscoring why the derivatives should be regulated on the state level.

“If you wager money on whether the Chiefs will win on any given Sunday, that’s a bet,” Miller wrote. “Whether you call it a derivative or an event contract, the intent and effect are the same.”

A CFTC spokesman did not immediately respond to a request from iGB for comment.

The nation’s police force, and the public, frowned upon the act. In response, national police Commissioner Paul Nyathi made the new declaration at the inaugural H-Metro National Forum On Responsible Betting in Harare on 12 July.

“Police officers in uniform must not enter betting shops or casinos to gamble. This does not portray the police in a good light, and such behaviour is strongly discouraged. [Therefore] anyone caught doing so will face disciplinary action,” Nyathi said at the conference.

ZRP faced with a new directive

The conference brought together respected gambling stakeholders, Lotteries and Gaming Board members and various government entities with the aim of progressing responsible gambling actions in the market,

Nyathi said officers discovered to be gambling while in uniform would face grave punishments.

The Zimbabwe police betting shop ban is part of a wider push to ensure professionalism and that respect for law enforcement agencies is upheld, the commissioner said.

The identities of the officers s involved in the incident were not revealed, but images shared on social media showed two of them huddled over the counter in a betting shop.

It remains to be seen whether officers that participate in gambling will adhere to this directive, but the warning could not be clearer.

What could have influenced Zimbabwe police to gamble publically?

Zimbabwe’s ongoing economic hardship has been on the rise in recent years. This could have influenced law enforcement agents to turn to gambling.

As per the World Bank’s 2024 annual report, data has shown the El Niño event in recent years (2023-24) and the late rains in 2024-25 could have increased the poverty rate in Zimbabwe.

With around 70% of the country’s population relying on agriculture for their livelihoods, these weather events clearly posed a huge challenge.

Boldwood Software, an iGaming solutions provider, was licensed in the Isle of Man between November 2022 and May 2025. However, it surrendered its licence after being served with a Notice and an Enforcement Report by the commission.

The company claims on its website to have “over six decades of expertise in all things iGaming”. The company provided an iGaming platform solution which integrated thousands of casino games over 500,000 live betting events a year. It also offered esports and virtual betting offerings via its platform.

The notice said the commission was to meet early in June 2025 to consider cancelling the provider’s licence. This stemmed from an investigation into Phua’s integrity to determine whether he was a “fit and proper” person.

The commission-led investigation identified certain open-source materials suggesting Phua was associated with “bad actors”. Section 4(2) of the Online Gambling Regulation Act 2001 (OGRA) requires licence-holders to be “under the control of a person or persons of integrity”.

The commission said in a statement it has a regulatory objective under the Gambling Supervision Act 2010 to prevent gambling from being a source of crime or disorder, associated with crime or disorder, or used to support crime. 

Evidence of ‘criminal association’ or Boldwood owner

While the commission acknowledged Phua had not been convicted of an offence, there was evidence of “association with criminal elements”. As such, he has been prohibited from performing any role or functions within the Isle of Man regulated gambling sector.

“The prohibition will remain in place indefinitely until such time as Mr Phua successfully applies to the Commission to have it varied or revoked,” the regulator said.

“Mr Phua’s acknowledgment of the facts and engagement with the Commission has allowed the Commission to conclude this matter sooner than might otherwise have been the case.”

The order comes after the commission in July also issued a heavy penalty to Celton Manx. The online gambling product provider was ruled to have breached anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing rules. It must now pay £3.9 million ($5.3 million).

Earlier this month, EA announced Hanzbet would close its operations by 31 July, with the site only remaining active for players to withdraw their balances.

Hanzbet founder and CMO Eduardo Peres published a statement on his LinkedIn page on Monday, describing the situation as a “true operational dictatorship” and explaining he and his team had been removed from all internal communication channels and decision-making.

According to Peres, the statement announcing the closure of the Hanzbet brand was issued without their consent, causing payments to affiliates, suppliers and service providers to be suspended.

Peres also claimed EA is intentionally diverting Hanzbet users to BateuBet, another of EA’s brands, via its support channel.

“This is revolting,” Peres said. “It is a lack of respect for our history, for the partners and for all the professionals who helped build HanzBet with so much effort.”

Peres believes this should serve as a warning to other operators working under a similar structure, saying he and his colleagues will continue to battle against EA’s actions.

“If you have an operation allocated under another [company’s] structure, be aware,” Peres continued. “Analyse who you are hanging out with. Not everything that looks like a partnership is, in fact, a partnership.

“We are taking all legal and appropriate measures. And above all: we will fight to the end for what is ours.”

iGB has reached out to EA Entretenimento e Esportes Ltda for comment but had not received a response at the time of publishing.

Hanzbet users unable to withdraw

Peres said he hadn’t experienced or witnessed anything like this in the three years working in the betting sector with Hanzbet.

Even with contracts signed between Hanzbet and EA, Peres explained the reliance on a judicial process will be extremely drawn out, with serious reputational damage happening in the meantime.

Even more seriously, Peres has accused EA of making withdrawals impossible by withdrawing company liquidity while also informing customers they must withdraw from their accounts prior to Hanzbet closing down.

“In other words, they induced customers to withdraw, but those responsible themselves prevented this from being done by emptying the funds,” Peres said.

Licensing structures in Brazil

This situation could prove concerning to operators in a similar position to Hanzbet, with parent company licence holders maintaining financial control.

Many legal operators in Brazil are licensed under parent companies, as licensing requirements dictate that operators must be at least 20% owned by a locally operating business and have local headquarters

Notably, in a separate Instagram post, Hanzbet hinted at a possible return for the business in the future, though it’s currently unclear how the company will achieve this with links with its previous licence holder now severed.

The post stated: “Hanzbet is about to return with a new phase. More modern, more complete and better than before.”

In contrast with last week’s meetings, Resorts World’s CAC met in what looked to be an actual meeting room, with several attendees. The committee itself is among the most star-studded of the field.

Instead of assistants and lower-level officials, it features state Senator James Sanders, Assembly member Stacey Pheffer-Amato and Queens borough President Donovan Richards, all of whom used their right to appoint themselves. Pheffer-Amato was elected chair Monday.

Representatives from Resorts World and parent company Genting were on hand to explain the details related to the property’s sprawling $5.5 billion expansion plan, if it is awarded one of the state’s three new casino licences. Eight bids were submitted last month for the licences, although the one from Bally’s Corp appears unlikely to proceed due to losing a rezoning effort.

Leading the Resorts World presentation was Kevin Jones, chief strategy and legal officer for Genting Americas. Jones explained how, at 73 acres, the former Aqueduct Racetrack is by far the largest parcel of all potential bids. Its location minutes away from John F. Kennedy International Airport was also a focal point.

“Aqueduct offers a scale and connectivity that no other site in New York can match, period,” Jones asserted.

A premade sponsor video from native Queens rapper Nas was also played. Notably, Nas and fellow rapper Jay-Z, who is the premier sponsor of the Caesars Times Square proposal, had a volatile and highly publicised feud in the late 1990s. While the two were said to have reconciled, they again find themselves on opposite sides of a New York battle.

Read my lips: all the taxes

If Resorts World’s bid was to be distilled to just one sentence, it would likely read something like this: “Our existing infrastructure allows us to start paying even more taxes than we already do, quicker than anyone else!”

By far the biggest selling point of the project is the fact that Resorts World is already the biggest direct and indirect taxpayer in New York state. The video lottery terminal facility brings in annual gross gaming revenue of nearly $1 billion annually, and thus has contributed over $4.5 billion to the state in taxes since 2011.

If awarded a full casino licence, Resorts World is projecting annual revenue of $2.2 billion by 2027. For almost a year now, the casino has been touting potential tax benefits approaching $1 billion per year. Company officials declined to confirm those numbers Monday and will give more up-to-date estimates in the coming weeks.

Tax revenue is a central point of consideration for the state, and the bids that advance past the CAC phase will be asked to pitch their own proposed tax rate. Currently, New York racino machines are taxed at an effective rate of about 55%, per the American Gaming Association. That’s compared to 9.25% for New Jersey casinos and 6.75% in Nevada. The Empire State’s online sports betting market is also tied for the highest tax rate in the US (51%).

Need for speed

Speed to market is also among Resorts World’s touted advantages. When the property was awarded a VLT licence in 2010, Genting expanded it more than necessary in hopes of future growth. It then opened a 400-room Hyatt in 2021.

If awarded a licence, executives say the property would simply fill out all of its available space with 4,000 slots and 250 tables, allowing it to begin operations by July 2026. That’s a full year before the next-fastest speed to market, fellow racino MGM Empire City, which is pitching mid-2027.

After that first phase, the rest of the expansion facilities would be built gradually over the next five years. By 2030, the finished facility would feature 6,000 slots and 800 tables, which would make it the biggest casino in the US if it comes to fruition.

“No other proposal can come close to our speed to market,” Jones enthusiastically told the committee.

Global perspective

Of the gaming companies vying for the licences, Genting is among the most global in scope. It operates resorts in Asia, Europe, the Caribbean and the US.

Robert DeSalvio, head of Genting’s New York operations, called the NYC region the “epicenter of finance, tourism and culture”. It is the largest untapped metro area for gaming, he said, and is highly saturated with wealthy households.

While the New York process is competitive, DeSalvio noted how Genting has previously won several highly sought bids, including one of just two Singapore licences.

“During my career, I’ve seen world-class gaming markets in places like Las Vegas, Macau, Singapore and Malaysia,” he said. “But I have never seen an opportunity comparable to what lies before us right here at Resorts World.”

What happens in Vegas…

Monday’s presentation was flashy, extensive and well-prepared. The combination of the high tax revenue, existing relationship with the state, and speed to market makes Resorts World an apparent frontrunner in the race among bidders. Yet an ugly facet of its business has made news some 2,500 miles to the west.

For multiple years, Resorts World Las Vegas has been embroiled in an anti-money laundering controversy related to multiple illegal bookmakers who were allowed to frequent the resort despite the casino’s knowledge of their background and source of funds. This includes Matt Bowyer, the bookie who accepted action from baseball star Shohei Ohtani’s former interpreter Ippei Mizuhara. RWLV even hired Bowyer’s wife, Nicole, to be her husband’s personal host.

The casino in late March was fined $10.5 million for historic AML failures, which represented the second-largest fine ever levied by Nevada regulators. Former RWLV president Scott Sibella, who was at the center of the scandal, also had his gaming licence revoked. Alex Dixon was brought in as president in January, only to be quietly fired and demoted by May.

Brian O’Dwyer, chair of the New York State Gaming Commission, said last month that the current phase of the licensing process started with an open slate. O’Dwyer told the New York Post last September, however, that it was “of particular concern” to see the allegations against Resorts World.

“These allegations in the complaint are particularly disturbing in that it alleges a culture of non-compliance in that information on illicit or suspicious activity was either negligently or worse fully disregarded to promote financial gain,” O’Dwyer said at the time.

In June, the Brazil government rocked the licensed gambling sector by publishing a provisional measure (PM 1,303/2025) proposing a gambling tax rate hike of 50%.

When paid alongside other taxes such as corporate income tax and social contributions, the overall tax burden on licensed gambling companies stands at around 50%, with some in the industry warning this will make operations unviable.

From the PM’s publication on 11 June, Congress has up to 120 days to vote on whether to make the tax hike on gambling permanent or not.

The joint committee has scheduled four public hearings, with the first set for 7 August and the last set for later that month, to discuss the measure and consider contrasting views on the measure.

Senator Renan Calheiros will chair the committee, while deputy Carlos Zarattini will serve as the proposal’s rapporteur.

Congress’ leader, Senator Randolfe Rodrigues, believes taxing sectors such as gambling could be crucial in reducing social inequalities in Brazil.

“Today, we are one of the 10 economies in the world and, at the same time, one of the 10 most unequal countries,” Rodrigues said. “Something isn’t right about this combination. The government sought, with this provisional measure, to build mechanisms for tax justice.”

The Congress must vote on the provisional measure by 9 October, with the committee’s own vote on the matter expected on 26 August.

What’s included in PM 1,303/2025?

Of the new 18% GGR tax rate, which became effective on a provisional basis immediately after the measure’s publication, one-third will go toward social security and health contributions, while the remaining two-thirds will be distributed across other areas, including sports and education.

The tax was introduced after the government revised a controversial decree that would have increased the rate of financial transactions tax (IOF) from 0.38% to 3.5%.

The IOF was implemented in Brazil as a monetary policy tool to help regulate financial markets. It applies to all foreign transactions, including loans, currency exchange, insurance and investments, representing a significant source of government tax revenue.

To alleviate the backlash of increasing the IOF by so much, the government switched its focus to sectors such as gambling in order to fill the BRL20 billion ($3.6 billion) hole in its budget. There are still plans to increase the IOF but by much less than previously suggested.

The move has sparked a furious reaction from the nation’s licensed gambling industry, with the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming warning the tax rise could spike the illegal market’s share to at least 60%.

“The measure is unacceptable and makes it impossible for many companies that trusted and invested in the regulated market to operate, generates legal uncertainty and threatens public revenue,” the IBJR stated in June.

Is gambling in Brazil being taxed enough?

Other sectors, such as fishing, real estate and agribusiness, have also been affected by PM 1,303/2025.

In a speech on Tuesday, Senator Izalci Lucas criticised the measure, saying it unfairly targeted sectors such as agribusiness and constructions funds, while not increasing the tax on gambling to a sufficiently high rate.

While industry leaders argue the rate is unsustainably high, some lawmakers such as Senator Izalci believe gambling is still undertaxed relative to its social costs.

Additionally, Izalci criticised the government’s failure to implement the ban on the use of social welfare proceeds, such as from the Bolsa Família programme, for gambling.

“This government only thinks about taxes and only thinks about raising taxes,” Izalci said. “You take the betting industry, which has destroyed Brazil, reduced supermarket consumption, reduced retail consumption.

“To this day, the government hasn’t had the authority to actually prohibit people receiving Bolsa Família from gambling on the betting industry. This government’s incompetence is incredible.”

In June, the ANJL accused ABRAS of misleading the public in a video published on the supermarket association’s social media, titled “History of Bets”.

In the video, ABRAS claims regulated betting is linked to worsening food insecurity in Brazil, stating every Brazilian real spent on betting leads to “one less dish on the table”.

The ANJL hit back with a lawsuit calling on ABRAS to explain where the information included in the video originated. The body said it went beyond “criticism of specific agents, and affected the sector as a whole”.

However, the ANJL lawsuit in Brazil has now been dropped, after a meeting with retail entities last Thursday in São Paulo, where the parties discussed how to foster an understanding of the regulated betting sector in Brazil.

“We demonstrated to ABRAS and the Institute for Retail Development (IDV), which also attended the meeting, that everyone’s focus should be on illegal gambling,” ANJL President Plínio Lemos Jorge said.

“Operators that are not authorised to operate in Brazil have no concern for the integrity of bets or the protection of bettors.”

Dialogue between ANJL and retail sector to continue

The meeting marked the opening of a dialogue between the betting and retail sectors, with Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming (IBJR) Executive Director Fernando Vieira also present. The IBJR is a second trade body covering the online gambling sector.

According to the ANJL, the goal for future discussions is to jointly advance issues of shared interest, particularly surrounding the financial health of Brazilian consumers, utilising what was learned at last week’s meeting.

“We have taken this understanding and will deepen those discussions in future meetings,” Lemos Jorge added.

Notably, however, the two sides couldn’t reach an agreement on the controversial topic of betting advertising in Brazil.

In May, the Senate approved a number of new ad restrictions, including bans on marketing during live sporting events and the use of celebrities, as well as watersheds.

The retail sector is keen for betting advertising to be restricted, while the gambling industry warns further restrictions will only boost the black market.

In the meeting, IBJR President Vieira highlighted that around 80% of bettors cannot currently distinguish a licensed operator from an illegal one, with advertising offering a solution to this problem.

ANJL and IBJR join forces

Last week, the ANJL officially formalised its cooperation agreement with the IBJR amid the threat of new ad restrictions and an increase in the tax rate.

This move, carried out in coordination with the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets, unites the country’s two largest gambling trade associations.

Both organisations are aligned in their primary objective of protecting the sustainability of Brazil’s regulated betting market.

Vieira said: “The consolidation of this partnership is a concrete response to the challenges that threaten the regulated environment in Brazil.”

SBM Holding Group, Sun Block Media Labs 2.0 and JEF Holdings have all been flagged by the regulator. Each company is a part-owner of the Casinoscout.nl, an online casino comparison website.

Previously, Casinoscout.nl only promoted licensed websites in the Netherlands. However, since ownership changed to the three parties in January 2025, the KSA discovered it was also advertising illegal operators.

Among the illegal operators being promoted on the website was Talksaspins.com. The KSA previously took action against LCS Limited, the company behind Talksaspins.com, for illegal activities in the Netherlands.

The regulator also flagged how illegal sites were being shown as approved brands alongside operators that actually hold a Dutch licence. This, KSA said, would have caused confusion among visitors as to which sites were legal and approved.

Regulator discovers further illegal online casino promotion

KSA approached each of the three owners to warn it would impose penalties if they did not cease promoting illegal websites. However, none of the companies responded.

As such, it contacted the Foundation for Internet Domain Registration in the Netherlands to request Casinoscout.nl be taken down. While temporarily offline, the three owners put in place an IP block to prevent Dutch visitors.

However, once back up, adverts for illegal content reappeared on the site. As a result, the Casinoscout.nl site has now been taken offline permanently.

During its investigation, KSA also discovered another site that was promoting illegal online casinos. Casinoscout.nl linked directly to besteonlinecasinonederland.com which is also owned by the three companies in question.

As KSA deemed this a continued violation of regulations, it proceeded to issue the penalty payment order. This will apply to each of the three owners if they continue to promote illegal websites.

The penalty payments will be set at €75,000 per week for each company, up to a maximum of €225,000.

It is not often that two litigants appear on the same panel with divergent positions on a hot-button issue. But that’s what transpired at the National Council of Legislators From Gaming States summer meeting.

At one end of the dais sat Joshua Sterling, an attorney representing Kalshi who formerly was director of the Market Participants Division at the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission. At the other sat Michael Hoenig, an associate general counsel of gaming for Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation, a California tribe. San Manuel is among the large coalition of tribes and tribal organisations that has filed amicus briefs in state suits against Kalshi.

NCLGS President Shawn Fluharty joked that organisers deliberately placed Hoenig at a separate table as far away  as possible from Sterling. The panel took place at a time when the regulatory environment for prediction markets has reached a proverbial fork in the road.

Ongoing litigation in Maryland

The CFTC, the nation’s federal regulator of derivatives markets, is conducting a review of the treatment of sports event contracts on prediction markets. It comes as a plethora of states have issued cease-and-desist orders this year against Kalshi and Crypto.com, accusing them of operating illegally in their jurisdictions.

After suing in Nevada and New Jersey, Kalshi was granted preliminary injunctions by federal courts in both states. At present, there is also ongoing litigation in Maryland on the legality of sports event contracts in the Old Line State. Last month, a group of 27 federally recognised Native American tribes filed a motion for leave to file an amicus brief in that case. Kalshi immediately took exception with the brief, describing it as “untimely and unhelpful”.

More broadly, the issue of regulation – or lack thereof – of sports event contracts on prediction markets has led to an intense debate on issues centring around federalism versus states’ rights in sports betting.

In April, MGM Resorts CEO Bill Hornbuckle told iGB that if the casino industry does not proceed properly in its fight against prediction markets, it could lead to federal oversight of the industry.

The debate on preemption

Earlier this year, another California tribe, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians, submitted a formal letter to the CFTC during a public comment period. In the letter, the tribe argued that permitting sports event contracts to be traded on a national exchange would “effectively preempt” a series of tribal laws. The statutes, they contend, have been established by sovereign governments to protect the welfare of their citizens.

The litigants have differing opinions on a CFTC regulation pertaining to event contracts that are deemed to be contrary to the public interest.

Regulations implemented in the wake of the 2010 Dodd Frank Act enable the CFTC to apply a public-interest test for event contracts. The rule, CFTC regulation 40.11, authorises the commission to ban contracts if they are contrary to the interest of the public. Enumerated examples of this in the regulation include:

1. activity that is unlawful under any federal or state law;
2. terrorism;
3. assassination;
4. war;
5. gaming;
6. other similar activity determined by the commission, by rule or regulation, to be contrary to the public interest. 

Examining the public interest test

Hoenig emphasised that his comments represented the views of the San Manuel Nation, not tribal gaming entities in totality. Nevertheless, he noted that the tribe does not believe that sports contracts are permissible because they violate the public interest.

Moreover, he indicated that the tribe rejects the premise that the CFTC has exclusive jurisdiction for regulating the contracts on tribal lands. To buttress his point, Hoenig argued that there is another federal law – the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act – that gives the National Indian Gaming Commission jurisdiction on gaming activity that takes places on those lands.

Sterling, a partner at Washington DC law firm Milbank LLP, represented Kalshi in a matter last fall before the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. There, he argued that Kalshi had the right to offer derivative contracts based on the outcome of the US presidential election. After notching a win, Kalshi handled trading volume on the election in excess of $500 million. Sterling criticised Hoenig’s interpretation on the rule in a fiery rebuke.

While Sterling admitted the activities are enumerated in the Commodity Exchange Act, he argued that at no point is it explicitly stated that the activities are “illegal” in the statute. Rather, the attorney contended that the activities are subject to review of whether they are contrary to the public interest.

Trading on dangerous situations

On Friday, West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey weighed in on prediction markets during a keynote address at the summer conference in Louisville. McCuskey noted that event contracts on morbid outcomes such as whether US President Donald Trump will be assassinated are “dangerous” on their face. For clarity, in accordance with Rule 40.11, it does not appear that any US prediction market has offered contracts pertaining to assassination.

Following an assassination attempt on Trump last July, a trader told the Wall Street Journal that he bet on the Republican candidate to win the election based on the sympathy he would garner from the incident.

The individual made the trade on Polymarket, a crypto-based offshore exchange. The trade on whether Trump would win the election differs starkly from contracts on whether another assassination attempt would be made on his life.

McCuskey believes some middle ground can be attained in the dispute between prediction markets and tribal entities. One option is to create a carve-out that prohibits the trade of sports event contracts on tribal lands, but permits the activity elsewhere in a state.

Lack of state regulations on commodities

One area that the CFTC regulates is oil futures contracts, where the commission sets limits on the number of contracts a trader can hold. According to the mission of the agency, the regulations are aimed at preventing considerable speculation on the market.

Despite the regulations, Sterling noted that WTI crude futures sank into negative territory at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, falling below zero for the first time on record. The commission is also the federal agency responsible for regulating wheat futures. In fact, there is some sentiment that the Grain Futures Act of 1922 served as the foundation of the Commodity Exchange Act.

Yet, there isn’t a single jurisdiction on the state level that regulates trading on oil or wheat futures, Sterling explained.

“How many contracts are event-dependent – oil, wheat, interest rates, or foreign exchange rates?” Sterling told iGB following the panel. “This is an industry-wide issue that has very little to do with events.”

Next steps

Asked where to draw the line between a sports wager that is regulated by a state and a sports event contract that has characteristics of a financial derivative, Sterling cited a relevant federal statute. In response to a question from Fluharty, Sterling invoked Section 2(a)(1)(A) of Title 7 of the United States’ code. According to Sterling, any contract that is a swap, a futures contract or an option is traded on a CFTC licensed-marketplace and is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC.

Still, some question whether a single-event sports contract should be classified as a financial instrument. A trade by the city of Philadelphia on the Eagles to win the Super Bowl can hedge the costs of a Super Bowl parade.

But does a $100 trade on a Chiefs’ defeat from an individual who dabbles in the market serve the same financial purpose? Hoenig contends that sports event contracts are a “profound affront” to tribal sovereignty and are fundamentally the same as wagers on sports.

While the panel became contentious at times, the litigants still maintained civility. Moments after it concluded, the four panelists congregated for a group photo. The litigants appeared on the panel with Sporttrade CEO Alex Kane and Prediction News analyst Chris Gerlacher.

Before leaving the stage, Sterling and Hoenig firmly shook hands. Although the Maryland litigation remains active, they will leave the battle for another day.

Each year, ANJ is required to approve the annual programme for operators FDJ and Pari Mutuel Urbain (PMU). The two operators hold the exclusive rights for specific online verticals in France like lottery.

Included in this approvals process are measures to support responsible gambling across both FDJ and PMU. In the case of FDJ, data the operator shared from the Canadian Problem Gambling Index showed the proportion of problem and excessive gamblers had increased in 2024. This followed a period of stability between 2020 and 2023.

Although ANJ approved FDJ’s betting and gaming plans for 2026, this came with several conditions, as part of the regulator’s programme to reduce excessive gambling among players.

These include ensuring marketing messages avoid statements such as “best chance of winning”.

Wider targets include limiting the share of revenue generated by excessive and problem gamblers across all online products. ANJ ordered FDJ to remove or modify the online scratchcard games with the most excessive gambling levels.

FDJ limited on new game launches

In terms of draw-based games, ANJ rejected a request to expand FDJ’s Amigo game and to reduce risks associated with it. It also said the freeze on the range of draw-based games implemented in 2025 will be maintained in 2026. FDJ was also directed to reduce revenue share from excessive gamblers on its BingoLive.

ANJ also placed a freeze on the launch of certain new physical scratchcard games. Only three new games or relaunched offerings priced at €3 will be permitted in 2026, and €5 launches will be capped at two. Also on €5 games, FDJ’s total offering in this area cannot exceed nine games online and in retail.

In addition, for games marketed exclusively online, ANJ requested FDJ reduce its offering. This primarily relates to titles in the €2, €3 and €5 game ranges.

ANJ issues €75,000 penalty over data issue

In other news, on Friday ANJ penalised an unnamed operator for breaching rules on data in France. The unidentified company has been ordered to pay €75,000 ($87,663) by the regulator.

ANJ ruled the operator failed to fulfil obligations for the real-time archiving and permanent data availability. This took place over a period of 25 months between 2022 and 2024.

All licensed operators are required to archive customers’ gaming data and data for player accounts in real time. This must be made permanently available to ANJ so that it can monitor the activities of operators.

The first failure related to not sending certain data concerning players’ bets. This, ANJ said, led the operator to exclude bets totalling several million euros from the physical archiving system. Meanwhile, a second breach related to the provision of inaccurate data across more than 900,000 defective records.

“As well as the ANJ’s exercise of its mission to regulate and monitor the online gaming and betting sector,” ANJ said, “a failure to transmit this information also has a significant impact on the controls carried out by the ANJ, particularly regarding the monitoring of player return rates and the detection of pathological gamblers.

“Given these repeated failures lasting more than two years, the Sanctions Committee imposed a financial penalty of €75,000.”

On the eve of NBA free agency, ESPN reported that federal authorities are investigating Beasley in a multi-year inquiry that has ensnared numerous professional athletes. Beasley, the Pistons’ third-leading scorer in the playoffs, entered the offseason as an unrestricted free agent. The sharpshooter engaged in advanced negotiations with the Pistons on a three-year, $42 million deal, according to ESPN’s Shams Charania, before the reports surfaced.

Beasley is the third NBA player who has come under federal investigation by the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York. Last summer, Beasley joined the Pistons on a one-year, $6 million deal.

“In my career I’ve represented hundreds of clients who have been under federal investigation that have never resulted in federal charges,” Beasley’s attorney, Steve Haney, told iGB on Tuesday.

“Malik deserves that presumption of innocence. At this point there have been no criminal charges. We hope that people will reserve judgment. The cloud of an investigation creates this presumption that he must have done something wrong, which is unfair to him.”

Porter scheme: A cardinal sin

Last July, former Toronto Raptors centre Jontay Porter pleaded guilty in federal court in Brooklyn to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Porter is the first NBA player to be permanently banned from the league for a gambling-related offence since the 2018 PASPA decision.

Porter, the younger brother of Nets star forward Michael Porter Jr, is one of six defendants indicted for their roles in a comprehensive gambling conspiracy. Months after his permanent expulsion from the NBA, Porter admitted to manipulating the outcomes of several props on his statistical performance for financial gain. Last March, Porter left a game early while feigning a stomach illness.

According to prosecutors, Porter took part in a scheme where a syndicate made a profit of $1.1 million on a same-game parlay that contained a series of his props.

The operator later froze the payout due to suspicion of criminality. While Porter initially faced a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, he will likely receive a lesser sentence. He is eligible for a sentence of 41 to 51 months, based on federal guidelines, and is scheduled to be sentenced in December.

Before Porter received his lifetime ban, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver described match-fixing as a “cardinal sin” among league players in violating the integrity of the game.

“While legal sports betting creates transparency that helps identify abnormal or suspicious activity, this matter also raises important issues about the regulatory framework in place, including the types of bets offered on our games and players,” Silver wrote at the time.

Since Porter’s ban, some sportsbooks have responded by limiting prop bets available on role players off the bench.

Feds also probe Rozier

In January, reports surfaced that federal law enforcement investigated Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier over potential irregular betting patterns in 2023. The investigation centred on a March 2023 game between Charlotte and New Orleans when Rozier played for the Hornets, according to the NBA. Rozier left the game after 9 minutes and 36 seconds while citing a foot issue.

In 30 games with the Hornets in 2023-24, Rozier averaged a career high 23.2 points per game. Rozier started 23 games for the Heat last season.

Rozier is entering the final season of a four-year, $96.3 million contract he signed in 2021. Rozier has not been indicted in the matter or suspended by the NBA.

‘Hit the unders for big numbers’

In January, federal law enforcement authorities placed Shane Hennen of Las Vegas under arrest in the Porter gambling case as he attempted to board a one-way flight to Colombia via Panama. Hennen carried multiple cellphones and $10,000 in cash as he planned to leave the country from Harry Reid International Airport. A pro poker player, Hennen is also a large sports bettor who has posted multiple six-figure tickets on his website, SugarShaneWins.com.

None of the six defendants, including Porter, have been sentenced in the matter. According to court filings, a co-defendant forwarded Hennen a text message on 26 January 2024. The initial text came from an individual identified as “NBA Player 1”. Based on the fact pattern in Hennen’s complaint, the player largely matches the description of Porter.

“Hit the unders for the big numbers,” the message reads. “I’m going to play [the] first 2-3 minutes off the bench, then when I get subbed, [I will] tell them my eye is killing me again.”

Later that night, Porter left a game against the Clippers after four minutes with an eye injury. Porter went scoreless with three rebounds in the Raptors’ 127-107 defeat.

Federal authorities are also investigating a widespread college basketball probe related to a series of suspicious line movements. In February, SI.com reported that authorities began examining potential links between the syndicate involving Porter and a betting ring under investigation for wagering on nine college games.

IC 360, formerly US Integrity, identified several Temple games from 2024 that contained suspicious betting patterns. Before Temple’s 100-72 loss to UAB on 7 March 2024, the line spiked to UAB -8 in a matter of hours. The six-point line movement in a short span of time typically presents red flags.

There are indications that players from nearly a dozen schools are under investigation, multiple sources told iGB. Former Temple guard Hysier Miller has been interviewed by NCAA investigators, but neither he nor any other college player under investigation has been charged.

An impending deadline

Hennen has not been implicated in the college scandal. According to court files, Hennen is facing a 22 July deadline to reach a deal with prosecutors on a plea agreement. An attorney for Hennen did not return a message left by iGB.

Over the course of the investigation, prosecutors allege that a ring orchestrated by Hennen facilitated a number of “fraudulent schemes” that resulted in potentially millions in illicit profits.

Federal prosecutors cited phone records, financial records and betting records as evidence to support their claims. The ring, according to filings, contained a network of proxies and straw bettors located across the country.

“The proof of his guilt is overwhelming,” the US Attorney’s Office wrote in a January 2025 letter.

Saddled in debt

As Beasley’s name surfaced in the NBA investigation, the former Florida State guard has also been targeted in multiple lawsuits across the nation. Last week, the Detroit News reported that Beasley owes creditors about $8 million for various missed payments since he turned pro. The debts include five-figure payments for rent and dental expenses and he owes $26,827 to Cairo Cuts, a Milwaukee barbershop, according to the report.

In November 2023, Beasley signed a four-year marketing agreement with Hazan Sports Management. Under the deal, Beasley appointed HSM as his exclusive marketing agent in charge of monetising his name, image and likeness. HSM provided Beasley with a cash advance of $650,000 against future marketing revenue from the NIL deals, court records show. But in February, Beasley abruptly terminated the deal after leaving HSM for another agency.

HSM has filed a $2.5 million lawsuit against Beasley for breach of contract. When reached by iGB, Hazan Sports Management President Daniel Hazan declined comment.

The Pistons open the summer league on 11 July against the Knicks. Silver is scheduled to hold a press conference on general league matters later this week.

Addressing the Beasley investigation, NBA spokesman Mike Bass told iGB that the league is cooperating with the federal probe.

A spokesman for the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York declined to comment.

Gokverliesterug, an organisation that manages claims against unlicensed online gambling operators, represented the players. It argued that the players in question were not given access to their data when requested.

According to the claim, Gokverliesterug said the players gambled with several Dutch-facing websites under the Unibet brand. Activities were said to have taken place between 2010 and 2024.

The Netherlands did not open its legal online gambling market until 1 October 2021. Unibet was active in the country before this and has since secured a licence to operate in the Dutch market.

Players had contacted Unibet to establish what personal data the operator had collected during their time gambling with the brand. In November 2023 and April 2024, two players were presented with overviews that included transaction and gaming histories.

However, after this, Unibet did not release any further data. The claim said Unibet had either instructed the players to submit their request a different way or that it needed more time to process the demand. Unibet was also said to have disputed whether it was legally required to release data, referencing Maltese law, where parent Kindred – now part of FDJ United – is registered.

With this, Gokverliesterug filed the case demanding the data be released. It also called for a financial settlement for the players and to cover the cost of proceedings.

Unibet victorious as court disputes data claim

However, the court did not see the case the same way. It noted Unibet’s defence in that it supported General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which protects player data from being released or shared.

Unibet said Gokverliesterug’s request did not meet the requirements of Article 79, paragraph 2 of the GDPR. This section said only a “not-for-profit body, organisation or association” may represent a player if they have that person’s personal data and protection in mind.

Unibet argued Gokverliesterug only took on the case with a motive to make a profit. On its website, Gokverliesterug said it takes 36% of any recovered losses from gambling operators. Unibet also stated that the organisation was not a not-for-profit as required by GDPR.

Gokverliesterug responded by saying GDPR does not create an “exclusive” legal framework. It denied a full profit motive, claiming it has drawn external financing from a third party to support its activities. It added that its 36% cut of winning cases “does justice to the very large financial risk that the litigation funder takes”.

However, the court said Gokverliesterug failed to provide relevant documents to prove it was not profit-focused during this case. The court also said it was not made clear that the organisation was only a “managing partner” to the players fighting the case, rather than having financial gain in mind.

With this, the court declared Gokverliesterug “inadmissible” in its claims. The organisation was ordered to pay a court fee, lawyer’s salary and additional costs, amounting to €2,553, to both Kindred and partner Risepoint.

At a conference organised by the ANJ, the regulator outlined its plans for stricter supervision of gambling sponsorship, as well as the introduction of loss limit tools that could cap what players between the ages of 18 and 25 lose.

These measures are only proposed at this stage, with no set timeline as to when the ANJ would plan to implement the recommendations. The ANJ intends to use the 2026 Fifa World Cup to run a large-scale campaign to promote responsible gambling.

A whistle-to-whistle ban would be similar to a self-regulatory measure introduced by operators in the UK in 2019.

Another move to regulate sponsorship

A call for stricter supervision of gambling sponsorship comes after the ANJ in January ordered France’s four biggest operators to cut their marketing and sponsorship spending at the start of the year.

Within its post-conference report the ANJ said “stricter supervision of sponsorship to combat the trivialisation of gambling” was required.

France’s Ligue 1 football league is not as heavily associated with gambling operators sponsoring teams as other prominent football leagues, with Winamax the only gambling-related front-of-shirt sponsor in the 2024-25 season via its deal with Le Havre.

However, Betclic is the official sportsbook sponsor of the Fédération Française de Rugby.

In 2023, the ANJ released new regulations regarding the use of images of athletes in gambling communications. If regulators deem athletes to be popular with minors, operators cannot then use their image.

Simone Alexe, head of the addiction prevention office at the Directorate General of Health, said during the event that new messaging to warn players of the harms gambling can cause should come into force for the 2026 football World Cup.

She said France’s players-info-service website recorded more than eight million visits in 2024, a 44% increase compared to 2023. One third of these requests came from players’ friends and family members.

Strategic plan for French gambling regulation

The ANJ’s conference report also highlighted the need for additional player protection tools.

It has implemented an annual monitoring programme to identify excessive gamblers. Around ten monitoring operations are planned and could give rise to several referrals to the sanctions committee by the end of the year.

In the report the ANJ said: “Cultural changes are finally necessary, and the 2026 Fifa World Cup offers us a good opportunity to offer a large-scale campaign. More generally, it’s about repositioning gambling as an entertainment economy (and not a game), which collectively involves deconstructing the myth of ‘easy money’.”

It previously outlined plans to reduce excessive gambling, including the strengthening of systems that identify and support excessive gamblers. Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, president of the ANJ, has outlined the regulator’s plans to make gambling in France less reliant on high-risk players and become more sustainable.

The ANJ said it is considering the development of tools that will enable the systematic identification of problem gamblers, and is developing an algorithm for detecting excessive gamblers. The ANJ is aiming to have the system live by 2026.

In its 2024 annual report, the ANJ said it was consulting with the French government on the legalisation of iGaming in the country.

Senate President Davi Alcolumbre announced he was taking the vote on casino bill PL 2,234/2022 off the agenda on Tuesday, in another blow to proponents of land-based betting in Brazil.

Over a year has now passed since the Justice and Citizenship Committee approved PL 2,234/2022, with the senate vote the final step before it would fall upon President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to sign it into law, which isn’t expected to be an obstacle.

Alcolumbre cited the low attendance in the plenary, with only 56 senators present and a number of key opponents of land-based betting absent from the plenary session.

“There is certainly a division in the senate on this issue,” Alcolumbre said. “Given the quorum of 56 senators, the significant divergence on this matter and the requests from senators who would like to be present for the vote, this presidency will withdraw this item ex officio.”

It’s not yet clear when PL 2,234/2022, which would legalise land-based gambling verticals such as casinos, bingo, jogo de bicho and betting on horseracing, will return to the senate’s agenda, with the next parliamentary recess coming up on 17 July.

Brazil’s long wait for land-based casino legalisation continues

Brazil enforced a nationwide ban on gambling in 1946, but the country launched its licensed online betting market on 1 January this year.

But the wait for legal land-based betting rumbles on, as it faces strong opposition from multiple senators who voiced their concerns over its authorisation in Tuesday’s plenary session.

Alcolumbre’s decision to postpone the vote highlights the deep political divide over gambling in Brazil, with its supporters claiming land-based legislation could provide huge economic benefits, while opponents are largely concerned with the social fallout of betting.

Senator Eduardo Girão has perhaps been the most vocal opponent of gambling in Brazil, and on Tuesday he celebrated the withdrawal of PL 2,234/2022, claiming the population was concerned.

Girão would like to see the bill forwarded to three committees to explore the impacts of legalisation and study potential increases in addiction levels and criminal activity relating to gambling.

He views the online sector’s legalisation as an error, saying: “The betting houses have shown that it was a mistake for this house to regulate them.

“Making a mistake once is understandable, but making a mistake twice is not. The senate needs to have a minimum of sensitivity and reject this.”

Senators Humberto Costa, Plínio Valério and Chico Rodrigues also voiced their opposition, citing impacts on the population’s mental health and family debt.

Rodrigues argued any economic benefits are cancelled out by the impact of gambling on other sectors within the economy, such as retail.

“Taxes collected through the legalisation of gambling are no longer collected from other economic activities, since families stop consuming and start spending on gambling,” Rodrigues claimed.

Vote postponed despite national survey

The vote’s postponement comes despite the vast majority of the population seemingly supporting land-based gambling. A recent state-supported survey reported 60% of the Brazilian adult population is in favour of land-based legalisation.

In April, the DataSenado Research Institute found just 34% of the 5,039 Brazilian men and women aged 16 or over surveyed were against the bill’s approval.

With some estimating legalisation could provide around BRL20 billion ($3.5 billion) in annual revenue, 58% of those surveyed by DataSenado agreed a licensed land-based sector would increase tax collection in Brazil.

Additionally, 44% said land-based legalisation would increase the number of jobs in Brazil.

Pressure on the online sector perhaps a contributing factor

The introduction of the online sector has been marred by political criticism and media scrutiny, which some believe could have led to the delays in land-based legalisation.

Just over six months has passed since the legal online market went live and already it appears the industry will be facing new ad restrictions and an increase in operator tax rate to 18%, which would take the total tax burden to around 50%.

Senator Girão claims recent media coverage of online betting-related money laundering is evidence the land-based form shouldn’t also be authorised.

“You can read the headlines of O Globo, Estadão and Folha recently, showing that organised crime has never laundered so much money, never made so much profit from the advent of gambling,” Girão argued. “And what is the problem in Brazil today? Basically, it is public safety.

“The Lula government, which claims to protect the less fortunate and the poorest, can fix this mistake of betting by absolutely not allowing any more gambling to take place.”

Published in June last year, the new regulations cover both AML and counter-terrorism financing (CTF). EGBA has not updated its own guidelines since March 2023.

Stand-out points in the EU’s AML regulations include the establishment of the Anti-Money Laundering Authority to regulate activity. Other changes include specific provisions for the use of crypto-assets and reinforcing rules on transparency.

EGBA said it will work with its members to establish the new guidelines for 2026. It added some of its changes will be based on feedback gathered during its recent annual reporting process on AML.

According to the association, its guidelines apply a risk-based approach aligned with EU and Financial Action Task Force standards. It added it also seeks to address the specificities of online gambling that AML regulators may be less familiar with.

The most recent review marked the second time EGBA has carried out its annual monitoring process. It covers AML issues such as risk assessments, payments, outsourcing and sports integrity.

EGBA aiming to raise the bar on AML

Ekaterina Hartmann, director of legal and regulatory affairs at EGBA, said the update will enhance its commitment to strengthening AML compliance across Europe’s online gambling sector.

“We’re pleased to have completed the second annual reporting process,” Hartmann said. “I want to thank our members for their dedication to this collaborative initiative. Together, we’re aiming to raise the bar for AML compliance standards across our members and, by example, influence other operators across the industry to do the same.”

Hartmann added that EGBA is also seeking to work with non-members to improve its AML guidelines. She said operators not part of the association are invited to take part in the process.

“We encourage operators who aren’t members of EGBA to join this initiative and help strengthen the sector’s contribution to the fight against financial crime,” Hartmann said.

Gaming lawyers from local Malta-based firms GTG Legal and financial services provider CSB Group say the EC could be acting outside of its jurisdiction.

“This is increasingly becoming more of a philosophical matter than a legal matter,” Dr Terrence Cassar, partner at GTG Legal, tells iGB.

“The TFEU covers very specific scope as the EU’s remit as a supranational union, and gambling has always been kept specifically out of the EU’s scope. The EU started as a trade agreement, but now it’s focusing on broader matters beyond its original remit, sometimes more on philosophical and other matters and surely beyond trade.”

The dispute relates to Article 56A, an amendment added to Malta’s Gaming Act in 2023, which aims to protect locally licensed operators from legal cases brought by other European jurisdictions. This relates to Malta’s interpretation of the EU’s TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), which Malta believes gives provision for services (like online gambling) to be provided freely across EU states.

The EC sent a formal warning to Malta in June, insisting it must comply with EU law and address its failure to recognise court judgments made against Malta licence holders.

One example of this is Malta’s refusal to enforce Austrian court judgments in favour of local players being awarded refunds for gambling on sites that were not locally licensed. This ruling was delivered by a Maltese Civil Court and determined that previous Austrian judgments, which were in favour of players who had lost winnings to Malta-licensed operators, were contrary to Maltese public policy.

What is Malta actually disputing?

Malta and its gambling regulator have defended its stance on the TFEU, and it believes Article 56A is a viable addition to local laws.

Digging into the details of its defence, Cassar says Malta does not take issue with locally regulated markets, as long as they operate in compliance with Maltese gaming law.

“Malta has had online gambling regulation since 2004, and with Article 56A, it was putting into writing what it always believed,” says Cassar.

“The legalities of online gambling are very nuanced. A local [licensing framework] should only be imposed by a member state as an exception to the EU freedom to provide services (TFEU), based on public health.”

The Maltese government is not disputing that operators must comply with local gambling laws across Europe. But it is arguing that its own licensing laws could effectively usurp the laws of other countries in disputable matters.

“Malta is saying it won’t recognise judgments from other countries because it goes against Malta’s public policy, and where the view would be that the other country’s regime is not compliant with EU law,” Cassar explains. “The fact that a licence is needed in a foreign country does not necessarily translate to that licence being legal in an EU context. It boils down to whether the laws of that particular country are justifiable from an EU point of view or not.”

Does Malta have a credible argument?

Malta does have a valid argument, Cassar says, as Article 56A should not be seen as breaking any terms set out by the EU.

Kyle Scerri, senior legal manager for commercial and financial services provider CSB Group, says Article 56A does not contradict EU law. Malta’s Gaming Authority protection of the amendment “codifies into law Malta’s long-standing public policy on gaming matters”.

“On this note, it is crucial to point out that EU law, which itself has been effective for a number of years prior to the introduction of Article 56A, specifically allows for the refusal and recognition of a judgment if such recognition ‘is manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public)’ in the European Member state in question. Accordingly, Article 56A may be considered as a reiteration of the principles enshrined in EU law.”

Cassar said: “The EU is trying to rule on a domain which falls outside its jurisdiction. Malta has enough faith in its framework that it should stand up to scrutiny and it does not believe other relevant countries have stronger frameworks than Malta, which could be enforceable [instead].”

What happens next?

If Malta does not comply with the EC’s June letter within two months, the case could be referred to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), meaning a long and outstretched case and judgment could be likely.

However, the process could be sped up by an ongoing ECJ case which is considering Malta’s position in relation to a number of player losses cases in Germany and Austria. An update is expected on Thursday.

This could have huge implications for Malta’s argument, particularly if the ECJ sides with the EU on its interpretation of freedom of movement trade laws.

“I think it will take at least two or three years for a final outcome,” Cassar says.

“[But] the ECJ’s ruling in this regard in respect of Article 45 of the TFEU, not to be confused with Article 56A in Malta, can have a very direct impact, so once that plays out, this could then lead to impact on Malta’s Article 56A.”

Celton Manx was previously licensed by the commission but surrendered this approval in May this year. The provider has held its Isle of Man licence since August 2008.

Prior to this surrender, the commission launched an AML/CTF inspection into the operator. The regulator identified a “significant” number of contraventions of the Gambling (Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism) Act 2018.

‘Systematic’ failings at Celton Manx

Detailing its findings, the commission flagged a series of issues, some of these were seen as “systemic” in nature. The regulator said this showed Celton Manx, while licensed, could not show evidence of compliance with the Code.

Among the issues were a failure to ensure network partners applied measures equivalent to those in the Code. The commission also criticised Celton Manx for not ensuring customers within its network services model had monitoring processes in place.

Also flagged was how the provider could not provide evidence of assessment of its own risk estimations of AML and CTF. The commission also raised concerns over no enhanced due diligence on players at higher risk of AML/CTF links.

Other issues included lack of efficient record keeping, and infrequent technology risk assessments and monitoring and testing compliance in the Isle of Man. The company also failed to provide material to the Financial Intelligence Unit on a timely basis on more than one occasion.

In addition, the commission raised concerns over the company’s money laundering reporting officer and AML/CTF compliance officer. The regulator said they were unable to demonstrate the “sufficient expertise” to properly discharge their responsibilities, thus breaching the code.

On top of this, Celton Manx failed to meet the training and education requirements of the code. As such, certain training provided to staff was not in line with legal requirements.

Could it have been worse for Celton Manx?

In response, Celton Manx said its own enquiries did not identify any money laundering or customer detriment. However, due to the nature of the failings, the commission ruled that a penalty was appropriate.

Initially, the fine set by the commission was £5.6 million. However, this was reduced by 30% to the agreed figure of £3.9 million. This was due to admittance of the failures by Celton Manx and its willingness to work with the regulator throughout.

 “The Code sets out the preventative measures necessary to ensure, to the greatest degree possible, that a gambling operator’s products, systems and services are not exploited for criminal purposes,” the commission said. “Any form of material non-compliance with the Code heightens the risk of money laundering, terrorist financing or proliferation financing occurring.

“The Commission will find unacceptable any business that is unable to satisfactorily identify, measure and mitigate risk posed by contravening the provisions of the Code.”

SK IOM also faces financial penalty

In addition to Celton Manx, the commission issued a £70,000 financial penalty to operator SK IOM on 3 July.

SK IOM was also found to have committed several AML/CTF breaches. These included not complying with monitoring and testing compliance and concerns over record keeping.

Like Celton Manx, the operator admitted to the failures and agreed to work with the commission to support its investigation. As a result, its fine was also reduced by 30%, having initially been set at £100,000.

“Operators must operate their compliance framework proactively and ensure that any weaknesses and vulnerabilities it may be exposed to, have been identified, analysed, understood and mitigated and not merely be reactive to such issues following inspections,” the commission said.

Spelinspektionen launched an investigation into WinBet and discovered the operator only holds a licence in Greece.

Under Swedish law, an operator can be seen as targeting players in the country if its website meets certain criteria. This includes offering a Swedish language version for users and offering payment methods only available in Sweden.

WinBet met several of these criteria. Spelinspektionen found Superb.bet automatically defaulted to Swedish language when visited from an IP address in the country. Swedish players were also able to register without any form of prevention, despite the site not being licensed.

Spelinspektionen offered WinBet the opportunity to respond to the charges, but it did not comment. With this, the regulator proceeded to ban WinBet, with immediate effect.

WinBet Swedish ban follows Dutch warning

Incidentally, this is not the first time WinBet has faced regulatory action. It was also cautioned over its activity by Dutch regulator Kansspelautoriteit last October.

Kansspelautoriteit had discovered that WinBet had been operating online games of chance without the required licence. This was apparent across four sites: Galaxyspins.com, Winnercasino1.bet, Superb1.bet and Doctorspins.com – none of which were approved in the Netherlands.

The operator was ordered to withdraw or face weekly penalty payment orders of €280,000. This would be issued each week until the maximum of €840,000 was reached.

Trio cleared over compliance concerns Sweden

In other news, Spelinspektionen has cleared three operators of any wrongdoing in relation to compliance concerns.

In June, AB Trav och Galopp (ATG), Svenska Spel Sport & Casino and Lotto Direct became the subject of extra focus from Spelinspektionen. It initiated supervision to check compliance with certain reporting requirements.

However, the supervision did not discover anything that warranted further action. As such, all three cases were closed.

Published Thursday, the opinion was published in response to a query from California State Assembly member Tom Tackey. This questioned the legality of daily fantasy sports, which online operators have made accessible in the state for some time.

In Bonta’s opinion, DFS should be treated the same as sports betting, which is already banned under California Penal Code section 337a. He said as participants pay an entry fee and can win real money based on the performance of athletes, this qualifies as sports betting.

What swung the decision for Bonta?

The opinion considered several forms of DFS, including pick’em style games. Here, customers predict how a certain player will perform, including how many points they may score in a match. Bonta said that this mimics parlay or proposition bets, where consumers can win money by wagering on a certain athlete.

He also took issue with draft-style games. According to Bonta, paying to pick a team and winning money based on its performance can be seen as betting. Therefore, like wagering, it should be illegal.

“We conclude that participants in both types of daily fantasy sports games – pick’em and draft-style games – make ‘bets’ on sporting events in violation of section 337a,” Bonta wrote.

Response to operator arguments in California

Bonta also countered several arguments put forward by operators of daily fantasy sports games.

First was the skill-versus-chance argument. Operators said selecting players and teams based on skill was more skill-based, as opposed to the chance element associated with betting. But this argument fell on deaf ears. The opinion stated betting is illegal in all forms in California, be it skill- or chance-based.

Another argument that fell short was contest versus wager. Operators said their games constituted competitions that players entered, rather than traditional betting. However, Bonta distinguished between contests – where customers directly participate – and paying money to win based on others’ performance. Under this framework, he ruled that entry fees constituted wagers, therefore making the practice illegal sports betting.

Bonta also turned down an argument based on the federal Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). Operators said that as this excludes certain fantasy sports, DFS cannot be regarded as illegal. However, the AG argued UIGEA does not override California law, which bans all forms of activity seen as betting.

Finally, he said the location of operators is irrelevant. Some operators argued that as they were not located in California, the law was not applicable to them. In response, Bonta said even if DFS operators or their servers are outside California, offering DFS to players physically in the state is illegal.

Following in the footsteps of other states

The opinion also made reference to similar rulings elsewhere. Several other US states have already ruled that DFS qualifies as sports betting and have passed laws to clarify this.

“Regulators in Virginia, Arizona, Wyoming and Florida, for example, have all concluded that state laws regulating sports wagering apply to pick’em,” the opinion said. “As the Arizona Department of Gaming explained, the games are simply a type of proposition betting.

“We are not aware of any out-of-state regulator to reach a contrary conclusion.”

He concluded by saying section 337a was designed to protect people in the state from addiction and harm. Therefore, anything seen as sports betting should not be permitted in California.

Where do we go from here?

While the opinion is not legally binding, it could be used to set a precedent in California. Lawmakers may use it to develop legislation formally outlawing daily fantasy sports.

Unsurprisingly, DFS operators have been highly defensive of their activities and distanced themselves from relationships with betting. Underdog, which takes around 10% of its total revenue from California, has been particularly vocal over the matter.

Underdog went as far as attempting to block an official opinion being released by Bonta. However, a California Superior Court judge this week rejected the approach on the ground that the operator could not demonstrate it would face harm. This ultimately allowed the opinion to be published and therefore cast doubt over the operator’s future in the state.

The operator has said it plans to continue operating in California for the foreseeable future.

Class action lawsuits already filed

On the flip side, consumer-focused lawyers in the state have been quick to react to the AG opinion. A coalition of consumer protection laws firms have filed four class action lawsuits against FanDuel, DraftKings, PrizePicks and Underdog, alleging they broke laws by running DFS.

The lawsuits were filed on behalf of California residents who entered DFS contests while located in the state. Each is seeking “monetary and injunctive relief” for what is claimed as “unlawful operation of online sports betting under the guise of fantasy sports”.

Margot Cutter, partner at Cutter Law PC, one of the coalition firms, said: “These lawsuits are about fairness and truth in advertising. Californians deserve to know when they’re engaging in gambling. When companies call it something else to skirt the law, that’s a problem not just for consumers but for the integrity of our legal system.”

James Bilsborrow, partner at Weitz & Luxenberg, added: “These companies intentionally created the false impression that what they were doing was lawful and they banked on no one stopping them.”