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.”

By 2022 that logic had collapsed under its own contradictions. Channelisation had sunk below 50%, Veikkaus’ annual contribution to the state had halved since 2017, and policymakers across the political spectrum were conceding — quietly at first, then publicly — that the monopoly was no longer defensible.

Now the country is poised to become Europe’s newest licensed market. What remains uncertain is when the competitive regime will actually begin. The legislative process — still officially aligned with the government’s timetable — has begun to buckle under political nervousness about advertising, electoral timing and the preparedness of regulators.

But while Parliament wrangles over dates, operators are already building teams, commissioning legal advice and shaping local strategies. The Finnish opening is small by European standards but symbolically weighty: one of the last Nordic holdouts is moving into the mainstream. And the industry is preparing accordingly.

Where the bill stands—and why delay now looks likely

At a technical level, the bill is close to the finish line. “The Finnish Parliament’s Administration Committee decided to conclude its hearings on 13 November and is now drafting its report,” says Antti Koivula, chief compliance officer of Hippos ATG. He expects the report “at the very latest mid-December”, after which the two plenary readings “can be completed relatively quickly”.

Independent consultant Jari Vähänen offers a similar assessment: “Parliament is still considering the bill. The Administrative Committee is almost ready, and Parliament will have time to approve it this year, when the law will enter into force on 1 January 2026.”

And yet the committee’s schedule tells another story. Pekka Ilmivalta of Nordic Legal had noted an omission in dealing with the bill in the administrative committee’s weekly plan, which, he said, “raises concerns about the timetable”.

Behind this ambiguity lies political considerations. Both Ilmivalta and Vähänen point to last-minute discussions about pushing the market opening from January 2027 to summer 2027 — after Finland’s parliamentary elections.

Gambling operators aware of potential delay

Operators received the same signals. A representative from a big operator told iGB that “government are now discussing postponing the market opening … so after the elections in April”, explaining why the item was unexpectedly pulled from the committee’s agenda.

What is driving the hesitation? According to Vähänen, “political decision-makers fear that gambling marketing will increase so much that public opinion will turn against it before the parliamentary elections.” Even parties broadly supportive of liberalisation prefer to postpone any visible shift until after the vote.

Most observers therefore expect a short delay — weeks in legislative approval, months in market opening. As University of Helsinki researcher Janne Nikkinen puts it, “Perhaps a delay of a few days or weeks, they’re mostly ironing out technical issues.” The law’s substance is not in question; the timeline is.

A spokesperson from the Ministry of Interior could not comment on a possible delay, but said in an email to iGB:  “The aim of the Administrative committee has been to complete the report in November, according to the estimate, after which the report is meant to progress to the plenary session”.

Consensus without clarity

Despite procedural delays, political unity on the need for reform is unusually strong. “There has been broad cross-party consensus for a few years that the gambling market should be partially liberalised,” Koivula says. Differences remain over advertising and harm prevention, but not over the direction of travel.

Ilmivalta explains the logic: “Channelisation of the monopoly is less than 50%, income for the Finnish government has declined and at the same time problem gambling has been slightly increasing. The current system simply does not serve its purpose any more.”

And unlike in many European debates, the opposition has little incentive to resist change: Veikkaus itself declared as early as 2022 that the monopoly should be dismantled. As Nikkinen puts it, “Even the opposition isn’t opposing the reform, because Veikkaus itself said it no longer wants the monopoly.”

The political friction, therefore, is not about whether but when.

A regulator still not ready for day one

While legislative consensus holds, confidence in regulatory readiness is far thinner.

Koivula is frank: “I am not fully confident that the transition will be seamless.” Although the National Police Board will supervise licensing through 2026, he warns that “the new authority will need to hire a substantial number of employees, and very few — if any — will have prior experience in the gambling sector.” Even within the National Police Board, he says, “this remains to be seen.”

Nikkinen is more pessimistic: Finland’s model “relies on courts, which can take years. That’s too slow for fast-moving marketing campaigns.” The new authority will sit within a regional administrative agency that also handles unrelated topics, from animal welfare to alcohol licensing. “They won’t have power to sanction directly. That’s a weakness,” he says.

Vähänen is more hopeful, believing staff will transfer from the NPB and that the technology project “will be ready in 2026”. Ilmivalta, though trusting in Finnish administrative competence in general, stresses that preparations “have not been very transparent, nor has the regulator had much dialogue with the industry”.

The result seems to be a split-screen picture: operators preparing with determination, and regulators racing quietly behind.

A black market problem without the tools to solve it

Every expert interviewed agreed that the largest structural weakness is enforcement.

Koivula’s assessment is blunt: “I foresee nothing but enforcement challenges. The enforcement toolbox provided to the regulator is highly insufficient for tackling black market operators.” He warns of a counter-intuitive outcome in which “the majority of enforcement actions end up targeting licensed operators”, simply because they are visible and cooperative.

Nikkinen underscores the legislative omissions: Finland “does not include payment blocking, website blocking, DNS blocking”, partly due to political resistance and partly because the autonomous region of Åland — and PAF — complicates national blocking measures. The result, he predicts, is persistent leakage: “I believe leakage to the black market will continue, and that we’ll need to revise the law again by 2029 or 2030.”

Ilmivalta shares the concern: “There will always be those who decide not to join the regulated market, and the regulator’s tools are not too many.” The B2B licensing requirement in 2028 will help, but is unlikely to be decisive.

Even the operators’ own trade body, the Finnish Gambling Association, Rahapeliala, strikes a cautionary tone. CEO Mika Kuismanen argues that “the bill in itself does not contain enough explicit tools to combat the black market”, warning that if supervision focuses only on licensed companies”, unlicensed operators will not have sufficient incentive to consider the legal market.

Operators prepare: cautious, optimistic and waiting for certainty

Despite the regulatory grey zones, operator sentiment is broadly positive. “The industry as a whole has a positive feeling,” says Kuismanen. The legislative process has been relatively fast and well structured, even if “operators will still have to wait before starting full preparations”, he says.

FDJ/Kindred´s general manager for Finland and Estonia, Joel Hakamies, echoes that view: “It’s looking fairly good for the big picture. Overall it’s been fairly positive from our view.” The main constraint, he says, is uncertainty: “For our planning it would be better if the timeline was set in stone sooner rather than later. Uncertainty always blurs the horizon for investment.”

Hippos ATG, meanwhile, is preparing at full speed. “We are building a Helsinki-based organisation, recruiting experts on product, marketing and customer support,” Koivula says. For Hippos ATG, Finnish liberalisation is not just commercial: “Every euro of profit flows back to Finnish and Swedish horse racing — a model no other operator can offer.”

Ilmivalta sees a wide variety of strategies: “Some operators will establish local organisations while some are planning on operating very much remotely. Some are customising, some trust that their international offering works.” He also expects variety of new and innovative measures in brand-building under advertising constraints.

Marketing: permissive or restrictive?

Advertising rules are emerging as one of the most contested elements of the reform. The government’s responsible advertising clause drew criticism for vagueness, and even the Basic Law Committee questioned whether courts could interpret it effectively.

Nikkinen notes that Finnish media interests are lobbying heavily, while affiliates have been “banned”, leaving an “uneven table”. He warns that traditional media — not online channels — are the dominant source of exposure for consumers, including children.

Operators themselves are split on how restrictive the framework will be. Kindred sees the new rules as “actually quite liberal”, with “plenty of possibilities for operators to make their mark”. Kuismanen, too, believes “almost all channels are available and there are no time limits”.

What Finland means for Europe

Analysts that iGB has spoken to agree Finland will not transform the European landscape overnight. “In reality, the wider impact will be limited,” Koivula says. Vähänen and Kuismanen concur.

Yet Finland matters symbolically: it is the first Nordic monopoly to fall since Sweden in 2019, and Norway will be watching closely. As Nikkinen notes, Norway “still maintains a strict monopoly”. Whether Finland succeeds — or struggles — will shape its neighbour’s arguments for years.

More broadly, Ilmivalta expects Europe to move gradually toward harmonisation in the 2030s, driven by black market control and safer gambling priorities.

A market worth the wait

Finland’s opening is not smooth, nor is it fully defined. But operators appear willing to tolerate uncertainty for a market that remains both lucrative and culturally embedded. “Finland has been and will be an attractive gambling market,” Hakamies says. “Definitely a major opportunity.”

The real test will come not in 2026 or 2027, but in the following years — when Finland must decide whether its lightly armed regulator and incomplete enforcement architecture can deliver the channelisation and consumer protection the reform promises.

For now, the industry waits — impatient, optimistic and already laying its bets.

All three will now move on to the last round of consideration by the New York State Gaming Commission (NYSGC). The commission is to make its final licensing decision by 31 December. Up to three downstate licences may be awarded, at a minimum cost of $500 million each.

Most of the meeting was procedural – GFLB’s announcement and remarks lasted all of about 10 minutes. The board has been convening weekly behind closed doors since 8 October.

Board chair Vicki Been said in prepared remarks that the group “determined that awarding all three licences best advances the state’s long-term economic, fiscal and community objectives”.

This question of whether all three projects would advance had become increasingly uncertain as the process unfolded. Several previous applicants voluntarily withdrew and two of the three remaining finalists – Metropolitan Park and Resorts World – are both in Queens, raising questions about cannibalisation from competition. The final licensing decision now rests with the NYSGC.

In any case, board members were met with vitriol following the announcement. Chants of “Shame on you!” broke out at the meeting for several minutes until the shouters were removed. It was not immediately clear which decision was being protested.

All three New York casino bids selected but costs vary

Once the shouting was quelled, board member Greg Reimers explained why all three had been approved.

“No alternative scenarios produce comparable revenue or fiscal benefits,” he said, with regard to other licensing outcomes. “Each project proposes to deliver substantial community benefits, including infrastructure and transit improvements, local business partnerships and significant commitments to community-based organisations.”

The planned investment costs listed on Monday for the projects were below the total cost projections offered by the applicants, which took licence fees, community benefits and other costs into account.

The capital investment for Bally’s was listed at $2.3 billion, from $4 billion total. Metropolitan Park was tagged at $5.3 billion, from $8 billion total, and Resorts World was listed at $3.3 billion, from $7.5 billion total.

Applicants eager to clear final licence hurdle

In a statement after Resorts World’s approval, Genting New York chief Robert DeSalvio said the ruling “represents more than 15 years of work to generate jobs, revenue and opportunities for our neighbours”.

Bally’s said in a statement that it was “grateful for the board’s confidence” and was “honoured” to be selected.

“Our team has worked closely with community leaders, union partners and local stakeholders to build a project that delivers real jobs, lasting economic benefits and a world-class entertainment destination for the Bronx,” the statement said.

Metropolitan Park spokesman Karl Rickett said in a statement that the board “has validated the positive economic impact this project will have with billions of dollars in tax revenue, 23,000 union jobs and over $1 billion in community benefits. We look forward to the Gaming Commission’s review.”

Both Bally’s and Metropolitan Park have projected openings in 2030, whereas Resorts World, as an existing facility, has pushed the limit in scheduling its ramp-up. Originally, it projected a July 2026 opening, but its latest projection has it moved up to March.

Bright spotlight for the GFLB

The five-member GFLB was thrust into the spotlight this autumn after a quick formation in 2025. Four of the five members were appointed this year, the most recent of which came on 30 September. None of the members have experience in or connection to gaming.

In a press conference following the announcement, Been indicated the board leaned heavily on consultants in forming its decision. This was especially true with regard to performance projections and market concerns.

“We ask our consultants to be extremely searching and thorough, and we ask them to be very conservative,” she told reporters. “They disagreed with some estimates by the applicants and thought that they were quite high, so all of our estimates about the revenue potential are based upon our consultants’ views, not the applicants’ views.”

The board estimates that the three applicants could generate $7 billion in gaming tax revenue and $5.9 billion in other tax revenue in the 10-year period from 2027-2036.

According to the selection rationale document, the gaming analysis was “led by Tailored Hospitality Advisors with support from Advantage Partners Consulting, Klebanow Consulting, Hall Hospitality Advisors, Ben Mammina Development Group and Thompson Consulting and Analytics”.

Been was adamant that the board’s approval is not a “rubber stamp” for an identical ruling from the NYSGC. When asked whether there are “strong odds” for such an outcome, she said simply, “I am not a betting person.”

Strong market potential but timelines ‘ambitious’

The rationale document showed that all three applicants were approved unanimously. There were points of concern with each, but the market overall was viewed as being fundamentally solid.

“The downstate gaming market is among the nation’s strongest, given the area’s dense population, high income levels and tourism volume,” the rationale said. “The large local population base residing within a two-hour drive of the proposed casino sites is expected to anchor longterm visitation, supplemented by domestic and international tourism. Each proposal is positioned to compete for premium gaming customers through brand strength, amenities, and facility design.”

Applicants’ suitability and integrity was not included in the board’s consideration – that will be the purview of the NYSGC. Commission chair Brian O’Dwyer has vowed repeatedly that applicants will be held to the highest standard.

Aside from the concerns with the individual applicants, the board noted that construction timelines might impact each. All of the proposed timelines were seen as “ambitious” by members.

“Resorts World New York City’s projected March 2026 opening may underestimate regulatory and construction complexities, and Bally’s Bronx and Hard Rock Metropolitan Park’s mid-2030 timelines may be optimistic given project scale and urban constraints,” the rationale reads. “Continued and diligent oversight and coordination will be necessary to ensure timely delivery.”

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.”

At present, a single licence is available in Austria for lotteries and online gaming products. This 15-year permit is held by Austrian Lotteries’ brand Win2day – a subsidiary of Casinos Austria, which also holds all 12 land-based casino licences. Austria’s state holding company, ÖBAG, in turn owns a 33% stake in Casinos Austria.

Rumours of reform have been swirling since Austria’s three-party coalition entered government back in March. In their February coalition pact, the centre-right People’s Party (ÖVP), liberals (NEOS) and centre-left Social Democrats (SPÖ) had cryptically promised a “further development” of the gambling monopoly, leaving the question of liberalisation on the table.

More recently, senior government officials have spoken out in favour of an open licensing scheme for online gambling. With the sole licence due to expire in 2027, the urgent question is whether the next tender process will be a fully open one.

According to Simon Priglinger-Simader, president of the Austrian Betting and Gaming Association (OVWG), clarity on this question could come “any day now”.

“It should only be a question of days until the draft is released and then it will be all about the political negotiations,” he told iGaming Business. “But the signals we’ve received from all three parties have been positive when it comes to a licensing reform for online gambling.”

Political negotiations over iGaming reform in Austria

Although the industry is eagerly awaiting the Finance Ministry’s plans, they will only be the start of the process, kicking off talks between the SPÖ (who control the ministry), the ÖVP and the NEOS.

These talks should lay the groundwork for a new gambling bill to be drafted in February or March next year, with new regulations potentially in place by summer.

If the anticipated reform is announced, it will spell the end of a long and arduous fight against the single-licence system in Austria, which has regularly been placed under a microscope by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). 

“I would say [we’re] much closer to online gambling reform than we’ve ever been in Austria – or at least in the past five or 10 years,” said Priglinger-Simader. “And for us as an industry, that’s a hugely positive sign.”

It is far from the first time that the question of ending the online monopoly has been on the agenda: a previous attempt by the former ÖVP and Green Party-led coalition was scuppered by the parties’ political differences. This time, however, the stars seem to be aligning in favour of an open online market.

Licensing deadlines and tender process

“By 2027, six of 12 of the existing 15-year national offline casino licences will expire, along with the single online gambling licence. The remaining six out of 12 licences for offline casinos will expire in 2030,” explained Arthur Stadler, an Austrian attorney who specialises in betting and gaming law.

With the tender process taking around two years, there is a race against time to draft a new framework for handing out the next set of licences – and potentially tap into a new income source for the government.

“Austria’s fiscal situation is deeply concerning,” Stadler added. “It is an open secret that new licensing fees and taxation models in the gambling sector, as so often in history, will be leveraged to help plug gaps in the national budget. Whether this creates an attractive consumer offering and channelisation is an entirely different story.”

Since entering government in March, the coalition has already introduced two significant tax hikes. Online gambling taxes soared from 40% to 45%, while betting duties were more than doubled from 2% to 5%.  

If the market is opened, the OWVG will argue that these dizzyingly high tax rates could stand in the way of channelisation. Research carried out in Germany suggests that every percent of tax above 30% could equate to a 1% loss to black-market operators.

Unanswered questions in Austria

According to Stadler, Austria’s current dire channelisation rates may have also prompted the political rethink.

“Despite the fact that Austrian Lotteries is the sole legal provider of online gambling services, it has failed in its task of steering Austrian players towards legal gambling channels,” he said.

This places the monopoly on legally shaky ground, as the ECJ has ruled that monopolies in Europe must genuinely serve the public interest.

Still, it’s unclear what shape any future online gambling framework – if there is one – could take, and how many potential licences could be available for operators.   

Speaking to the Austrian Press Agency (APA) this November, a ministry spokesperson explained that the number of licences available in the next tender would be part of the ongoing political discussions.

If the monopoly is lifted, it’s possible that licences could still remain capped at an arbitrary number. Here, however, Germany’s unsuccessful sports betting licence cap – which was scrapped in 2021 – could serve as a cautionary tale.

Another option is a cap through the back door, which would involve setting the standards and costs so high that only a few operators could realistically meet them. The third, much less complicated option, would be to offer unlimited licences.

Enhancing player protections

Whatever the next licensing scheme looks like, one thing is clear: the government will have to develop its player protection regulations almost from the ground up.

“All three parties will need to make sure that player protections are increased and improved in Austria because at the moment, we don’t have that much within the Gambling Act and very little oversight from the ministry,” said OWVG President Priglinger-Simader.

In their February coalition pact, the three parties pledged to ramp up enforcement measures against the black market, introducing measures such as IP-blocking and payment blocking.

However, Stadler points out that these would require precise implementation to avoid falling afoul of EU rules.

Nevertheless, the gaming law expert believes Austria is in a unique position due to the long delay in regulating the online market.

“As one of the last countries to maintain an online gambling monopoly, Austria is very late to the show,” said Stadler. “However, this could potentially turn out to be an advantage, as the Austrian legislator has been able to observe developments in similar countries and draw conclusions on the most successful measures.

“There is no need – and no justification – for a trial-and-error-period in Austria.”

An independent gambling commission?

Alongside an expansion of the online licensing scheme, industry stakeholders will be scouring the draft plans for mentions of an independent gambling authority, ending the Ministry of Finance’s jurisdiction.

Though moves have been made to address any conflicts of interest – moving the stake in Casinos Austria from the Finance to Economics Ministry – operators are still yearning for neutral and independent oversight. However, as Stadler explains, “establishing such an authority would take a substantial amount of time”.

With time running out to issue tenders, the OWVG believes the new gambling authority will be put on the backburner until after new licences are issued – or even set up in parallel.

Even without a new gambling commission to worry about, however, time is still tight. If the tender process kicks off next summer as expected, it is unlikely to be completed by the autumn of 2027 – not least due to the likely barrage of legal challenges.

According to a recent report in Der Standard, the Finance Ministry is considering buying extra time by extending the current tenders by one year – pushing back reforms to 2028. This would take advantage of a provision laid out in the current Gambling Act, although it’s unlikely to be received well by operators or the European courts.

Although the wait could be longer than expected, however, there is one major consolation for the industry: after years of campaigning and legal scrutiny, one of Europe’s most intransigent online gaming markets could finally be on the brink of reform.

In the role, the government confirmed that Eldhagen will support the minister for financial markets, Niklas Wykman. Alongside gambling regulation, Eldhagen will oversee the financial market, state properties and the financing of new nuclear power.

Eldhagen takes on the new position having most recently served as head of international secretariat Sveriges Riksbank. Previously, he worked in various management roles at the Ministry of Finance and as an advisor at the World Bank.

The government said Eldhagen will commence his new role with effect from 1 December.

Another new face in gambling regulatory leadership

The appointment comes after the Swedish gambling regulator in September also announced a change in leadership. Johan Röhr is now its acting director general following the departure of Camilla Rosenberg.

Röhr took on the temporary role from 1 November and is overseeing Spelinspektionen until further notice. He has worked as chief legal officer at the regulator since June 2008.

Spelinspektionen confirmed that Rosenberg would be stepping down as director general on 31 October. She had led the body as its director general since 2017.

Changing face of Swedish gambling market

Aside from regulatory leadership, the Swedish market has also seen several changes to laws and rules over the past year.

In September, Sweden’s Ministry of Finance published Marcus Isgren’s report, outlining amendments designed to strengthen the country’s regulatory framework. This included closing loopholes that enabled illegal operators to market to locals via English-language sites with payments accepted in euros.

Other proposed amendments included broadening the prohibition on promoting illegal gambling in Sweden. Beyond advertising, this would extend to payment processors, financial services and other providers that support unlicensed operations.

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.

Aside from this, the government in October published the full text of legislation imposing a blanket ban on using credit for gambling. This will extend the Swedish Gambling Act, which already prevents players from using credit to gamble with licensed operators.

The new rules will come into effect from 1 April 2026.

This year also saw the end of the country’s land-based market. Svenska Spel confirmed the closure of its final land-based casino in Stockholm, after the Swedish Parliament voted to end land-based casinos in April.

A dominant global force in gaming, the operator has become market leader in the US through its FanDuel brand and has expressed similar lofty ambitions in Latin America.   

In September 2024, Flutter acquired a 56% stake in NSX, the parent company of Brazil-facing brand Betnacional. That same month, the company insisted the deal boosted its market share to 11%. NSX provided the operator with a wealth of local talent and experience.

The deal was completed in May, when NSX CEO Joao Studart stepped into the top job at the newly formed Flutter Brazil.

The agreement mirrored Flutter’s strategy across Europe and the US, combining local brand strength and the group’s financial and technology firepower and global structure. For Studart, the deal made perfect sense and marked a new chapter for the Brazil sports betting market.  

“Flutter saw in Brazil not only an opportunity for strategic expansion, but also a market with real prominence within the global sector,” Studart tells iGB. “It recognised in Betnacional a successful example of genuine connection with Brazilian fans – a popular, culturally rooted and fast-growing brand.” 

M&A specialist Christian Tirabassi, founder and senior partner of Ficom Leisure, believes Betnacional was a top-10 player in Brazil’s pre-regulated market.

Acquiring a local hero of this size meant Flutter could achieve an early-mover advantage, a key benefit in such a highly competitive market.

“The opening of other markets has shown us that whoever is early into the market has an important market share and will probably stay there or even increase that leading position,” Tirabassi says. 

Local prowess 

Stakeholders have noted just how important localisation is to succeed in Brazil, which differs culturally from its LatAm neighbours even beyond the language distinctions.

Pre-regulation, many shared the belief that international entrants could struggle in Brazil unless they properly localised through a boots-on-the-ground approach that differs vastly from their other markets. 

Studart believes Flutter Brazil combines NSX and Betnacional’s local prowess and the Flutter Edge technology stack, bringing scale and local autonomy.

“Flutter Brazil [is] an operation that remains Brazilian at its core, with local leadership and a deep understanding of the consumer,” Studart explains. “At the same time, it operates with the resources, governance and technology of a global group. 

“Through the Flutter Edge, we brought to Brazil state-of-the-art tools, a robust infrastructure, high-level compliance standards and a responsible gaming programme tailored to the country’s reality.

“At the same time, we preserved Betnacional’s essence as a local hero – a brand that represents the Brazilian spirit of football, entertainment and popular culture.”

Brazil’s launch has dominated gaming news in the last couple of years. A huge nation with a population of around 213 million, Brazil has a vibrant sporting culture, and many expected its opening to provide an entry into LatAm’s growing gambling opportunity.  

H2 Gambling Capital ranks Betano, Superbet and Bet365 as its top three players by market share, according to its revenue estimates. International entrants are clearly gaining a strong foothold in the market.

Since the launch, operator revenue figures for Brazil have varied. In Q1 most listed players reported strong numbers as early entrants, but as competition has increased, and KYC pressures remain, some have seen that growth slow slightly.  

In Q3 London-listed Entain warned that iGaming was not performing as well as it could be, due to a slow and arduous certification process, which meant few games were available in the market during the period. Flutter reported revenue of $87 million in Brazil in Q3, marking a 412% uptick on the same period in 2024, prior to regulation.  

Of course, this year the company has included NSX’s revenues within its mix, with Betnacional reportedly achieving record iGaming revenues during the quarter. Excluding NSX’s revenue, Flutter saw a 18% year-on-year revenue drop across its Betfair brand in Brazil.

Group CEO Peter Jackson said this was due to its continued recovery from bottlenecks that occurred during and following the regulatory process.

Ed Birkin, H2 Gambling Capital managing director, estimates Flutter Brazil is currently sitting in fifth position in the market with a 4.5% market share. 

“While it’s still very competitive at the moment, I would imagine Flutter’s strategy will be focused on getting the best product [out],” Birkin explains. “And then as other people start to pull back, which is going to happen at some point because the losses that I’d imagine a lot of companies are making aren’t sustainable, that’s when they will start to leverage their financial firepower, start to lean in as they call it and pick up the slack.” 

A slice of the pie 

The Flutter Edge platform is the core function powering the operator’s “local heroes” strategy, through which it has acquired numerous leading brands in various markets and integrated them into the central platform.

Analysts are bullish on the power of the Edge platform. In December 2024 Macquarie senior gaming analyst Chad Beynon estimated the platform would help Flutter gain up to 25% market share in Brazil by 2030.  

In his December note Beynon said the platform had proven to affect market share gains in new markets quickly. He also said further M&A was on the cards for Flutter in LatAm.  

“Flutter Edge brings to Brazil state-of-the-art resources in infrastructure, data intelligence, innovation and compliance – ensuring that our brands operate with robustness, speed and security,” Studart says. “At the same time, we have the freedom to adapt products, experiences and strategies to local realities, delivering tailored solutions that truly connect with our audience.  

“It is precisely this combination of global structure and local leadership that positions Flutter Brazil among the most prepared companies to lead the sector – with consistency, credibility and a positive impact on the entire ecosystem.” 

Birkin expects Flutter will invest heavily in marketing further down the line, as competition slows and others pull back from the market. This will enable it to capitalise on waning competition, a strategy that worked for Flutter in stunning fashion in the US. 

“My view is the best strategy would be to focus on integrating their very strong technology and know-how into the Betnacional business to improve the product,” Birkin says. “Once they’ve got the product where they want it, then to spend their money on marketing as others pull back on it. 

“What you’d notice in the US is that as people started pulling back on bonusing and marketing, as lots of operators were loss-making, they pull back, then FanDuel starts to lean in and kind of use their scale to take customers.”

Birkin notes Bet365 employed a similar strategy in the US, where the operator avoided spending huge amounts to gain brand awareness. Instead, it operated efficiently in the background, waiting to make market share gains when others pulled back. 

The sheer scale of Flutter Brazil compared to smaller operators is demonstrated by its massive local workforce of over 500. The business operates multiple functions locally, including technology, marketing and customer services. The company also recently changed its corporate structure, with a raft of new C-level appointments to work alongside Studart. 

Flutter Brazil has drawn from other sectors to build out its executive team, while also ensuring a combination of international expertise with a “deep cultural connection” to Brazil.

“The IT team is a great example of this integration, with professionals from Flutter’s international structure working remotely in collaboration with the local team, expanding our capacity for innovation and integration,” Studart adds. 

“The new executives bring extensive experience in their fields, foster local reach and lead highly qualified teams that are already recognised as industry benchmarks, always operating with responsibility and a long-term vision. With Betnacional as part of its brand ecosystem, the goal is to sustain an operation centred on Brazilian talent and local insight.” 

Further M&A 

Tirabassi shares Benyon’s view that Flutter will make other acquisitions in LatAm, in part due to their strong history of successful M&A across its global portfolio and with the company’s sights set on reaching the summit of the regulated Brazil sector.

“Their objective, clearly, is to become number one, and that’s why I think they’re going to make other acquisitions,” Tirabassi says. “Large ones that would allow them to be quickly number one or number two, so something of the same size or similar size. I think that Flutter is actively looking for an [M&A] target. I know that for sure.” 

But Tirabassi knows well that this process isn’t easy.

“We believe the issue [in Brazil] is finding a target which is ready to transact,” Tirabassi adds. “Being on the sell side, the majority of the work we do is prepare the target, because they’re not ready. We understand the priority is business. But then again, very big business, very small corporate. So that’s why we’re trying to kind of help them to realign the size of the corporate together with the size of the business.  

“They need at least a couple of quarters to organise the company. So, we expect that in 2026 you will see some additional M&A in the market, because targets will be in a better position than now to engage in a transaction with a company like Flutter.” 

With Birkin currently ranking Flutter Brazil and its Betnacional and Betfair brands at number five in the market, he has reservations over whether they can scramble to the top spot. H2’s numbers give Betano, Superbet and Bet365 a combined 47% of the market, and Birkin feels that could be a tough trio to crack for Flutter. 

“They want to be in a podium position,” Birkin explains. “On our numbers that would involve them overtaking Sportingbet and Superbet. Is that possible? Yes. Do I see them being able to capture in a year, five years, Betano and Bet365? That would involve a significant change in market structure.” 

Tirabassi, however, is a little more confident and believes in the value of the NSX acquisition. Add to that Flutter’s capability to conduct more M&A, and Flutter could certainly buy its way to the top.  

“I think the difference is that culturally, the Flutter group has been extremely capable in M&A, they have a very strong team and also the guys that come after the deal. Betano has basically no experience in M&A or very little so it’s not really their culture.” 

Ultimately, Studart is confident Flutter Brazil will continue to make strides in the new and exciting Brazil market.

“The Brazilian market is going through a phase of consolidation that brings great opportunities for operators who invest with seriousness, a consumer-first mindset and a commitment to best practices,” Studart concludes.  

“The progress of regulation has laid the foundation for a more balanced ecosystem – one that combines innovation with responsibility. Flutter Brazil sees this new scenario as fertile ground for sustainable growth. By combining global scale with a deep understanding of local specificities, we aim to actively contribute to the sector’s maturation – offering relevant and safe experiences to users while reinforcing the pillars of trust, transparency and Brazilian culture that underpin our brands.” 

The draft, “The Case For a National Online Gambling Tax“, stressed that while land-based bookmakers and casinos are currently taxed between 6%-9% of winnings or gross gaming revenue by the licensing provinces, they still generate employment and other communal benefits for the citizens. The same cannot be said about online and interactive gambling despite the significant spike in its user engagement.

A recent publication from the market’s regulatory bodies showed GGR from online gambling went up 60% on data from the previous year.

According to a report from Statistics South Africa, firms providing bookmaker and online gambling services saw a massive income boost up to R152.6 billion ($8.9 billion) as of 2023, representing a 72% increase between 2018 and 2023, a figure which clearly surpassed all other activities in the sports and recreation sector.

Why this proposed tax rate is cause for concern

With online gambling being in direct competition with land-based casinos as part of the interactive gambling industry in most countries, tax rates should be aligned to ensure fairness, the draft stipulated.

And as up to 11 other jurisdictions are already charging a 20% tax on GGR, with a further 16 regulators collecting an even higher tax rate, the National Treasury explained why the proposed rate should be upheld and implemented. The national gambling tax would be in addition to the provincial tax rates and would lead to a tax rate of between 26% and 29% for all online gambling activities.

The new rate is expected to translate to an additional R10 billion in revenue generation to the South African government. However, the proposed reform was not particularly aimed at further revenue generation but to curb the issue of problem and pathological gambling and its consequences.

Enforcing oversight

In respect to that, the National Treasury has also mapped out a procedure to ensure oversight and the collection of the proposed tax rate when approved.

Every online operator will be required to register and provide the South African Revenue Service with similar information to that currently available to the provincial gambling boards they are licensed to, which is used for gambling tax revenue collection. That way, compliance will be enforced.

Local industry players who are involved in interactive gambling will also be subjected to the proposed tax, depending on the extent of the GGR of every gaming activity in which they are involved.

In its conclusion, the Treasury’s proposal noted that regulatory bodies have not kept pace with the evolving market over the years as forms of gambling (like online and interactive gambling) other than lotteries and sports pools have been let off, hence the need for the new rate on their operations.

Play 971 launched earlier this week, stating on its website that it is the maiden online gaming site to launch in the UAE with a licence from the General Commercial Gaming Regulatory Authority (GCGRA).

The regulator updated its site to add Play 971 to its internet gaming and sports wagering licensees on 28 November, with sources suggesting it is undergoing a trial rollout in a limited area. The site appeared to be available in Abu Dhabi and Ras Al-Khaimah, but not Dubai, on Wednesday.

The site is operated by Coin Technology Projects LLC. That entity shares an address with The Game LLC, the business behind The UAE Lottery, which launched ticket sales a year ago today.

Whether the site going live marks its official launch is unclear. Sources close to the project suggested an official launch was planned in the first quarter of 2026.

Which suppliers are providing games for Play 971?

A number of the games featured on Play 971’s homepage are from the supplier OneTouch, which falls under the licensed entity of Live Online Gaming Services, a subsidiary of Yolo Group.

However, in the live casino section, the Speed Dragon Tiger is supplied by Evolution, which isn’t yet listed among the licensees.

Aside from OneTouch and two other Yolo Group B2B brands – Hub88 and Live88 – geolocation provider Xpoint and sports data specialist Sportradar, the vast majority of supplier licensees announced to date appear focused on land-based and lottery gaming.

Play 971 marks UAE’s first foray into iGaming

The Play 971 launch – whether as a trial or as an official rollout – marks a major step as the UAE expands its regulated gambling market, by adding online sports betting, racing and iCasino to the nascent market. To date, the UAE Lottery is the only legal product, with Wynn’s Al Marjan Island resort not due to open until early 2027.

Sources suggest regulations allow for one online licensee per emirate, meaning there could in theory be up to seven operators in the market. This of course would depend on all seven emirates supporting an online gaming offering.

While regulations state emiratis are not permitted to gamble, a population made up of roughly 88% expats provides an addressable market for operators. Rumours of an online launch have persisted throughout 2025, as far back as the second quarter of the year.

Building Momentum

Momentum LLC became a key player in the UAE last July, when it beat local incumbents Mahzooz and Emirates Draw to secure the UAE Lottery licence. That business is operated via its subsidiary TheGame LLC, while Play 971 is linked to Coin.

The rollout may be just one step in Momentum’s growth plans. Its website lists a game publishing arm, mixed reality gaming and esports alongside lottery operations and commercial gaming as areas of focus. This, it says, is underpinned by an embrace of AI.

Personnel changes at the GCGRA

Play 971 emerges in the wake of the GCGRA’s founding CEO Kevin Mullally stepping down from his role earlier this month. Mullally, who oversaw the establishment of the regulator’s core governance and regulatory structures, is departing to spend more time with his family. Chairman Jim Murren takes over in the interim.

As well as building the foundations for regulated gaming in the UAE, Mullally also oversaw the launch of the UAE Lottery and Wynn’s licensing.

In its first year, the UAE Lottery awarded prizes of over AED147 million ($40 million) to more than 100,000 players.

The GCGRA and Momentum have both been approached for comment.

This story was updated on 28 November to reflect the GCGRA adding Coin Technology Projects to its internet gaming and sports wagering licensees.

In the wake of FanDuel and DraftKings giving up any hopes of a gaming licence in Nevada and leaving the American Gaming Association, prediction markets are front of mind for Ed Birkin this week. He’s not convinced they even have a long-term future in the industry, so why are the market leaders going all in?

This quickly develops into the difference between white, black and grey market gambling. Do grey markets actually exist or, as Robin Harrison suggests, is the definition of what constitutes a grey market being stretched to breaking point?

On Apple? So is Right to the Source!

Gambling in Argentina highlights the grey market challenge

Argentina, with its province-by-province framework, illustrates the grey market challenge quite nicely. Most provinces may have a licensing system, but the bulk of certifications seem to have been handed out for Buenos Aires province and the capital city. 

That doesn’t necessarily mean Argentina gambling licensees are just sticking to those two jurisdictions, however. There’s an element of parts of the gambling industry trying to have their cake and eat it, Ed argues, but does anyone actually face consequences for their actions?

In its pre-budget preparations, which included a Select Committee meeting with industry stakeholders and think tank representatives, the Treasury has raised concerns around parts of the UK sector being based offshore in hubs like Gibraltar and Malta.

During its meeting in October, the committee probed Betting & Gaming Council CEO Grainne Hurst and Tax Committee Chair Stephen Hodgson on why many UK-facing gambling firms maintained an offshore presence.

The committee’s suggestion was that companies were based offshore to avoid corporation tax in the UK. But Hignett explains the reasoning is much more nuanced.  

“There’s a history as to why different parts of the industry are offshore and some are onshore, which needs to be understood to sort of realise how we got here,” says Hignett.

“They’re there for reasons that are well explained,” he adds. Hignett notes that operators have flitted between having offshore and onshore bases for years, to ensure they can compete on equal footing.

Dynamic regulatory environment

Additionally, in the UK remote gambling was illegal until the 2005 Gambling Act came into force in 2007. During this period mobile and online betting was increasing in popularity and operators remained or returned offshore to leverage this opportunity across Europe.

“If you’re an operator in 2007, the question is ‘Why would you come onshore voluntarily, when all of your competitors remain offshore?’ You’re volunteering to pay a whole load of taxes that’s just going to put you at a massive competitive disadvantage,” Hignett tells iGB.

“I can tell you about some of the musings of the Court of Appeal, in particular income tax cases where they look at gambling companies that have gone offshore and said, ‘We kind of understand why you went offshore, because everyone else had gone offshore, and therefore you would be the only people paying duty in the UK when the rules were like that’. So they were pretty sympathetic of that.”

But the Treasury has made some progress in better understanding the sector, he suggests. “You can see that in the differences between the Treasury Select Report and the rather blunt [gambling tax] consultation earlier in the year. But I think they’ve got a way to go to really understand those differences,” Hignett says.

A long way since the consultation

The consultation was launched in April by the Treasury, requesting stakeholder feedback on the current three-rate, profit-based tax system for operators. The initial report hinted at consolidating the three rates into one single rate across all verticals.

But stakeholders largely objected to this idea, as it would raise betting duty from 15% to 21%, in line with Remote Gaming Duty. This could hugely impact, and possibly decimate, the retail betting and horse racing industries.

Various other policies were then suggested by think tanks, including increasing remote gaming duty to 50%, and machine games duty from 20%. But we won’t know which the government has settled on until Wednesday’s budget session.

“If anyone has the ability to sort of shoulder an increase in tax, it’s probably not various people within the general betting duty camp — you know, the high street shops, particularly bookmakers, who are taking bets on horse racing, where they’ve got to pay the levy as well,” Hignett reflects on the initial consultation.

“The industry reacted badly to this consultation, thinking it wasn’t a very good idea, because I think it was based on a false premise, which was essentially, because various types of gambling can be consumed online they must be sufficiently similar, and therefore we can merge them all together.”

Taxes on high-risk verticals in the UK

In its report following the Select Committee meeting, the Treasury has advised the government to consider increasing the tax for high-risk verticals, like online casino.

“I think they are on a journey and I think they’ve probably got a way to go, because what we’re looking at is a very complex ecosystem,” Hignett says of the committee’s meeting and subsequent findings.

“The Treasury select interview process was really interesting because it was meant to be all about gambling tax policy,” he adds. “And most of the questions that were being thrown, particularly of the BGC, were more regulatory-related questions and around gambling creating social ills. I think everyone accepts that. That’s why it’s regulated, to try and make sure we can control that.”

When could a new gambling tax policy come into force?

On the timeline for a potential gambling tax hike, Hignett says the chancellor has a choice on when to introduce a new policy that is announced during the budget.

“She will either bring them into effect from midnight of Budget Day or from the beginning of the next financial year. If it’s a transactional tax, like capital gains tax or a tax on transactions like stamp duties, rate rises often take effect from midnight.

“For the types of gambling duty that we have been talking about, rate rises often take effect from the start of the next financial year (this is what happened when RGD was increased from 15% to 21%, with effect from 1 April 2019). As regards rule changes (rather than just rate changes), these will typically come into effect on a date prescribed in the Finance Act that enacts those rule changes.”

He says a date for operators to formally change their systems could be included in the budget speech.

The Federal Revenue Service in Brazil published its monthly tax update on Monday. The BRL1.09 billion figure was 9.4% lower than the BRL1.21 billion generated in September.

However, it did take the total market tax contribution to BRL7.95 billion for the year. This is the latest indicator the market has reaped sizeable financial benefits since regulation launched in Brazil on 1 January.

Brazil government set to vote on tax increase on Wednesday

The tax situation for the regulated Brazil betting sector could change imminently, with a vote scheduled on Wednesday for the current rate to be doubled.

Currently, the tax rate on GGR stands at 12%. However, operators have to pay a number of other taxes, meaning their overall rate is in excess of 40%.

The Senate’s Economic Affairs Committee is expected to vote on PL 5,473/2025 on Wednesday, with the bill doubling the tax rate to 24%.

If it is approved the bill will go straight to the Chamber of Deputies, unless an appeal is made for the Senate plenary to vote on it.

The bill is facing opposition, however, with a previous vote postponed reportedly due to the Chamber of Deputies President Hugo Motta stating the proposal would fail to have the required support to pass.

Brazil government intent on hiking gambling taxes

With an election looming next year, President Lula’s administration appears determined to increase gambling taxation as it seeks to hit its fiscal targets.

The government recently faced a major setback when its provisional measure proposing a 50% hike in gambling taxes failed.

According to Brazilian iGaming analyst Elvis Lourenço, this defeat has triggered renewed and increasingly urgent efforts by the administration to push tax rates even higher.

“That’s the main reason that they struck back so fast, because it was embarrassing for them,” Lourenço, managing partner of EX7 Partners, previously told iGB.

“This becomes an election agenda, because this is good for the audience and the public to get votes because we are a conservative country in some ways. So, to put this on their agenda, ‘we increase the taxes of the billionaires, of the gambling world’, it is good for the speech of the actual government.”

Lourenço warns that doubling the current tax rate would be an “insane” decision, one that could jeopardise the regulated market.

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.

However, despite these frequent interventions, breaches persist. The pattern raises a difficult question: why does non-compliance remain so endemic? The answer seems to lie in a complex mix of regulatory evolution, operational shortcomings and commercial tension between growth and governance. 

The numbers give an indication. A conservative estimate is that the total annual fines for regulated non‑compliance in the European gambling sector lie above €150 million per year. Spain is a leader among the European countries, both in number of non‑compliance cases and aggregate fines issued in recent years. The Spanish regulators imposed €142.7 million in fines on gambling and online gaming operators during 2024. 

According to Vixio’s AML Fines Outlook, regulators across Europe imposed more than €36 million in AML-related penalties alone between March 2024 and March 2025, underscoring the sector’s struggle to meet compliance standards that are tightening by the month. 

What’s happening across Europe?

In Britain, the Gambling Commission remains an assertive enforcer. Between April 2023 and March 2024, it issued £7.16 million in fines. Then for the period 1 April 2024-31  March 2025, the commission’s annual report revealed enforcement action against 24 operators led to £4.2 million in fines or regulatory settlements. A new seven-step process to calculate financial penalties was introduced by the Gambling Commission in October. They will now be based on a percentage of the offender’s gross gambling yield.  

In the Netherlands, the Kansspelautoriteit (KSA) introduced a tougher fining matrix for 2025, where Category 5 violations now carry penalties of between €2 million and €4 million. Last year, Malta-based online casino Gammix Limited was fined €19.7 million for unlicensed operations, one of the largest penalties ever imposed by a European regulator. 

Elsewhere – from Malta to Finland and Denmark – regulators are taking similar tough stances against regulatory non-compliance. Belgium’s Gambling Commission, for its part, handed out a record €4.6 million in fines last year. And in Italy, the regulator ADM imposed €1.35 million fines in advertising-rule breaches. 

Some industry stakeholders warn the black market will be the only beneficiary if enforcement becomes disproportionate relative to revenue. Regulators, however, counter that deterrence requires precisely that degree of financial sting. 

Compliance or competition? 

Industry observers note the longstanding compliance dilemma stems from competing imperatives. Regulatory requirements are complex and there is a tension between delivering commercial performance and meeting compliance obligations. 

“It is clearly obvious that the bar has been raised by regulators both in the UK and across Europe. The sharp increase of regulatory action we are witnessing, particularly around AML and social responsibility, paints a picture that all may not be as it should be in the regulated market,” says Victoria Reed, chief executive of Better Change. 

This friction is particularly acute in markets where margins are tightening. Melanie Ellis, a partner at Northridge Law in London, argues that investment in compliance infrastructure often competes with initiatives that promise faster returns. “The cost of compliance has increased massively. Operators are unable to divert sufficient funds to this function. In the UK, this particularly relates to the increased expectations in relation to customer monitoring and action.” 

She explains how it has become difficult to meet the GC’s expectations without significant investment in both software and personnel, particularly to enable immediate responses to indicators of money laundering or harm. 

That challenge is further complicated by demographic shifts – especially the rise of younger, digital-native gamblers – that put further pressure on operators to deliver seamless, instant experiences without breaching consumer-protection thresholds. 

Reactive to predictive

Britain’s Gambling Commission has sought to evolve from reactive enforcement to predictive oversight. Andrew Rhodes, its chief executive, told industry representatives at a briefing in November that nine operators had been suspended in recent weeks for “issues that we have repeatedly warned about – software provision and self-exclusion”. 

The commission’s new approach to non-compliance relies heavily on real-time monitoring through its Regular feed of Operator Core Data (ROCD) “Over 73% of last year’s consumer-protection assessments were rated good or satisfactory,” Rhodes explained. 

He credits the ROCD with allowing regulators to spot behavioural risk clusters – such as younger players who seldom set deposit limits yet reach thresholds of financial harm. The GC hopes this analytical capability will pave the way for “a truly risk-based regime”. 

Signs of progress 

Despite the headlines that non-compliancy makes in mainstream press, not everyone sees an unmitigated compliance crisis. Richard Williams, a specialist gambling, licensing and regulatory lawyer at Keystone Law, believes operators have made tangible progress. “If you go back five years and look at AML and social-responsibility compliance then versus now, the change has been huge – particularly around intervention when people are losing large amounts of money. Operators are far more responsible,” he says. 

The GC’s evolving stance also reflects a wider trend toward collaboration rather than confrontation. “We recognise there will always be tension between regulator and regulated,” Rhodes says. “But it doesn’t have to be adversarial. Working together productively has delivered progress.” 

Williams notes that regulators increasingly prefer structured action plans to outright licence reviews. “If improvement isn’t shown, then suspension or revocation can follow – but that’s becoming rarer,” he says. “It’s now more about raising standards than simply sanctioning operators.”

Non-compliance a fault of global expansion 

Nevertheless, non-compliance remains a concerning issue. Tamsin Blow, a lawyer at CMS London, observes why instances continue to occur: “Enforcement often results from operators grappling to understand and keep on top of multiple differing legal systems across jurisdictions, balancing parallel — and sometimes competing – obligations under AML, social responsibility, data protection and equalities law.” 

Breaches, in most cases, are not deliberate. “I’m sure it happens occasionally,” says Williams, “but I think it’s rare. If you look at the size of fines, which are often in the millions, and when you add legal fees, audits and licence conditions, it’s generally not profitable to be non-compliant. Most responsible operators don’t intend to breach rules.”  

According to Williams, the high number of compliance cases in the UK is a reflection of a particularly vigilant regulatory body. “Regulators in other markets doing only a handful of checks each year will naturally find fewer breaches.” Operators are being squeezed by rising duties, taxes and levies, he points out. “That pressure creates real challenges.” 

The Dutch toddler 

Taking a quick glance across Europe, if Britain represents regulatory maturity, the Netherlands is still finding its footing. Bjorn Fuchs, chairman of the Dutch trade body VNLOK, likens the market, which opened only four years ago, to “a toddler with a steep learning curve”. 

“The speed with which the bar has been raised, combined with multiple possible interpretations, can lead to misunderstandings, loss of oversight and sub-par execution,” he says. Operators, he adds, face heavy fines for responsible gambling lapses, particularly in self-exclusion and deposit-limit enforcement. 

Fuchs worries that “when regulatory burdens grow exponentially fast and become disproportionate, the legal market as a whole is at risk”. Still, he insists that genuine errors should be seen as part of a maturing ecosystem, not disregard of rules: “Operators that knowingly and structurally aren’t compliant should lose their licence to operate.” 

In Norway, where gambling remains a state monopoly, compliance takes a different form. Carl Fredrik Stenstrom, secretary-general of the Norwegian trade body NBO, says that “being the last-standing monopoly means the operator is under intense scrutiny. Even minor deviations are highlighted.” 

That scrutiny intensified after PwC’s 2025 audit of Norsk Tipping found “poor control and unclear leadership”, with excessive emphasis on innovation over quality assurance. For Stenstrom, the episode reveals that even monopolies are vulnerable to governance drift. “It’s very interesting that PwC issued such criticism for a monopoly company, which is supposed to just supply Norwegians with gambling products,” he notes. 

Trade bodies like NBO, he argues, are vital to maintaining accountability by providing a collective voice, engaging with politicians and communicating the industry’s perspective. He adds, too, that skilled regulators are essential. “Competent regulation ensures responsible and attractive markets.” Personal accountability for directors or turnover-linked penalties, he suggests, could complement strong institutional oversight. 

Reputational damage is another risk 

The financial cost of non-compliance is one thing, but reputational damage is another. Ellis warns: “When players, regulators or the public perceive repeated non-compliance, that can affect brand value and long-term profitability.” 

In markets such as the UK, where gambling advertising and social responsibility obligations are under constant political scrutiny, reputational harm can quickly translate into commercial risk, says Reed. “It is a huge reputational risk; we cannot portray the regulated industry as whiter than white and a safe place for people to play if the headlines continue to report huge fines as a result of failings,” she adds.  

The direction of travel, many agree, is toward data-driven, risk-based compliance. The UK’s ROCD system is a case study in how analytics can identify and mitigate risks. Similar approaches are emerging elsewhere: Sweden’s Spelinspektionen now ties fines to turnover, while the KSA in the Netherlands is experimenting with behaviour-based enforcement triggers. 

For operators, the challenge is to move to predictive oversight embedded in everyday operations. As Reed puts it: “The better operators understand the patterns regulators are monitoring, the better they can align their business practices and protect consumers – which benefits the industry as a whole.” 

The long game 

Looking ahead, Williams sees progress hinging on two fronts: “AML and social responsibility failings are often the same in not properly establishing a customer’s means or source of funds. But now there are far more mandatory limits, vulnerability checks and automated monitoring systems. Technology and machine learning have reduced human error, which was often the weak point.” 

He is skeptical about EU-wide harmonisation. “Each regulator wants its own rules. Harmonisation makes sense in principle, but in practice countries approach it differently.” 

Meanwhile, Blow believes enforcement has already peaked in Britain: between 2018 and 2023, annual enforcement cases ranged from 15 to 23; in 2024, they fell to around a dozen. “The market and the clarity of the regulatory regime have matured,” she says. “We may now see similar developments across Europe as other markets evolve.” 

Ellis adds that infrastructure will matter more than ever going forward. “Investment in compliance infrastructure would have the biggest impact on reducing non-compliance,” she says. “Unfortunately, this will be increasingly challenging if tax rates rise. Effective communication of expectations by regulators is also crucial.” 

Bjorn Fuchs argues for better balance: “The most effective lever for reducing recurring fines is a combination of strong accountability for operators and an effective dialogue between legislators, regulators and the industry.” 

After a decade of explosive growth and sporadic governance, Europe’s iGaming sector is learning that compliance must be built into the business model, hoping that compliance will shift from being a recurring headline to a quiet constant. Until then, the penalties – financial, operational, and reputational – will keep the conversation alive. 

From 2 December, residents in the following countries will be unable to place bets with William Hill; Angola, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Kenya, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Vietnam.

As explained on the William Hill website, any open bets will be settled as normal up to 2 December. Any bets due to be settled after that will be voided and refunded to accounts.

Customers will be able to log in to their accounts until 5 January to withdraw their funds.

From 6 January onwards, players’ login details will no longer work. To withdraw their remaining funds, they will have to contact the customer service team.

In 2022, Evoke licensed the 888 brand to the Africa-facing joint venture 888Africa for regulated online markets in the continent. Evoke retains a stake in the venture.

Ex-Paddy Power head of competitive intelligence Christopher Coyne serves as CEO of 888Africa, while former William Hill online manager director Andrew Lee holds the position of chief product officer.

Threat of retail closures in the UK

The withdrawal from these 13 markets comes after Evoke warned it could close up to 200 William Hill retail shops in the UK should the government increase gambling tax in the November budget, which is due next Wednesday.

Evoke is reportedly mulling the closure of up to 15% of its UK William Hill stores, with 1,500 jobs potentially being lost.

An Evoke spokesperson said: “As part of our ongoing planning, we are assessing the potential impact of different overall tax scenarios on our UK operations. This includes the difficult but necessary consideration for shop closures.

“We are mindful of potential tax increases in the forthcoming budget which would impact investment in the UK and drive more customers to the black market.”

Several weeks after Truth Social disclosed plans to launch Truth Predict, a new prediction market platform, a Senate committee grilled Michael Selig on the controversial topic Wednesday. Asked by Senator Elissa Slotkin, D–Michigan, how he will respond if Trump advised him to design a carveout for Truth Predict, Selig indicated that he plans to follow the letter of the law in the applications process.

Selig, who is Trump’s second pick to chair the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission, made the comments at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Crypto.com, which will partner with Trump Media on the platform, received CFTC approval in September to hold a designated contract market licence.

In response, Selig stated that he will always “uphold and stick to the law”, adding that if President Trump remains in compliance with requisite ethics rules and submits an application, he would go “through the same process as everyone else”.

If confirmed, Selig will become the seventh chairman of the CFTC since 2000. The CFTC was established through the Commodity Exchange Act, a 1936 federal law that regulates commodity and futures trading.

The committee narrowly approved Selig’s nomination on Thursday afternoon. Selig advanced by a 12-11 margin, on a vote along party lines. Brian Quintenz, Trump’s previous nominee, testified before the Senate over the summer, but the nomination did not advance out of committee.

Latest moves by sports betting market leaders

The committee held the confirmation hearing on the heels of announcements by the nation’s two largest sportsbooks that they will roll out sports prediction markets in select states. The impending launches by FanDuel and DraftKings could raise the temperature in a heated battle on states’ rights versus federalism in the regulation of sports event contracts.

Both companies outlined plans to debut prediction markets on recent earnings calls. Following its acquisition of Railbird Exchange, DraftKings said on 8 November that it plans to launch a prediction market offering in the coming months. Days later, Flutter announced that it will offer sports event contracts on its new prediction market site, FanDuel Predicts. The offering will be available through Flutter’s partnership with CME Group.

As traditional sportsbooks prepare for their leap into prediction markets, the operators have cut ties with the nation’s largest lobbying group for the gambling industry. Both companies announced Tuesday that they are leaving the American Gaming Association, a casino trade group that opposes the proliferation of prediction markets.

HoldCrunch founder Tom Johnson discussed the impact of the impending launches this week in a meeting with Truist Securities analyst Barry Jonas. Although the listings in non-sports betting states will put FanDuel and DraftKings on the map, Johnson views the competitive landscape as an “open playing field,” with established companies such as Kalshi.

Also this week, CME Group issued a memo detailing the launch of several sports event contracts. Pending CFTC regulatory review, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. plans to list contracts on pro football, college football and pro basketball starting 6 December.

CFTC nominee punts to the courts

Selig, who serves as the chief counsel of the SEC’s Crypto Task Force, is in favour of principles-based regulations that will protect consumers from fraud and manipulation. While the committee spent a large portion of the hearing seeking his views on the regulation of crypto spot markets, he fielded several questions on sports event contracts.

The most heated exchange occurred during a line of questioning from Sen. Adam Schiff, D–California. One rule, CFTC Regulation 40.11, prohibits event contracts that violate a so-called public interest test, including those pertaining to war, assassination, terrorism and gaming. However, advocates of sports event contracts have a differing view on the treatment of the contracts.

Josh Sterling, an attorney who has represented Kalshi, has argued that while the activities are enumerated in the act, they are not expressly “illegal”. Speaking at a gambling industry event in July, Sterling stated that the activities are subject to review on whether they are contrary to the public interest.

Schiff criticised the CFTC for its failure to issue guidance on whether sports event contracts violate existing regulations. He also pressed Selig on whether contracts that involve “gaming” are in violation of federal law.

“These are questions for the courts,” Selig replied. “They are really complicated issues of interpretation.”

Further discussion on sports event contracts

Schiff was not the only committee member to address the topic at the hearing. Several others, most notably Democratic Senators Cory Booker of New Jersey and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, broached the subject. When asked to expound on the legality of sports event contracts, Selig noted on at least six different occasions that he will defer to the courts on the matter.

Booker, a former football player, spent a portion of his time discussing the sports betting scandals that rocked the industry in the last month. He credited several regulated sportsbooks for detecting suspicious activity that led to a slew of criminal charges. “Given these recent events, it’s all the more concerning that sports event contracts are being offered without the same monitoring,” he said. Kalshi maintains a partnership with integrity monitor IC360.

Klobuchar, the committee’s ranking Democrat, asked Selig if the CFTC has ample resources to regulate the new markets. The nominee replied that if confirmed, he will take a close look at the agency’s resources to ensure that it has enough to fulfill its mission.

Dina Titus, a congresswoman from Nevada who co-chairs the Congressional Gaming Caucus, also weighed in. In a statement posted on X, Titus wrote:

“CFTC regulations clearly prohibit event contracts based on gaming, and as such, the agency must crack down on platforms that improperly offer event contracts on sport outcomes. Failure to enforce these rules not only infringes upon the rights of states and tribes but also undermines market integrity and consumer protection in the games the public enjoys.”

Vote on CFTC nominee Thursday

Truth Social, an alternative social media platform, is owned by Trump Media & Technology Group. Before returning to office for a second term as president, Trump insisted that he would not sell his stake in the company. While Trump initially held a 52% stake estimated to be worth at least $2.3 billion, the company issued new shares that diluted his stake to about 41.5%.

Trump’s refusal to divest his stake has been met with criticism among some leading ethics groups. Citizens For Responsibility & Ethics in Washington urged Trump to divest his shares following his 2024 victory, citing the influence foreign governments could exert through investments in the company. The president disclosed several stock transfers in Trump Media over the summer in a 234-page list of public financial disclosures with the US Office of Government Ethics.

Truth Social is on track to become the first social media platform to launch a predictions market. Trump Media did not respond to a request from iGB for comment.

Brazil has captured much of the gambling sector’s interest this year after regulation launched on 1 January, with a number of international giants entering the market.

One such company was Flutter, which created its new Flutter Brazil business after acquiring a 56% stake in NSX, the parent company of Brazil-facing brand Betnacional.

That deal was concluded in May and, in Q3, Flutter achieved $87 million in revenue from its Brazil venture. This was 412% higher than the $17 million it generated in the same quarter last year prior to the completion of the NSX deal, which largely came from its existing Betfair business.

But while Betnacional achieved record iGaming revenues in Q3, excluding M&A Flutter’s revenue during the quarter was actually down 18%, which Flutter attributed to the fact that Betfair Brazil was still continuing its recovery from the friction derived from the re-registration required at the start of regulation in January.

Despite the Betfair struggles, Flutter CEO Peter Jackson remains confident the company will succeed in Brazil.

“Brazil is an exciting growth opportunity for Flutter and we retain a strong conviction that scale operators with the best products will win the largest share of the market,” Jackson said in the Q3 report.

Entain hampered by poor sports margin

Entain, meanwhile, enjoyed a successful transition to the regulated market with its Sportingbet brand, reporting a 21% year-on-year NGR rise in Brazil during H1.

But Q3 was a different story, with NGR in Brazil down 11% despite 14% volume growth.

Entain deputy CEO and CFO Rob Wood put this down to “genuine bad luck from sports results”, stating the company is still trading on the right side of expectations when it comes to volume.

He expects sports margin to normalise over time, with the volume growth demonstrating why Flutter continues to be enthused about its future in Brazil.

It’s not just sports betting where Entain struggled during Q3, however, with Wood saying slow game authentication has hampered the company’s iGaming efforts in Brazil.

“iGaming is not particularly strong at the moment and all the growth is coming from sports,” Wood said on the earnings call. “We think this is a market-wide phenomenon, not just Entain.

“The good news is we think there’s a lot more growth to come out of gaming as we look forward. But so far in 2025, it’s been slow.”

BetMGM investing heavily in Brazil

Last August, MGM Resorts International struck a partnership with Grupo Globo, LatAm’s largest media group, to introduce the BetMGM brand to the Brazilian market as a joint venture.

The company has stated on a number of occasions that it is aiming to reach 10% market share in Brazil, and it reiterated this target in its Q3 presentation.

MGM achieved “strong growth” in Brazil during Q3 without giving direct figures. The company is focused on efficiently building brand awareness and customer acquisition, powered by its on-the-ground team led by MGM Brazil CEO Almir Ribeiro.

However, MGM Resorts International CFO Jonathan Halkyard said the company’s heavy investment in Brazil will likely lead to MGM Digital reaching an EBITDA loss of close to $100 million for the year.

Halkyard explained the company’s investment is in line with its roughly 50% stake in the JV, which is already showing positive signs.

“The venture has seen encouraging growth quarter-over-quarter throughout the year in active players, deposits and GGR,” Halkyard said on the company’s earnings call.

Record LatAm casino revenue for Betsson in Q3

Betsson continues to make significant efforts in LatAm, launching in Brazil and Paraguay during 2025 to add to its existing markets which include Argentina, Colombia and Peru.

It is proving a successful venture, with Betsson achieving year-on-year revenue growth of 10.2% to €76.5 million in LatAm over Q3.

This was powered by record casino revenue in the region, rising from €46.1 million in Q3 2024 to €56.6 million in the same period this year.

Casino growth helped to offset a year-on-year drop in sportsbook revenue from €23.1 million to €19.8 million. Betsson put this down to tough comparisons with last year’s Q3 which included the European Championship and Copa America football tournaments.

LatAm accounted for 26% of Betsson’s revenue in Q3, down from 28% in Q2.

Betsson CEO Pontus Lindwall pointed to Argentina, Peru and Colombia as key areas of focus, with the former continuing to show strong underlying growth in terms of deposits and turnover.

Codere Online positioned to become a leading player

Codere Online is currently operating in the LatAm markets of Mexico, Colombia and Panama, as well as certain provinces in Argentina.

Its current total addressable market (TAM) is €4.8 billion, although it noted in its Q3 presentation the combined TAM of online expansion markets, which includes Brazil, Peru and Uruguay, could be €8.4 billion by 2029.

In the presentation, the company said: “Codere Online is especially well positioned to become a leading player across the region.”

Mexico continues to be Codere Online’s biggest market, achieving market revenue of €26.8 million in Q3. This is ahead of the €22 million generated in its home market of Spain.

However, with Mexico’s government weighing up increasing the gambling tax rate from 30% to 50%, Codere Online said it may have to reconsider its investment into the market.

Outgoing CFO Oscar Iglesias, who will shortly be replaced by Marcus Arildsson, expects the tax to come in from 1 January.

“The discussions around capital allocation, I think, is a broader one, and it’s in the context of the discussions we’re having at the board level,” Iglesias told analysts.

“The tax obviously factors into … our appetite and willingness to invest into the market because it has an impact on the unit economics, the flow-through of every dollar of NGR to EBITDA in the business.  

“It’s still a little bit early to say what that means in terms of our plans for next year to invest in Mexico.” 

Codere Online is also working under the assumption that the 19% VAT in Colombia, which is set to end from the start of 2026, will be renewed.

Codere Online Executive Vice Chairman Moshe Edree explained the operator’s short- to mid-term strategy “does not include Colombia”, echoing CEO Aviv Sher’s post-Q2 comments that the company was pulling back in the market.

RSI confident Colombia VAT won’t be renewed

But while Codere Online is expecting the VAT to be renewed, Rush Street Interactive CEO Richard Schwartz said on the company’s post-Q3 earnings call that the business is predicting the tax will be scrapped.

Rush Street Interactive followed many other operators in absorbing the tax through player bonusing. This meant in Q3, while GGR from Colombia grew over 50%, net revenue was down 27%. Revenue across LatAm fell 11%.

Despite this, Rush Street Interactive believes it holds second place in Colombia, while it also claims to be among the top seven operators in Mexico.

Monthly active users in LatAm during Q3 were up 30% year-on-year to around 415,000.

Rush Street Interactive listed Brazil, Ecuador, Argentina and Chile as potential expansion opportunities.

When asked on the earnings call whether the situation in Colombia may dampen the company’s interest in further LatAm expansion, Schwartz responded by saying the company was still excited by the region.

“We believe those markets are at the infancy of growth,” Schwartz said. “And as we see in our growth ourselves, there’s lots of opportunity there, and it’s a very large population across Latin America that are in the process of or will be legalising online gaming in the future. So we certainly remain very excited for it.”

Kambi lowers FY2025 guidance due to slow Brazil progress

In its Q3 report, Kambi announced it was lowering its full-year 2025 guidance from an adjusted EBITDA of €20 million-€25 million to approximately €17 million.

The company said this was in part down to the Brazilian market developing more slowly than expected, with CFO David Kenyon stating the company isn’t seeing the growth in Brazil it had “hoped for”.

Kambi CEO Werner Becher said on the earnings call that while the Brazil market is continuously growing, he believes the overall pre-regulation market size was overstated.

“There’s a little bit of disappointment, I would say, in the entire industry about the Brazilian market,” Becher claimed.

“The legalised regulated market grew slower than expected because the black market is still very big there.”

The new voluntary code is not legislation and will not be legally binding for prize draws and competitions (PDCs) operators. It will also not replace existing regulations on issues such as consumer law, advertising and data protection.

In June, the government pledged to publish the code before the end of the current year. This was despite calls from some industry stakeholders, including the UK’s Lotteries Council, for the sector to be regulated. PDCs do not require a licence under the Gambling Act 2005, due to a free entry route option being offered.

There was some speculation that the Gambling Commission could oversee implementation of the code. However, the DCMS confirmed that it will assume responsibility for the code, including carrying out periodical reviews of its effectiveness.

PDC operators that want to sign up must implement the code within six months of it being published. The code was officially released on 20 November, meaning operators have until 20 May next year to adhere to guidance.

“All operator signatories agree to act in good faith in relation to the measures set out,” it said. “Other relevant signatories who are not operators but connected to the sector, such as web developers, agree to promote compliance with this code to the best of their abilities.”

Player protections a key part of voluntary code

Going into detail as to what the code sets out, a primary focus of the guidance is protection for players. It includes points for operators to follow to ensure they are effectively protecting people from potential harm.

These include only allowing users aged 18 and over to participate in PDCs. Operators should also monitor players’ behaviour for signs of harm and properly signpost users to approved help when harm is identified.

Players should have the option to set monthly spend limits – as low as £0 – while operators can also enforce their own spending limits on users. Credit card spending is permitted in some cases but up to a maximum of £250 per player each month. However, credit cards should not be allowed for instant win games.

Also specific to instant win draws, paid and free entry routes must be equivalent in terms of chance of winning. Operators should display clear information about how free entries work and ensure these draws not make up the majority of their total draws.

Users should be allowed to suspend their account for minimum of six months, a period in which they should not be sent any marketing messages. In addition, there must be a clear complaints process and dispute resolution for players to follows.

Additional market guidance comes with operators to comply with existing advertising codes, including both CAP and BCAP. PDC operators must also ensure their marketing is socially responsible and not target players under 18.

Transparency over prize draws

The code also emphasises the need for transparency with all prize draw and competitions in the UK. This includes operators setting out how each draw works and, where possible, the chance of winning.

Operators were also advised to ensure the prize allocation is fair and independently verified. There is, however, an exception for when a computer or random audited mechanism is used in the draw.

Focusing on the free entry route, operators should ensure this is clearly shown before players opt for a paid entry. The free route method must be no more costly or less convenient than paid entry and allow enough time for people to use it.

As for prize delivery, operators should commit to giving the prize advertised or a fair cash alternative. They must not reduce the prize value or cancel or modify draws due to low ticket sales.

In addition, if a donation is made to charity as part of the draw, operators should detail the amount, frequency and how that is calculated.

Operators should take accountability

The final part of the code refers to accountability. This include operators monitoring and reviewing compliance with the code and acting to fix issues, as well as ensuring that any third-party partners also abide by the code.

Operators will be encouraged to share best practices across the sector, including player protection and transparency. In addition, operators should publish on their websites the measures they have in place around these areas.

Finally, operators will be urged to work with the DCMS going forward after implementing the code. This, the DCMS said, will help amend, develop and evolve the code as time goes on.

Early support for the voluntary code

Despite having only just been published, the code has secured signatories from across the market. Among those to have backed the code are Omaze, Daymade, BOTB and Dream Car Giveaways, which was recently acquired by Jumbo Interactive.

Also signing on as a signatory was Elite Competitions, which has been running prize draws since 2016. Elite CEO Alex Beckett described it as a “major milestone” and said it will bring “complete confidence” to players.

“For the first time, prize draw operators have come together to set clear, consistent standards that protect players and build trust,” Beckett said. “By working closely and collaboratively with the DCMS, we have put transparency, fairness and integrity at the centre of how this sector moves forward.

“Players deserve complete confidence in how our draws are run, prizes are fulfilled and what safeguards exist to protect them. This new code gives them exactly that. Its clear rules mean players can check that the companies they play with are trustworthy.

“The code ensures they can take part in online prize draw competitions knowing that operators are being held to the same stringent standards.”

Lotteries Council repeats call for regulation

However, the Lotteries Council was not as welcoming of the code in its response. Chair George Collins repeated calls for the PDC sector be regulated and urged the government to reconsider its stance.

“Free prize draws continue to operate with no meaningful oversight, while society lotteries face strict limits, including a maximum prize of £500,000,” he said. “At the same time, commercial prize draws are still permitted to offer multi-million pound jackpots that were intended to be reserved for the National Lottery.

“This ongoing disparity undermines fair competition and threatens the revenue that charity lotteries and the National Lottery provide to good causes. We urge the government to monitor compliance with the code closely and to take further action to ensure a fair and consistent regulatory framework.”

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.

The GRA has a “broad and overarching scope” to oversee ship-based, land-based and online operations with the exception of lotteries and social games. It will govern licensing and taxation, manage revenue collection and standardise problem gambling safeguards.

“The regulator will also ensure that casinos operate according to rules and concerns about money laundering,” said Deputy Minister of Economic Development Anil Jayantha Fernando.

The launch effectively repeals the Betting on Horse Racing Ordinance, the Gaming Ordinance and the 2010 Casino Business Act.

Minister: No rapid expansion of gaming

A handful of land-based casinos now operate in Colombo, the commercial capital of Sri Lanka. In October 2024, a $1.2 billion integrated resort opened in the port city. Developed by John Keells Holdings and Melco Resorts and Entertainment, City of Dreams Sri Lanka offers a 16,725-square-metre gaming floor.

Melco Chairman and CEO Lawrence Ho has said Sri Lanka “can be to India what Macau is to China”.

However, Sri Lanka is not looking to rapidly expand its gaming industry or hand out additional licences, according to Fernando. “The focus is on regulation,” he said. “That regulation will define which gambling activities are permitted, the restrictions that apply and matters such as the revocation or cancellation of licences.”

New tax structure increases levy by 3%

The introduction of a sole independent regulator was accompanied by a higher tax rate. On 1 October, the Betting and Gambling Levy increased from 15% to 18%. The casino entry fee for Sri Lankan citizens doubled from $50 to $100.

Sri Lanka’s gaming sector is projected to generate $410 million by 2026, up from $240 million in 2020. Analysts predict a compound annual growth rate of 5.4% through 2031.

The House Industries and Professional Activities Subcommittee approved PCS for HB 189 Tuesday afternoon. HB 189 is a nearly 100-page gambling bill that would overhaul Florida’s gambling laws, including provisions related to match-fixing.

The proposal creates new felony offences tied to sports betting integrity, including betting with knowledge of a fixed result and bribery-related conduct. That includes felonies for anyone who conspires or promises a bribe to influence a game, anyone who accepts a bribe as part of a match-fixing scheme and anyone making a bet with knowledge of the bribe. Those newly proposed felonies come after the arrest of Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier last month as part of an FBI sports betting probe.

The subcommittee’s approval comes two months ahead of the start of Florida’s legislative session in January. The measure was referred to the Commerce Committee and the Criminal Justice Subcommittee.

Lawmakers discussed the bill little on Tuesday, and nationwide industry stakeholders were absent from the hearing. A variety of nonprofit organisations from the state, including the VFW, American Legion and Florida Moose Association, testified in opposition. However, they are in support of “getting illegal gaming out of the state” and hope for clear definitions of charitable gambling.

Rep Dana Trabulsy filed the bill and guided it through Tuesday’s hearing. She said she is willing to work with concerned parties and lawmakers to make it a stronger bill.

Florida fantasy sports defined

The gambling bill would regulate daily fantasy sports operators, which have operated in the grey market in Florida. It defines fantasy sports as a contest with an entry fee where a user controls a simulated sports team.

It includes language that outcomes cannot be based on individual performance and the contests cannot involve collegiate participants.

The Florida Attorney General’s Office sent cease-and-desist letters to Betr, PrizePicks and Underdog for offering prop-style games in 2024.

The Seminole tribe of Florida does not comment on proposed legislation but does support efforts to eliminate illegal gambling. The Seminoles hold sports betting exclusivity in the state through a state-tribal compact, in addition to operating Las Vegas-style resort casinos. FanDuel and DraftKings pumped nearly $40 million into a failed ballot initiative attempt to legalise commercial sports betting in 2022.

Along with its daily fantasy sports language, the bill cleans up portions of state law concerning live racing taxes and provides definitions for penalties for online gambling and illegal sports betting. A bill penalising operators outside of the tribal compact was shelved earlier this year.

The bill would also increase criminal penalties against illegal slot machines. Last week, Carl Herold, director of law enforcement for the Florida Gaming Control Commission, told a Florida House panel it needs more help. He said the existing misdemeanours are not enough for proper enforcement.

Following the failure of a provisional measure to increase the tax rate from 12% to 18%, new proposals were made in October to hike the current rate on gross gambling revenue to 24%.

An initial vote for the proposal was postponed earlier this month, prior to Tuesday’s meeting of the Economic Affairs Committee (CAE) also being pushed back.

Reportedly, Chamber of Deputies President Hugo Motta believed the bill did not have the required support to pass. He informed Senate chief Davi Alcolumbre of his intention to prevent the bill from going to a vote. This ultimately led to CAE president Renan Calheiros cancelling the meeting.

It is expected that negotiations over what the bill includes will continue with a vote potentially scheduled for next week.

The bill also contains a higher social contribution on net profit for fintechs and other financial institutions.

However, it could be a long process, with 172 amendments to PL 5,473/2025 having already been presented in the CAE.

If the bill is approved, it will head straight to the Chamber of Deputies unless there is an appeal for it to be voted upon in the Senate plenary.

Brazil government determined to hike gambling tax

With a general election coming up next year, the government, led by President Lula, seems set on increasing gambling taxes to meet its fiscal targets.

The government suffered a humiliating defeat when its provisional measure to raise the gambling tax by 50% failed.

Brazilian iGaming analyst Elvis Lourenço has told iGB this has led to desperate continued attempts to raise the tax rate.

“That’s the main reason that they struck back so fast, because it was embarrassing for them,” Lourenço, managing partner of EX7 Partners, told iGB in October.

“This becomes an election agenda, because this is good for the audience and the public to get votes because we are a conservative country in some ways. So, to put this on their agenda, ‘we increase the taxes of the billionaires, of the gambling world’, it is good for the speech of the actual government.”

Lourenço believes doubling the current tax rate would be an “insane” move that could risk a collapse of the regulated market, which only launched on 1 January this year.

Codere Online reported its Q3 earnings on Monday. It said net gaming revenue for the period had dropped slightly to €51.6 million from the €51.7 million reported last year. 

Adjusted EBITDA for Q3 was up €2.9 million or 93.3% compared to €1.5 million last year, with Codere Online reiterating its full-year NGR guidance of between €220 million-€230 million and adjusted EBITDA of €10 million-€15 million. 

The company’s NGR in Mexico was €26.8 million, a 0.4% year-on-year rise. Codere Online CEO Aviv Sher noted revenue had been flat in Mexico despite a 5% devaluation of the peso and a consistently low sports betting margin. 

However, Mexico is in the process of increasing its tax rate on gambling from 30% to 50%, as part of the government’s 2026 budget. 

The hike hasn’t yet been approved, but CFO Oscar Iglesias, who will shortly be replaced by Marcus Arildsson, expects it to come into effect from 1 January. 

“The discussions around capital allocation, I think, is a broader one, and it’s in the context of the discussions we’re having at the board level,” he told analysts during the earnings call, in response to questions on its position in the market.  

“The tax obviously factors into that in terms of our appetite and willingness to invest into the market because it has an impact on the unit economics, the flow-through of every dollar of NGR to EBITDA in the business.  

“It’s still a little bit early to say what that means in terms of our plans for next year to invest in Mexico.” 

Mexico government targeting the wrong side of legality 

Mexico continues to be Codere Online’s biggest market, with its €26.8 million in Q3 revenue ahead of the €22 million achieved in its home market of Spain. 

Its monthly active players in Mexico soared by 39% to approximately 88,300, compared to 50,200 in Spain. 

Elsewhere, Codere Online is working with the Mexican government to highlight the prevalence of the black market in the country.  

Iglesias said the government should be looking to bring illegal operators onshore as a source of additional revenue. 

“Directionally, obviously, a tax increase is not good,” Iglesias explained. “We always are looking for governments to look to increase compliance with anyone operating offshore or operating in the grey or black markets. That’s the first place we prefer for governments to look for additional revenues.  

“We are partnered with the Mexican government. We are partnered with governments in every market in which we operate, and we are going to find a way through this and continue to be confident that the Mexican market is going to be a winner for us over the short, medium and long term.” 

Tax rise might ease competitive landscape in Mexico 

Iglesias did note the incoming tax increase could dampen the competitive landscape in Mexico, perhaps benefitting well-established players such as Codere Online. 

“While it is difficult to know how other operators will react, we are expecting that this tax increase may have a chilling effect on both new market entrants in regards to their appetite for further investment in the Mexican market and on those not yet operating in Mexico, but with near or medium-term plans or ambitions to enter the market,” Iglesias said.  

“It is difficult to quantify the impact of that chilling effect, [but] we would at least directionally expect a more benign competitive landscape in Mexico going forward, which we believe will be to our and other incumbents’ benefit.” 

Codere Online five-year strategy does not include Colombia 

In the company’s Q1 results, Codere Online said it was pulling back in Colombia because of the 19% temporary VAT. Sher reiterated this strategic change on the business’ post-Q2 earnings call. 

The VAT is set to come to an end from the start of 2026, but the company is working under the assumption it will either be renewed or made permanent. 

Speaking on the Monday call, Codere Online executive vice-chairman Moshe Edree said the operator’s short to mid-term strategy “does not include Colombia”.  

“We just monetise it as it is. So we’re not going to invest any further unless the tax will change,” he said.  

Iglesias added more colour: “We continue operating under the assumption that this will continue, that this will get legislated in a more permanent way.  

“That said, that may not necessarily be the case. If it’s not the case, then we will rethink what it is we want to do. Obviously, that’s a game changer and fixes the primary problem in Colombia, which is the unit economics are not good in the context of a tax on customer deposits. It is a situation we’re monitoring. 

“As things stand today, it’s a tough market for us to find a way forward that makes sense for us.” 

On Friday US District Court of Nevada Judge Andrew Gordon said he is leaning toward reversing his initial decision, given in April, when he granted Kalshi a preliminary injunction against Nevada’s enforcement of gambling laws. Gordon reserved judgment after a hearing and expects to issue a written ruling within two weeks.

“We’re always happy to be heard in court and take the judge’s instruction to confer with the state seriously,” a Kalshi spokesperson said in a statement. “In the meantime, we will continue to operate our national exchange in compliance with federal law.”

Kalshi sued Nevada gaming regulators in March after receiving a cease-and-desist letter directing it to stop offering unlicensed gambling. The prediction markets operator argues it is federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and should not be bound by the state order. Kalshi contends the event contracts it offers are derivatives and are recognised financial tools.

Following Gordon’s initial Kalshi decision, he did not grant a similar injunction to Crypto.com in October. During Friday’s hearing, he questioned whether some of Kalshi’s products, largely sports event trades, qualify as derivatives.

“It seems like your definition is so broad that pretty much anything can become a swap, anything can have a financial consequence,” Gordon said, per Bloomberg. “Nobody thought sports bets were commodities or excluded commodities or swaps until some brilliant people at Kalshi.”

Kalshi will likely appeal any decision against it, and multiple industry sources expect the legal battle between state regulators and prediction markets to head to the US Supreme Court.

Prediction markets lawsuits abound

Friday’s hearing came after Kalshi notched a significant win in California last week. A judge denied a motion from three tribes requesting that Kalshi be prevented from operating on tribal lands. The judge said because Kalshi is regulated through the CFTC, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act applies, and the markets do not qualify as bets and therefore do not violate the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.

Following Gordon’s initial decision in April, a New Jersey judge also granted Kalshi a preliminary injunction to prevent state regulatory enforcement. Since then, 34 state attorneys general sent a brief to support New Jersey’s case.

In Maryland, a judge denied Kalshi’s request for an injunction against the state regulator.

There are also pending lawsuits in other jurisdictions, including Massachusetts, New York and Ohio. Last week, 22 Native American tribes, including the Seminole Tribe of Florida, sent a brief in support of Ohio.

Suffolk County Superior Court in Massachusetts will hold a hearing on 9 December to hear that state’s motion for a preliminary injunction against Kalshi.

Multiple other states have also sent cease-and-desist letters to Kalshi, including Arizona, Illinois and Montana.

As commercial sportsbook operators look to launch prediction markets products, including DraftKings and FanDuel, states have also begun to warn them their licences might be at risk if they offer sports event trades. Last week, FanDuel and DraftKings surrendered licences and withdrew applications for sports betting in Nevada.

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.

Acquisitions, aggressive expansion into retail betting and a determination to navigate Germany’s highly complex regulatory framework have turned it into one of the country’s most ambitious emerging challengers. 

Under the direction of 54-year-old CEO Pierre Hofer, who has been on the board since 2010, the company is accelerating a wave of consolidation that is reshaping the German betting landscape. 

The major acquisition by Pferdewetten AG subsidiary NetX Betting of the HappyBet franchise from Playtech, as part of the latter’s B2C exit, marked a major pivot for Pferdewetten.de AG. The deal was announced in late May and includes approximately 600 hardware units, such as betting terminals and POS systems. The main strategy is a simple question of gaining market share, explains Hofer to iGB. 

“We knew we could make the shops perform better with our product, improving revenues for franchisees. Playtech also wanted a fast and simple deal,” he says. But for Pferdewetten.de AG, it is only the beginning. A joint venture with Bet3000, another retail heavyweight, is already under way. 

“This [next] deal is actually five to six times bigger than the HappyBet deal. They will switch to our licence. Contracts are ready to sign and several dozen shops are already in the process of switching.” 

And yet another deal is on the horizon, Hofer says. He reveals that his company is in talks with another important player. “But I cannot talk about it for now. It’s consolidation.” He insists an announcement is imminent. 

Reshaping the German betting landscape 

For a company long in the shadow of national giants such as Tipico, the prospect of a sudden leap in scale is dramatic. Hofer admits that the past year has been transformational: “We have seen more or less every single part of a life with ups and downs,” he says. Yet the ups increasingly outweigh the downs. 

Pferdewetten.de AG began modestly during the early days of online betting. In its formative years, it offered general sports betting – until a lack of regulation forced a retreat. “Because we didn’t have a law or regulation for sports betting, management decided to pull out of the sports betting market and focus on horse racing,” says Hofer.

It was a fateful decision. Rivals pressed on in the regulatory grey zone, eventually becoming today’s industry giants, Hofer remarks. Pferdewetten.de AG remained a niche business, profitable but limited by the scale of Germany’s horse racing market. 

The pivot back to sports betting came only in 2018, facilitated by the acquisition of the Sportwetten.de domain (sportswetten means sports betting). “ It’s more or less the best domain you can have in the German market,” Hofer says.

Revenues from the racing business financed the relaunch. “We took positive results and cash from the horse racing business and invested them into the sportsbook in Germany,” he says. The firm grew cautiously, “in line with predictions”, while biding its time for a larger opportunity. 

That opportunity arrived in 2021. “The entire team of a leading sports betting operator in Germany – offering land-based shop betting and online betting – was looking for a new home. They had major discussions with the owner and decided to split,” Hofer explains. The move signalled turbulence among competitors – several foreign firms were shrinking their German exposure or withdrawing outright as compliance pressures mounted. Yet Pferdewetten.de began amassing talent, technology and shop expertise. 

The company’s business model shifted too. “We transformed from a stable, ‘boring’ horse racing operator into a sports betting startup, investing heavily. We moved from paying dividends to issuing capital increases and convertible bonds,” Hofer notes – a clear signal to investors Pferdewetten.de was preparing to scale. 

HappyBet: The deal that set the pace 

The next turning point was the aforementioned acquisition of HappyBet. Following Flutter’s purchase of Snaitech, the German HappyBet business was left in limbo and with Playtech, eager to complete its B2C exit, it sought a buyer. Hofer moved quickly. 

“Around a year ago, we started negotiating with Snaitech and Playtech to get hold of these franchise shops,” he recounts. The final agreement brought over a substantial portion of the HappyBet retail estate – along with the Maltese HQ, employees and several hundred betting terminals. Compatibility with Pferdewetten.de’s systems was a lucky bonus. “Our supplier is the same, so terminals are 100% compatible without major investments,” Hofer applauds.

HappyBet’s steady decline meant the portfolio required selective pruning. “There were maybe 90–95 shops available. We didn’t want around 30–35 of them – too small,” Hofer says. Even so, the remainder represents meaningful scale: “Yes, as expected, we are integrating a mid-double-digit number of shops.”

Pferdewetten.de wants to be number two behind Tipico

Perhaps it is the next chapter that signals a more profound shift. Alongside HappyBet, Pferdewetten.de is finalising a joint venture with Bet3000, one of Germany’s most recognised retail operators. Hofer outlines the scale: “They run 68 owned shops and 120 franchise shops.” 

Contracts are “ready to sign”, he says, with several dozen shops already migrating. If executed as outlined, the group could operate approximately 400 shops by mid next year – a remarkable escalation for a company that entered the retail market only in 2022. 

And then comes the tantalising hint of the new as-of-yet unannounced deal. The implication is clear: Pferdewetten.de is lining up a third acquisition, potentially larger than HappyBet, in a market where weaker operators are seeking exits. 

Hofer’s ambition is now explicit: “Three or four years ago, there were 11 players in the retail market. Now we are down to six. The Bet3000 deal will make it five. Another deal may make it four. Our goal is to become number two in the market – after Tipico – within four years of operations.” Tipico has a current market share of around 50%. 

For a company that once abandoned sports betting entirely, the target is bold. And Hofer’s enthusiasm suggests that he sees consolidation not as opportunism, but as a once-in-a-generation chance to model Pferdewetten.de AG’s trajectory. 

Germany’s regulatory knot 

The obstacle, as always, is regulation. Since the introduction of the Interstate Treaty on Gambling in 2021, Germany has imposed strict monthly deposit limits which narrow product offerings and require heavy compliance reporting. 

Hofer is blunt about the challenges. “Deposit limits make things complicated. It’s overregulated,” he says. He points to the flood of offshore competition. “There are more than 430 illegal betting platforms targeting Germany.” With restricted odds and capped deposits, “many high-volume customers go to illegal platforms. The online casino market is hit very hard.” 

Even fully compliant operators pay a steep price. “Compliance costs are huge – seven digits per year,” he says. “Last quarter alone we spent €300,000 on lawyers and consultants, excluding employees.”

He hopes that next year’s planned update to the treaty may ease restrictions. “Authorities believed they had 95% channelisation – this was unrealistic,” Hofer says. In reality, “the market appears to shrink but actually grows underground.” 

On whether regulation will improve, his answer is measured: “We hope so. Authorities are slow, but starting to understand reality.” 

Performance and prospects 

Despite regulatory pressures, the company’s underlying business is strengthening. “Third-quarter numbers were presented today — we didn’t expect to disappoint. We are at more or less break-even now,”  Hofer notes, adding that next year it should deliver “record EBIT”. 

Growth has been helped by a broadening retail base and a strong sportsbook product built specifically for domestic preferences. “We focus on the German market nationwide – from Munich to Hamburg to Berlin,” he says. 

There is tentative expansion abroad. The company also operates in Denmark under JackpotBet.dk, licensed for sports betting and casino, and maintains a small presence in Austria. But Germany remains the overwhelming priority. 

Asked whether the model is sustainable amid regulatory change, Hofer replies: “Yes, definitely for the next few years. Regulation can change, but we don’t expect it to get worse.” 

The company that in 2007 stepped back from sports betting now stands on the verge of becoming Germany’s second-largest retail operator. In one of Europe’s strictest markets, Pferdewetten.de AG is betting not on luck, but on timing – and on the sudden availability of competitors’ assets. 

If Hofer’s instincts prove correct, the horse racing specialist may soon find itself racing among giants. 

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.

Members of the Federation of State Gaming Regulators of Nigeria (FSGRN) and the CEO of Enugu State Gaming and Lotto Commission Prince Arinze Arum lauded the steps taken to implement global best market practices across the country. Prominent among them is positioning Nigeria’s state regulators at the forefront of global gaming regulations.  

Speaking to iGB on 13 November, Arinze notes the initiative would steer Nigeria’s iGaming operations in the right direction if well implemented. “This structured exchange of knowledge programme is indeed commendable and reflects the forward-thinking posture of the FSGRN,” he says.  

“As a member of the association, the Enugu State Gaming and Lotto Commission is fully aligned with the spirit and objectives of the collaboration with GESPA. We are, however, still awaiting the full details of the arrangement and how its outcomes will be domesticated across the various state commissions.  

“That said,” he continues, “the concept itself is a strong signal that Nigeria’s regulators are serious about deepening global cooperation, improving regulatory capacity and embedding best practices in consumer protection and responsible gaming. 

“This kind of partnership ultimately benefits operators, too, by creating a more credible, transparent and trustworthy environment for iGaming in Nigeria. I fully believe it is a step in the right direction, and one we look forward to seeing fully implemented.” 

The current state of Nigeria’s iGaming regulations  

When quizzed on whether he feels the regulations in Nigeria are closely mirroring global standards and the industry’s best practices today, Arinze agrees that progress is being made. Arum believes that, with time, other countries from around the continent could emulate them.  

“I would say that Nigeria’s regulators have made significant progress in aligning with international standards,” he adds. “The last few years have seen a deliberate shift towards harmonisation, where regulatory frameworks have not only been consistent across states but have been benchmarked against the principles of integrity, fairness and player protection that define modern gaming oversight.”

Arum believes Enugu and Lagos have implemented policies which increasingly mirror those in mature jurisdictions such as the UK, Malta and other parts of Europe.  

Putting things into a wider context, he says the state regulator’s focus is on robust licensing, digital transparency, responsible gaming frameworks and effective tax compliance.  

“Given this trajectory, I believe other African markets will soon begin to emulate Nigeria’s approach. Our country is already becoming a reference point for structured gaming regulation in sub-Saharan Africa, showing that with the right policy leadership, local markets can achieve both investor confidence and consumer trust.” 

Enugu state to boost foreign investor confidence

Arum says the commission is working around the clock to roll out and strengthen initiatives that will significantly improve market standards and boost investment confidence in and around the state.  

“At the Enugu State Gaming and Lotto Commission we are prioritising reforms that make our market more transparent, investor-friendly and socially responsible,” he said before going on to explain these initiatives.  

The first initiative is to strengthen regulatory technology infrastructure to ensure real-time monitoring of operators’ activities. This will help improve compliance and enhance data integrity and consumer protection. 

Second is a responsible gaming and legal education framework that engages agents, operators and players. The aim is to make gaming literacy a shared responsibility, “because a well-informed market is a safer market”, Arum says.

An additional project with the state government is seeking to create an investment facilitation window, which will streamline approvals and reduce bureaucratic friction for legitimate investors who want to establish themselves in Enugu.  

These initiatives will be designed to position Enugu as one of the most progressive, transparent and technology-driven gaming jurisdictions in Nigeria.

Can a centralised regulatory framework work in Africa?

Many recent conferences in Africa have revolved around the continent centralising gaming regulations. This move would allow operators licensed within a specific regulatory framework to do business around the continent with fewer hitches.  

Arinze feels it is a progressive idea but, in a practical sense, different cultural perceptions of gaming as well as varied legal systems make it a difficult thing to implement.  

“You see, in principle, regional harmonisation is an attractive idea. It speaks to efficiency, integration and the growth of Africa’s gaming economy,” Arum notes. 

“However, in practical terms, achieving a single cross-border regulatory framework for gaming in Africa is a much more complex proposition. Each country currently operates under distinct legal systems, taxation models and cultural perceptions of gaming. These differences shape how each regulator defines responsible gaming, determines suitability criteria and enforces compliance.” 

The idea of an operator licensed in Nigeria seamlessly being able to operate in Ghana sounds progressive. However, it would require a deep level of policy coordination, mutual recognition of standards, and political will across jurisdictions. Arinze recognises some of the necessary elements for this are not yet fully in place. 

“I believe that gradual collaboration is the way forward,” he concludes. “We can start with bilateral or sub-regional agreements on information sharing, AML compliance and responsible gaming standards. Over time, these can build the foundation for broader harmonisation.  

“While I’m optimistic about greater regional cooperation, I would say that full cross-border operational harmonisation will remain an aspiration which won’t be achieved overnight.” 

The developments highlight both the legal complexity and rapid evolution of event-trading markets across the United States.

This week, the US District Court for the Northern District of California denied a motion from three tribes to prohibit Kalshi from operating on tribal lands in the Golden State. The Blue Lake Rancheria, Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians and Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians filed the lawsuit against Kalshi in July, arguing its offerings on tribal land violate the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Tribes have Class III gambling exclusivity in California.

The ruling states because Kalshi is federally regulated through the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act applies to Kalshi and its “internet contracts are not bets or wagers under the UIGEA and therefore do not constitute ‘unlawful internet gambling’ even if the contracts are received, placed or transmitted from persons on Indian lands where internet gambling is illegal.”

“The court does not take lightly plaintiffs’ concerns about the effects Kalshi’s activities might have on tribal sovereignty and the tribes’ finances,” the ruling reads. “Indeed, by self-certifying the legality of its event contracts in a way that insulates its activities from judicial review, Kalshi may have found a way around prohibitions on interstate gambling that were created with the tribes’ best interest in mind.

“But, on the record currently before the court, and in light of the Commodity Exchange Act’s self-certification process, plaintiffs have not met their burden of showing a likelihood of success on their IGRA claim.”

Prediction markets in court across US

California is not the only state with tribal gaming interests looking to stop Kalshi offerings on tribal land, as Wisconsin’s Ho-Chunk Nation also filed a lawsuit against the prediction markets operator.

Kalshi is in multiple court battles across the US in states where regulators argue it is offering gambling without appropriate licensure. In New Jersey and Nevada, Kalshi received initial injunctions to prevent regulatory enforcement. In Maryland, a judge denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction. Those cases are under appeal.

Meanwhile there are also court cases in Massachusetts, New York and Ohio. Other states, including Arizona, Illinois and Montana, sent cease-and-desist letters to Kalshi. Also, 34 state attorneys general filed a brief supporting New Jersey’s court case.

Trading platforms including Robinhood and Crypto.com are also facing legal challenges about their prediction markets offerings. Crypto.com recently pulled out of Nevada amid an ongoing lawsuit with the Nevada Gaming Control Board. In Massachusetts, a judge ruled Robinhood cannot block the state’s gambling enforcement.

PrizePicks launches event trading product

On Friday, daily fantasy sports operator PrizePicks announced it is live in 38 states with prediction markets through a multi-year partnership with Kalshi. The DFS company agreed to sell to international gaming giant Allwyn last month in a $1.6 billion deal.

The offering comes through PrizePicks subsidiary Performance Predictions II, a federally approved Futures Commission Merchant. An FCM registration allows PrizePicks to offer prediction market contracts approved by the CFTC.

“Expanding into prediction markets delivers on what our customers want, innovative products with more ways to play,” PrizePicks CEO Mike Ybarra said in a release. “Together with Kalshi, we will welcome new customers across many states to the PrizePicks experience, and we couldn’t be more excited about the opportunity ahead in this fast-growing space.”

Earlier this week, PrizePicks announced a partnership with prediction market competitor Polymarket. Polymarket’s full reentry into the US was delayed by the government shutdown, but the partnership remains in place and PrizePicks will offer markets from multiple exchanges.

Customers will be able to trade on sports, entertainment and pop culture on the PrizePicks app through Kalshi’s library of offerings.

PrizePicks is not alone in its foray into prediction markets products. Underdog, which like PrizePicks started as a daily fantasy sports operator, also recently launched prediction market offerings. Underdog has also launched a sports betting product.

Despite multiple states warning sportsbooks that offering prediction markets might affect their licences, market-leading sports betting operators FanDuel and DraftKings are both readying launches of event trading platforms.

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. 

“As a group, we’re deliberately shifting away from that short-term cash mindset,” Falzon tells iGB.  

She says the company is leaning on its “truly unique” technology platform to drive its new strategy.  

“It’s highly agile, allowing us to enter new markets quickly and deliver exactly what customers want,” Falzon tells iGB. “We believe that, combined with our ecosystem of live studio, slots and aggregation products, this agility gives us a strong advantage.  

“In the regulated space, this means we can move faster than competitors, adapt to local requirements efficiently and provide a superior, compliant experience for players.” 

In September, Yolo announced it would incorporate its Sportsbet and Bitcasino brands into the single Yolo.com brand, which it would utilise to target Tier-1 regulated markets. 

Yolo has already secured two gaming-related vendor licences for its Hub88 Holdings and Live Online Gaming Services subsidiaries in the UAE. These licences will allow Yolo to supply iGaming content to the regulated market in the UAE.

With Yolo having enjoyed a hugely successful period as an unregulated operator, the move away from grey markets raised questions over how exactly the company would manage this seismic shift. 

Shift from quick-buck mentality 

In its announcement the company said it had a responsibility to bring the crypto casino experience to regulated domestic markets. 

This has necessitated a cultural shift for Yolo, and Falzon describes the strategy change to one of heavy regulatory compliance as “by far the biggest hurdle”. 

“In terms of changes, I think the biggest one is mentality,” Falzon explains. “I’m not saying we’re done yet.  

“Historically, our business has operated at a pace of speed, speed, speed – let’s get the money, let’s move fast. But when you’re dealing with regulators, it’s a completely different world. 

“There’s a lot of paperwork, processes and procedures that we have had to implement. It requires patience and discipline, and it changes how people think – some initially resist because it doesn’t feel immediately revenue-generating. But that’s part of the regulated environment and embracing it has been a major shift for us.” 

A long-term financial outlook for Yolo Group

Falzon raises an interesting point on margins, with iGaming and sports consultant Stefan Kovach previously telling iGB that Yolo’s strategy change could “significantly impact” its profitability, at least in the short term. 

But this is something Yolo is well aware of, says Falzon, and it has formed a large part of its strategy.

“I believe it’s about more than just margins – it’s really instant cash versus long-term valuation,” she adds. “It’s the million-dollar question that many business owners ask themselves: do you prioritise immediate cash and dividends, or focus on building sustainable, long-term value?  

“We’d rather invest in creating a robust, high-value proposition that positions Yolo for growth, stability and leadership in regulated markets over the long term.” 

Will Yolo Group face increased scrutiny from regulators? 

In the announcement of its plans, Yolo acknowledged domestic regulators “are not keen” on operators continuing activities in other pre-regulated markets. 

Elizabeth Dunn, partner at UK law firm Bird & Bird, suggested Yolo’s previous position as a grey-market crypto operator could raise concerns among Tier-1 regulators. 

“Regulators in most Tier-1 markets continue to struggle with the idea of operators directly accepting cryptocurrencies and/or being funded through cryptocurrencies,” Dunn previously told iGB. 

“Yolo’s history as a crypto-first operator is, therefore, likely to come under scrutiny when regulators are assessing its suitability to hold a licence.” 

But while Falzon emphasises the strategy change hasn’t been an “easy ride”, Yolo’s collaboration with regulators has made the transition smoother. 

“I believe proactive engagement, transparency and collaboration is paramount,” Falzon says. “We are not shy of our crypto origins; it defines who we are. However, at the same time, we want to collaborate closely with regulators, educating them about our platform while learning about their concerns.  

“By working together as a team, we can find a middle ground that ensures player protection, transparency and compliance, while allowing our technology and ecosystem to deliver the best possible experience for our players.” 

This week, UK Gambling Commission CEO Andrew Rhodes warned the government cannot ignore crypto gambling.

However, he stopped short of saying the UK could soon issue licences for crypto-based betting, instead stating the government must take steps to regulate the activity.

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.

“That is a challenge that probably didn’t really exist a few years ago, or not at this level,” he said during his “CEO Briefing 2025” speech this week. “What I thought was a five-year-away problem, perhaps a year or two ago, I think is now an 18-months-to-two-years challenge.”

Rhodes addressed several issues facing both the regulator and the market in general, with crypto gambling among the areas of focus for the commission.

He said growth in cryptocurrency use among younger demographics has led to a “pressure building” within the system. Rhodes added that in years to come, a “significant cohort” of consumers will use crypto regularly as this is what they will have become accustomed to.

As to the impact on gambling, Rhodes said it could serve as a demographic shift, whereby these consumers “have no place in legitimate industry because of the currency they use”. As such, he said action needs to be taken now to prevent such issues in the future.

No plans for Gambling Commission to license crypto

Despite such concerns, Rhodes stopped short of suggesting licences could soon be issued for crypto-based gambling. He said the government must first take steps to regulate such activity, with the commission’s role to enforce laws being set in Parliament.  

“This is going to have to be government-level discussion,” he said. “It is a government-level decision because once you open that door, you cannot close it.

“It brings questions around are you considering crypto as a source of wealth? Are you considering that as a source of funds? What conditions would you put in place? What are the risks and how do we manage that?

“But the reality is, and this growth in those demographics means, I don’t think governments can ignore that pattern. And it’s good to see the Financial Conduct Authority are doing a lot of work in looking at how we might create a regime for this.”

Rhodes flags concerns over funding for commission

Rhodes also used the speech to set out other issues for the regulator moving forward. These included a concern over funding for the commission and an overdue fees review.

The commission is funded solely by fees and does not receive any taxpayer funds. However, its fees are not linked to inflation or uprating, meaning the funds agreed during the last review may not be in line with current spending requirements.

A review is due every five to seven years and was scheduled to take place in 2024, in line with the far-reaching white paper. However, with this having been pushed to the end of 2025, Rhodes has aired his concerns over the funding of certain measures in the interim period. He warned that the regulator’s funds could be exhausted by mid-2026.

“This does mean the extra investments we have made in areas like illegal gambling, criminal investigations and data capabilities, among other areas, are not funded beyond the middle of next year, as they have been funded from our excess reserves built up in 2021-22, which will now be exhausted,” he said.

“Just as there is a very active debate about taxation and the sector at the moment, there is also a very active debate about the role of regulators and ‘arm’s length bodies’ and to what extent we stand between you and growth and to what extent we ensure a level playing field, which will no doubt be a consideration for the government as it considers the commission’s future programme,” Rhodes told sector representatives.

“Our programme over the next year is to continue this work as much as we possibly can, while we await an outcome from the pending fees review.”

Gambling Commission remains committed to tackling illegal gambling

Despite these concerns, Rhodes was steadfast in his praise of the regulator. He set out the commission’s ongoing work to counter illegal gambling in the UK and the work the regulator has done to block unlicensed operators.

During the financial year-to-date, the commission has issued 480 cease-and-desist notices to advertisers and operators. It has also reported 188,297 URLs to various search engines and seen 104,192 URLs removed as a result.

Meanwhile, some 659 websites were referred to search engines for delisting. In addition, the commission has disrupted 504 websites so that they have either been taken down or geo-blocked in the UK.

“We’ve been extremely active in this space and in talking to a huge number of regulators around the world we haven’t found any that have invested in the way that we have,” Rhodes said.

“Nonetheless, for the avoidance of doubt, because every time I give a speech, there are people who will pore over it and feel the need to tweet about it, we have been extremely active in this space. But we know we don’t have coverage of all the risks that are out there.”

On Monday, the SPA published Normative Ordinance No 2,579 and Normative Instruction No 31, which will reinforce its policies of protecting bettors and promoting responsible gambling.

The centralised self-exclusion platform, which has been developed by the Federal Data Processing Service, is expected to be available by the end of 2025.

The measure will allow bettors to voluntarily request the blocking of their registration to betting platforms, with the tool available either for application to specific operators, or as an all-encompassing version which will cover all federally licensed betting platforms.

This can either be for a fixed term or indefinitely.

Additionally, operators will have to implement mandatory self-limits on time and wagering amounts at the time of registration.

These new measures align with the SPA’s 2025-26 regulatory agenda, which it laid out in April, with the regulator stating at the time the implementation of a national platform for players to self-exclude was the “most important” item.

SPA chief Regis Dudena reiterated the protection of players was the regulator’s chief concern and he expects the self-exclusion scheme will prove to be successful.

“We are giving people the possibility to decide whether they want to temporarily restrict their exposure to betting, in a centralised and secure way, including reducing their access to advertising,” Dudena said. “This is a step forward that puts Brazil in a leading position in the world in caring for our population.”

Brazil operators given 30 days to adjust to self-exclusion requirements

The measures will mandate operators to verify a user’s status in the centralised self-exclusion database through Sigap, Brazil’s betting management system, using players’ Individual Taxpayer Registration (CPF) numbers.

This must be done at account registration, at first login each day and every 15 days for all active users.

Operators must immediately block new bets of users marked “Blocked – Centralised Self-Exclusion” and close their account within three days from the date of the query.

Operators should refund any remaining funds or value of open bets to bettors within two days, with the record of the communication maintained for at least five years.

It will be forbidden for operators to carry out active communication, targeted advertising or direct notifications to users to inform them of the possibility of readmission to the betting system.

Within 30 days of Monday’s publication of the new measures, operators must integrate with the centralised self-exclusion system.

A 90-day period has been granted for operators to adapt their betting systems, implement the self-limit tools and update their registration forms.

The self-limit tools will allow bettors to set daily, weekly or monthly betting limits, either on time spent or amount wagered. Users can choose to receive program alerts or usage blocks according to the time elapsed in their betting session.

Bettors can also pause their accounts temporarily. They will still have access to their accounts but will be unable to place bets.

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 combination will, on paper, create a €6.4 billion-revenue European champion, according to Banijay’s own pro forma figures. But the significance of the transaction lies less in its scale than in what it reveals about the industry’s direction of travel.  

“This deal represents a significant convergence of the media and gambling industries. It combines entertainment content with sports betting,” says Gabriele Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst, senior associate at CMS Germany.   

The deal, he says, also reflects the trend of vertical integration, whereby content producers leverage their media assets to boost customer engagement and stand out in highly competitive betting markets. 

It signals a shift towards cross-media ecosystems in the European gambling industry and a clear strategy for Tier 1 operators towards continued consolidation in heavily regulated European markets.

Banijay-Tipico’s combination proves entertainment, data and gaming are beginning to interact and integrated digital experiences could become more common.

Last week on Banijay’s Q3 earnings call, CEO François Riahi dismissed analyst suggestions the group could go all-in on gaming and look to wind down its media business. “The Tipico acquisition was a very major event for us and we stick to our strategy here for growth in gaming,” he told analysts.

“However, we also believe that we have very positive opportunities on the content side. So no, we don’t have any plans to sell this division.”

Banijay-Tipico: A strategic marriage 

Banijay’s €3 billion financing package will buy out CVC Capital Partners’ majority stake in Tipico, uniting two complementary businesses: Betclic, a digital specialist with leading positions in France, Portugal and Poland; and Tipico, a dominant omnichannel operator across Germany and Austria. The result is a combined force in six regulated markets, serving 6.5 million customers and operating over 1,200 betting shops. 

For Banijay the rationale is diversification. Long known for producing shows such as “Survivor” and “Big Brother”, the Paris-based group has been edging steadily into gaming. With Tipico, gaming becomes the majority of Banijay’s revenues.

Vaughan Lewis, a veteran gambling strategist, calls it a “transformational deal, creating a leading betting and gaming operator across key European countries, and one of the largest in the world”. The logic, he says, is “further evidence of the ‘local hero’ consolidation strategy, combining market-leading brands while benefiting from group economies of scale”. 

Risks and legal challenges 

The transaction’s stakeholders all emerge with distinct advantages. Betclic gains access to new markets in Germany and Austria, while Tipico inherits a continental platform and capital backing for expansion.

“Big tech synergies should drive better operating margins for the buyer group,” notes Paul Richardson, managing partner at Partis Capital. For CVC, the deal is a well-timed exit after a recent refinancing of Tipico. “This is a great result for them and shows it’s somewhat opportune versus planned.” 

For Banijay’s shareholders, the financial story is equally compelling. The company expects to generate around €100 million in annual synergies in the medium term, while raising profitability from 18.7% to 21.6%.

“Banijay’s gaming division doubles to become the majority of the group,” Lewis adds, suggesting that “there is potential for an IPO or spin-off of the gaming or media unit to unlock further value”. 

The Banijay-Tipico deal will impact the broader gaming landscape for the European sector, remarks Paul Richardson, as “it stops Flutter moving into Germany, as there is very little else to buy of scale in the market”. 

For all the enthusiasm, integration risks remain. Banijay will have to harmonise corporate governance across two highly regulated jurisdictions, reconcile technology stacks and manage cultural integration between a French tech-driven operator and a German retail-anchored one. As Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst points out, “aligning licensing and compliance could be complicated”, since Tipico operates under a German licence.  

And cross-border fiscal implications may also give rise to further legal issues for the Banijay-Tipico transaction, warns Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst. “Chief among these are regulatory and competition law issues, given that the deal is likely to be scrutinised under the EU Merger Regulation and potentially by national competition authorities.” 

Banijay will need to navigate Germany’s Joint Gambling Authority, one of Europe’s strictest regulators, as well as obtain approval from EU competition authorities. Completion, expected in mid-2026, hinges on those approvals — and on Banijay’s ability to integrate entities with very different operating cultures, experts point out. 

Consolidation will continue to drive the sector 

The Banijay-Tipico union is the latest chapter in an accelerating wave of European gambling consolidation – following on from Allwyn´s takeover of OPAP only a few weeks ago. Operators are racing to gain scale as taxes rise, margins narrow and regulation tightens across the continent. “Consolidation will continue to drive the sector, driven by margin pressure from regulation and operating costs,” says Richardson.  

The logic is simple: compliance costs and marketing restrictions are squeezing smaller firms, while established players look to spread fixed costs across wider revenue bases. As in other industries, bigger increasingly means safer. “Scale and resilience to regulatory shocks is key to long-term success,” Richardson observes. 

Lewis agrees, describing the Banijay move as a new template for consolidation across regulated European markets.

The shift, he argues, is away from chasing high-risk grey markets and towards mastering complex regulated ones. “This demonstrates that significant value creation is being driven by regulated markets,” he says. “Regulatory challenges create barriers to entry, which tends to increase the value and sustainability of the leading operators.” 

The French paradox 

That dynamic explains an irony not lost on observers: with Banijay’s gaming division and FDJ United’s acquisition of Kindred Group earlier this year, Europe’s two largest gaming empires are now based in France — a country with punishing tax rates and no legal online casino sector.  

“France’s market is indeed highly regulated and heavily taxed, yet certain operators demonstrate a sophisticated regulatory resilience,” says Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst. 

Their compliance expertise, financial strength and institutional relationships provide a competitive edge as other jurisdictions tighten controls. “Ironically, being forged in a tough market like France or Germany could become a strength when expanding across Europe,” he adds.

Lewis goes further. “France as a hub for Tier 1 operators despite regulatory challenges shows that domestic-based companies are proving operational excellence in challenging environments,” he notes. Any expansion of regulation of online casino in France could significantly grow the total potential market size, he points out.  

For investors, this resilience carries appeal. France’s high tax environment might deter weaker players, but for those that master it, it creates defensible, sustainable competitive advantage. The same logic underpins the position of the state-linked FDJ United, which completed its purchase of Kindred in 2024, adding Unibet’s pan-European presence to its lottery backbone. 

Continental realignment 

The broader picture is of a sector reorganising across the whole continent. The UK – once Europe’s undisputed iGaming powerhouse – is increasingly constrained by a tightening regulatory regime, rising tax burdens and curbs on cross-vertical marketing.

The Netherlands and Sweden are following suit. And last month Denmark announced new tightened rules regarding advertising. In contrast, continental European groups are quietly consolidating strength in markets with stable, albeit strict, regulatory frameworks. The sector is entering a phase of regulatory convergence and market cleansing, suggests Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst.  

“Smaller operators will struggle with rising taxes and compliance costs, leading to further consolidation. Larger, well-capitalised groups with diversified portfolios are best positioned to adapt. There is a good chance that the future European landscape will favour integrated entertainment ecosystems, not pure betting operators.” 

Banijay’s move follows a pattern seen before. Richardson compares it to Flutter’s acquisitions of Sisal and Snai. “A large multinational buying market leader in a local market. In both cases, the buyer had bought into an omnichannel operation and is now exposed to retail,” he says.

Lewis draws parallels with the Sky Betting & Gaming sale to The Stars Group, where CVC also exited.  “That was also CVC selling a market-leading position in a key country to a more diversified leader,” he notes. “FDJ and Kindred had some similarities too. So did the Allwyn/OPAP merger and the Intralot/Bally’s deal.”

Such comparisons underscore how Europe’s betting landscape is becoming a handful of regionally diversified conglomerates — Flutter, Entain, FDJ United, Banijay Gaming and Allwyn are among those.

The road ahead 

Analysts see the Banijay-Tipico deal as an early sign that additional similar deals are coming. 

“This is likely to be a trigger for further M&A across regulated markets,” predicts Lewis. “The industry remains fragmented and relatively immature. Scale is critical, as demonstrated by the €100 million synergies here.” 

Richardson foresees “other private-equity or former PE single-market operators like Lottomatica needing to buy international diversification at scale and get more ‘baskets for their eggs’”.  

Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst, meanwhile, expects a wave of smaller acquisitions: “We can expect continued consolidation, especially targeting small- to mid-sized operators in Europe.”

Acquisitions in RegTech and FinTech will likely also rise, driven by the need to automate compliance and improve efficiency. The broader trend also points toward media-gaming convergence where entertainment companies seek audience monetisation through gaming and betting firms seek audience engagement through content, Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst points out. 

The consensus among experts is that the next phase of European gaming growth will not come from regulatory arbitrage or from unregulated grey zones, but from disciplined execution in challenging jurisdictions.  

Therefore, future growth in Europe’s iGaming industry won’t come from taking advantage of loopholes or operating in loosely regulated markets, but instead from doing business well in countries with strict rules. 

“Operators that thrive under strict regimes such as Germany or France develop advanced compliance frameworks, responsible gambling systems and scalable tech infrastructures,” says Stark-Lütke Schwienhorst. “These conditions foster innovation and credibility, enabling them to outperform less mature competitors. In short, regulatory maturity breeds operational excellence.” 

Lewis concurs: “Betclic and Tipico have shown that operators with strong brands, effective operations and a clear strategy can build a highly profitable and sustainable business in mature, regulated markets.” 

The outcome, if Banijay’s bet pays off, could be a new European order in gaming – one where stability and compliance, not aggression and opportunism, define leadership. The entertainment conglomerate from Paris will need to prove that it can integrate Tipico smoothly. But if it succeeds, the combination of storytelling, data and betting could reshape not only Europe’s gaming industry but its entire digital entertainment economy. 

“Yolo is entering the UAE market with a complete eco system offering, live studio experiences, slots and aggregation services,” Falcon tells iGB. “Thus, providing a fully connected entertainment platform that can provide quality, safety and innovation to players.

“This all-in approach builds credibility and trust, which effectively gives us a lot of opportunities as well as a head start when compared to our competitors.”

First-mover advantage for Yolo in the UAE

Yolo is aiming to “press the start button” in the UAE as early as this month, with its live studio in Abu Dhabi very close to completion, according to Falzon. “As soon as they’re ready, we’re ready to go,” Falzon declares.

Falzon believes Yolo’s first-mover advantage in the UAE is imperative to success, especially in a market that could prove to be hugely lucrative.

“Speed to market is key,” Falzon adds. “It provides the opportunity to have a local footprint and thus raising barriers to entry for competitors. This could be quite rewarding both in terms of revenue but also valuation.”

In early October, Yolo Group announced it had secured two gaming-related vendor licences in the UAE for its Hub88 Holdings and Live Online Gaming Services subsidiaries.

The licences enable Yolo to supply iGaming content to the UAE’s regulated market. As per the the UAE’s gambling regulations, one online licence will awarded per emirate.

The news of the approved licences followed Yolo’s announcement that it had decided to pivot to fully regulated markets, leaving its grey past behind.

Yolo CEO Tim Heath described the move into the UAE as a “statement of intent” and Falzon, who was appointed CEO of Yolo’s B2B brands in July, says the company’s mentality should prove a successful strategy in the market.

UAE a key market for Yolo’s future

During Falzon’s time at the company she says securing the UAE licences has been one of her proudest achievements so far.

“Beyond the commercial opportunity it represents, it fundamentally changes Yolo’s positioning in the market,” Falzon says. “The licence has elevated our credibility and opened new conversations that weren’t possible before. It’s a strong foundation for the next phase of our growth.”

It’s a big opportunity for Yolo and its B2B segment, especially considering some other more mature regulated markets are already dominated by monopolies or big operators.

The UAE, meanwhile, is described by Falzon as a “forward-thinking, well-regulated market”, which aligns with Yolo’s company values. “Yolo Group believes it has the opportunity to innovate responsibility in a high growth region,” Falzon explains.

“In the UAE, there are a lot of untapped opportunities which makes it very exciting as we don’t know where this will take us, both in terms of product offering but also from a strategical point of view.”

Falzon believes Yolo’s ability to differentiate itself in the UAE market will hinge on two strategic levers – product and technology.

“One of our core initiatives is to treat the UAE as a live lab trying to test & identify what players value most,” Falzon says. “As a content aggregator our key focus is to understand the market & identify different product offerings that appeal to the players in this region.

“The other lever is technology. Yolo can differentiate through a best-in-class tech stack which is trusted by its suppliers and customers. The technology allows for rapid iteration and deployments. Moreover, it provides other tools such as analytics, automated promotional setups as well AI-driven personalisation.”

Localisation as a safety net

One interesting finding so far has been the UAE’s affinity for camel racing. Falzon jokes: “I need to find a studio that offers camel racing first!” But while she feels localisation is important, it goes beyond simply making Yolo “fit in”.

“It acts as a safety net, reducing cultural, regulatory and engagement risk,” she says. “However, I still believe that long term success depends on how quickly Yolo ‘integrates’ into the market.

“An additional factor which is very important in the UAE is the religious and social alignment that is unique when compared to other markets.”

A transparent licensing process in the UAE

The licensing process in the UAE as tough but collaborative, she says.

“Overall, the process has been thorough, transparent and internationally benchmarked, but it’s still evolving. We had several briefing sessions, guidance calls and documents reviews whereby GCGRA offered a level of engagement that was more of a collaboration or ‘partnering’ rather than punitive,” she concludes.

“What is unique is that the UAE’s approach is to encourage innovation and co-operation while still asserting control.”

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.”

On Wednesday Attorney General Keith Ellison announced that he has sent cease-and-desist letters to 14 illegal gambling websites. The sites targeted include offshore sports betting and casino operators as well as dual-currency sweepstakes operators.

“Online platforms offering sportsbooks and casino games run by out-of-state and overseas operators may make it look as though online gambling is legal and safe in Minnesota, but let me be clear: it is not,” Ellison said in a release.

“Trying to rebrand poker chips as virtual currencies does not change the fact that these online gambling operations are unlawful. By continuing to operate online gambling sites in Minnesota, these operators are likely openly defying our state’s laws and I will not stand for it.”

Ellison’s letters were sent to:

• BetAnySports
• BetNow
• BetOnline
• BetUS
• BetWhale
• Bovada
• EveryGame Sportsbook
• Fortune Coins
• MyBookie.com
• Slotsandcasino
• Sportsbetting.com
• VG Luckyland
• XBet
• Zula Casino

Law enforcement sent letters this summer

According to the release, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety’s Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division sent letters to the same 14 operators in June.

Those letters alerted the sites to potential legal violations, but Ellison said they have continued their operations. Along with the previously mentioned criminal violations, Ellison’s letters highlighted civil consumer protection laws the sites might violate.

“Illegal online casinos and sweepstakes sites make big promises but deliver only risk to Minnesota consumers,” Minnesota Department of Public Safety Commissioner Bob Jacobson said in the release. “Most are based outside the United States to avoid laws, regulation and enforcement measures. There’s no accountability, no protection for players and no way to know if the betting will be run fairly.”

Minnesota sports betting legislative attempts

Minnesota lawmakers have repeatedly introduced sports betting legislation and were reportedly close to a bipartisan deal with every stakeholder on board as the 2024 session ended.

Despite the 2025 session beginning with a similar deal essentially in place, a bipartisan group of legislators against sports betting solidified and prevented passage of a bill sponsored by Senator Matt Klein this year. The Senate Finance Committee held a hearing in January that focused on the harms of sports betting.

Klein, a member of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, said this year that lawmakers are “abandoning” Minnesotans and the state’s 11 tribes by failing to act. The DFL and Republicans have been at odds in their support for various gambling industry stakeholders. The DFL supports tribal exclusivity, while the Republicans want to include the state’s horse racing tracks as part of sports betting operations. The deal in place had the various stakeholders in agreement before the opposition reared its head this year.

Heading into 2026, Minnesota still might be the best shot for a state without legal sports betting to pass some form of legislation, according to multiple industry sources. One source put the odds at 50-50.

Unregulated sportsbook crackdowns continue

Multiple state legislatures passed sweepstakes prohibition bills this session, including California, Connecticut, Montana and New Jersey. California accounted for an estimated 20% of US revenue for sweepstakes companies, according to panellists at the Global Gaming Expo last month.

Lawmakers in Louisiana and New York also passed similar legislation. New York Governor Kathy Hochul has yet to sign S5935, but New York Attorney General Letitia James sent 26 cease-and-desist letters to sweepstakes operators this summer.

Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry vetoed his state’s bill while stating that regulators already had the power to enforce gambling laws. The Louisiana Gaming Control Board then sent 40 cease-and-desist letters to unregulated operators, including sweepstakes sites.

Other states including Maryland, Michigan and Arizona have also taken significant action against sweepstakes operators.

After its authorisation to operate in the newly regulated Brazil online gambling market was formalised in July, Caixa set a November date for the launch of its betting offering.

However, the plans received political criticism, as Senator Damaras Alves launched a scathing attack on Caixa in October, describing its plans as a “contradictory, dangerous and profoundly irresponsible move”.

This attracted the ire of Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who then met with Caixa President Carlos Vieira to discuss the matter.

According to local news outlet O Globo, Caixa has now decided to delay its planned November launch, with no new date given.

Vieira previously estimated Caixa’s betting business would achieve revenues of between BRL2 billion (£371.8 million) and BRL2.5 billion in 2026, in its first full year of operation.

The licence covers three brands: BetCaixa, Megabet and Xbet Caixa. The company did not respond to iGB’s request for comment on the delay.

What does this mean for Caixa and the market?

Caixa’s plans to launch betting also raised questions around competition, with concerns over whether a state-owned entity should be involved in the market considering the potential for government influence.

As an example, Vieira had previously described a potential rise in the gambling tax rate from 12% to 18% as “reasonable”, going against the opinions of the majority of the regulated sector.

Fabio Ferreira Kujawski, partner at Brazilian law firm Matthos Filho, expects this comment stems from Caixa’s difficult position, in which it “cannot publicly oppose what the federal government is saying”.

Atucha has warned Caixa’s delayed launch highlights various “contradictions” within Brazil’s regulatory landscape, with the government seemingly halting Caixa’s entrance into what is now a legal activity.

“With rising taxes, political debate and public backlash, the move risks undermining the regulated market itself,” the LatAm iGaming expert tells iGB.

“Instead of fostering a sustainable, competitive environment, these actions may end up strengthening the position of unlicensed, offshore operators, precisely the opposite of what regulation is meant to achieve.”

Questions over Caixa’s potential

Vieira has voiced his hopes Caixa will become a “major player” in the regulated Brazil betting market.

Caixa holds a legacy federal lottery monopoly, and its status as a state-owned bank means it should have strong brand recognition as a trusted entity in Brazil.

However, H2 Gambling Capital Managing Director Ed Birkin doesn’t expect Caixa to be at the very top of the market, despite its existing lottery player base.

“I do not believe that they will be one of the number one operators,” Birkin told iGB earlier this month. “Lotteries have never done particularly well against commercial operators in the online betting and iGaming market.”

Birkin describes Vieira’s estimate of 2026 revenues between BRL2 billion and BRL2.5 billion as “highly ambitious”, with the upper band of that prediction placing Caixa at a market share of 7.5%, according to H2 data.

“It would be completely unheard of for a lottery operator to get to a podium position, or even a top five position in a commercial market,” Birkin explained.

However, Caixa may not need to invest as heavily in marketing as other operators entering the Brazilian market, since it can leverage its established lottery brand and possibly its existing player database.

This advantage, Birkin suggests, is one reason Caixa is likely to run a profitable betting operation.

“In terms of the financials, they can be profitable with a much lower market share than other people in the market,” Birkin said.

“They already have all the land-based network there, they already do have online operations. So it financially makes sense for them. It should very much be additive to their earnings. The financials are more compelling than they would be for commercial operators.”

GCGRA Chairman Jim Murren, who succeeds him as CEO on an interim basis, said Mullally played a significant role in establishing the regulator’s core governance and regulatory structures. 

“We thank him for his contribution and wish him continued success in his future endeavours,” Murren said. “The GCGRA remains focused on the next stage of its growth, ensuring regulatory excellence, responsible gaming, and continued confidence in the UAE’s approach.”

Mullally ‘profoundly grateful’ to exceptional GCGRA team

Writing on Linkedin, Mullally described serving as CEO of the GCGRA as “one of the greatest professional honours of [his] career”. 

“I am profoundly grateful for the exceptional team with whom I have had the privilege to work. Their dedication, expertise, and commitment to public service have been essential to everything we have achieved,” he said.

With that team he created “an efficient, modern regulatory framework” and an “agile, predictable and forward-looking regulatory environment”. But he now had to “prioritise family over [his] profession”, he added. 

“I look forward to returning to Kansas City with my incredible wife and best friend, Jerri, to be with our five children, their spouses, and our eight grandchildren. While this decision has not been easy, it is the right one for us and our family.”

GCGRA up and running, but gaming operations remain limited

When the the General Commercial Gaming Regulatory Authority was established, the UAE’s largest gaming development, Wynn Al-Marjan Island in Ras Al-Khaimah, was already under construction. 

That property is due to open in March 2027, with Wynn Resorts predicting the UAE gambling market will be worth up to $5 billion at maturity. 

It was under the regulations developed by Mullally that Wynn Al-Marjan secured the UAE’s first commercial gaming licence. Under the regulatory framework, each emirate can put forward one casino development for a licence. After Ras Al-Khaimah, the main prizes for operators would be resorts in Abu Dhabi and Dubai. 

Industry speculation has linked multiple integrated resort operators with an Abu Dhabi facility, though there have been no public announcements on a project to date. MGM Resorts, which has a non-gaming development in Dubai, has been the most vocal about its ambitions for the market. 

CEO Bill Hornbuckle told delegates at a Skift conference in September last year that MGM Resorts had put forward an application for a casino licence, suggesting it had eyes on Abu Dhabi. 

However, that appears to have shifted back to Dubai, with the company saying little on the licence process since. 

What is Kevin Mullally’s legacy as the UAE gambling regulator?

Alongside setting up its regulatory framework, the launch of the UAE Lottery was the other major milestone of Mullally’s tenure.

The company behind the lottery, Momentum LLC, was a surprise victor in the tender for the lottery licence. Two companies, Mahzooz and Emirates Draw, were already running lotteries in the Emirates. Both paused operations as they pursued the national lottery certification. 

Mahzooz parent Ewings said it was planning a pivot after the “disappointing” decision, while Emirates Draw said it would shift focus to other legal gaming verticals. The UAE Lottery, meanwhile, announced the first winner of its Dh100 million jackpot in October this year.

But what about online? 

While the lottery is live, there are not yet any other licensed online operators. The UAE gambling regulations allow for one licensee per emirate, suggesting up to seven operators could ultimately be able to enter the market. 

However, as with the land-based properties, only expatriates – which make up around 88% of the UAE population – are allowed to gamble. 

Both online casino and sports betting licences are available. Despite much industry speculation of progress this year, no operator licensees have been announced. 

A number of suppliers for sports betting and iGaming have secured vendor certification. These include Sportradar, geolocation provider Xpoint and crypto specialist Yolo Group’s Hub88 and Live88 following that company’s regulated market pivot.

Will Jim Murren oversee the UAE’s online gaming launch?

This means interim CEO Jim Murren, who also holds the same role at Ritz Carlton Yachts and chairs Resorts World Las Vegas, could be overseeing the launch of online gaming in the UAE. 

Murren joined alongside Mullally to chair the regulator’s board of directors and has stepped in as CEO with immediate effect. The GCGRA said its operations, licensing programmes and stakeholder engagement will continue without interruption under the guidance of its new leadership team. 

In parting, Mullally added: “I am confident in the strength of the GCGRA, grateful for the dedication of its people, and proud of what we have accomplished together.”

The BRL3.7 billion figure represents 27% of the total amount granted to Bolsa Família recipients during the month of January.

Betting among social welfare recipients is a contentious issue in Brazil and a ban on gambling by those beneficiaries was formally announced in late September.

The TCU, a federal audit office, conducted the study to establish whether families were using the money from social welfare programmes to bet online, finding the amount spent was “very high”.

As part of the study, the TCU analysed data on financial transfers made from the government to Bolsa Família recipients. Additionally, the study also utilised data from the Ministry of Social Development, the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank.

The TCU ordered the Ministry of Social Development, Assistance, Family and Fight against Hunger, as well as the Central Bank, to submit an action plan to identify and reduce improper inclusions in the Bolsa Família programme within 90 days.

Additionally, the department called for bank transactions that “excessively exceed” players’ declared income amounts to be used as evidence.

An investigation into the misuse of beneficiaries’ Individual Taxpayer Registration numbers by third parties for illicit purposes, especially gambling, has been called for.

Ban on betting among social welfare beneficiaries in Brazil

The discussion over betting among social welfare beneficiaries gathered real momentum last year ahead of regulation coming in on 1 January.

In November 2024, the Supreme Federal Court upheld an emergency measure to prohibit betting via social welfare proceeds.

In late September, the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets published Normative Ordinance No 2,217/2025 and Normative Instruction No 22, completely banning recipients of the Bolsa Família and Continuous Benefit Payment programmes from fixed-odds betting.

A database of social welfare beneficiaries has been established and betting operators are required to consult it when verifying player registrations and logins.

Operators must also cross-check bettors’ CPF numbers in Sigap, Brazil’s betting management system, to identify any users listed as welfare recipients.

These checks must be conducted at least every 15 days for all registered users. If a user appears in the database, operators must block their registration, close their account and refund any deposited monies.

Operators were initially given 30 days to comply with the ban, although this deadline has been extended by an additional 30 days.

Does the ban go too far?

The ban has proved hugely divisive. Lawyer Luiz Felipe Maia has suggested the prohibition constitutes a civil rights issue.

Maia, founding partner of Brazilian law firm Maia Yoshiyasu Advogados, previously told iGB: “At the end of the day it becomes a civil rights issue, because 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’.

“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.”

Some have warned too that the prohibition could simply lead to banned players looking to the black market to bet.

The National Association of Games and Lotteries believes the ban goes too far, with the initial ruling only prohibiting the use of social welfare money for betting.

An ANJL-commissioned study shared with BNL Data found that 45% of social welfare beneficiaries plan to turn to the black market to continue gambling once the ban takes effect.

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.

Multiple federal lawmakers urged bans on prop bets following FBI arrests last month tied to a gambling scheme involving NBA games, but others are now taking a more nuanced approach. Major League Baseball is reportedly working to eliminate microbets, while a New Jersey lawmaker recently proposed a ban on the bet type.

Meanwhile, US Representative Paul Tonko of New York sent a letter to professional league commissioners asking for support of his SAFE Bet Act, which includes a prohibition of AI use to create microbets.

Microbets are specific prop bets that occur throughout a sporting event, for instance whether a pitch will be a ball or a strike or who scores on a team’s next possession in a game.

MLB pursuing microbet ban?

Ohio Governor Mike DeWine told the Columbus Dispatch last week that MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred is working with the other leagues to pursue a ban on microbets. DeWine said Manfred’s office told him there was agreement with all but one sports betting company, according to the report.

“These micro prop bets are just very dangerous,” DeWine told the Dispatch. “They’re really a great threat to the integrity of sports. And they can occur in baseball, but they can also occur in other sports as well. And they do occur in other sports as well.”

DeWine called for a microbet ban this summer. That followed the suspension of Cleveland Guardians pitchers Luis Ortiz and Emmanuel Clase as part of a gambling investigation.

DeWine said he would wait to hear back from MLB before urging further state regulatory action against the bet type. Last year, the Ohio Casino Control Commission banned college prop bets after NCAA President Charlie Baker began campaigning for the prohibition.

New Jersey microbet ban proposed

New Jersey State Senator Paul Moriarty last week introduced S4794, which aims to ban microbets. It is a similar bill to Assemblyman Dan Hutchison’s AB5971, which was introduced in July.

Moriarty’s bill adds fines for operators who offer microbets. The bill defines a microbet as:

“A proposition bet which is wagered live, while a sport or athletic event is ongoing and concerns the outcome of the next play or action occurring in the sport or athletic event.”

Operators would be fined “not less than $500 and not more than $1,000 per offence”.

Hutchinson told CBS Philadelphia he is not against sports betting, but that this proposal is to stop “excessive and impulsive gambling”.

Tonko pushes for SAFE Bet Act support following NBA gambling scandal

Tonko first introduced the SAFE Bet Act last year and reintroduced it this year with Senator Richard Blumenthal. Included in the SAFE Bet Act is a ban on the use of AI to create gambling products, including microbets.

Last week, Tonko sent letters to multiple major professional sports leagues “demanding they support implementing federal gambling safety standards”.

“Claims of prioritising integrity ring hollow when leagues have sold credibility to gambling operators, integrated betting content into broadcasts, normalised wagering for teenagers, glorified it in advertising, and then failed to prevent criminal conduct from taking hold within the sport,” the letter read.

“The choice before you is now explicit. Either engage directly with Congress to establish mandatory federal guardrails that restore integrity and protect the public or stand in opposition and accept responsibility when the next scandal breaks and more families and lives are destroyed.”

The letters were sent to:

• Major League Baseball Commissioner Robert Manfred
• Major League Soccer Commissioner Donald Garber
• National Basketball Association Commissioner Adam Silver
• National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell
• National Hockey League Commissioner Gary Bettman
• National Women’s Soccer League Commissioner Jessica Berman
• Women’s National Basketball Association Commissioner Cathy Englebert

A House committee requested a briefing from Silver following the NBA gambling arrests. A Senate committee asked the NBA to produce information related to internal gambling investigations by 10 November.

The SAFE Bet Act includes creating federal standards for sports betting, including:

• No sportsbook marketing during live sporting events.
• No programming designed to induce gambling, like “bonus,” “no sweat” or odds boosts.
• Prohibition of operators accepting more than five deposits in a 24-hour period.
• Requirement that operators perform “affordability checks” on customers.
• Prohibition on using AI to track players’ gambling habits and offer individualised offers.
• A ban on collegiate and amateur prop bets.
• Requirement that the surgeon general report on public health challenges related to sports betting.

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”.

Political tension over Caixa’s plans reached a peak last month as local news reported President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has requested a meeting with Caixa’s president, Carlos Vieira, to discuss the matter.

In October, Brazil Senator Damara Alves condemned the launch, which is planned for November, describing the plans as “perhaps one of the greatest moral and social setbacks in the country’s recent history”.

Caixa’s move has raised questions over whether a state-owned financial institution should be involved in a sector that has gained a hugely negative reputation among politicians, who are increasingly concerned about the harms related to betting.

Is President Lula just looking for election support?

Despite this political pushback, Caixa’s legacy federal lottery monopoly could help propel its upcoming betting brand as consumers respect and know the brand well.

These plans have been known for a while, with Caixa applying for a licence to operate in the regulated market in August last year. Its licence to operate was formally authorised on 29 July this year.

With an election coming up next year, Fabio Ferreira Kujawski, partner at Brazilian law firm Matthos Filho, believes President Lula is trying to appease the significant evangelical faction of Brazil’s Parliament with his pushback against Caixa’s plans.

“I think the government is wanting the taxable revenue [from Caixa] on one hand, which is good. [It could be] making a lot of money and collecting a lot of taxes,” Kujawski tells iGB.

“On the other hand, they’re trying to make a [comment] to the society that we are against this [move], and that Caixa should not be involved in gambling at all because that’s not the principal reason why [we have] such a big bank controlled by the state.”

Kujawski suggests the negative press surrounding the gambling sector and the timing of the general election next year have led to the rise in discourse around Caixa’s betting plans.

Caixa’s difficult position as a state-owned entity

Lula’s government is making moves elsewhere to restrict Brazil’s nascent betting sector, with additional ad restrictions on the horizon and multiple bills seeking to raise the gambling tax rate in discussion.

A provisional measure to increase the tax rate from 12% to 18% was vetoed in October, although an additional proposal has been launched to double the current rate to 24%.

Notably, Caixa President Vieira previously labelled the rise to 18% as “reasonable”, going against the views of the vast majority of the regulated sector.

The company’s mammoth status could help support it through tightening regulations, while much smaller operators will likely be forced out of the market if the measures are enacted.

Kujawski warns Caixa could also be in a difficult position in terms of opposing Parliament’s plans, due to its state-owned status.

“Caixa is in a situation where it cannot publicly oppose what the federal government is saying,” Kujawski explains. “That’s why they said 18% is not that bad, while we know that 18% is a disaster for the legal market.”

If new restrictions are to come in as many fear, H2 Gambling Capital Managing Director Ed Birkin suggests Caixa, as well as the black market, could be set to profit.

“Let’s say they double the tax rate and they ban all advertising,” Birkin says. “Do you know who benefits from that? Apart from the black market, obviously it’s Caixa.

“They’re well known. They’ll probably still be able to advertise on their lottery products and all the other things. So they’re still have all the brand recognition. They can probably absorb higher taxes than commercial operators can.”

Will Caixa be successful in the betting sector?

Beyond whether the bank and lottery monopoly should be allowed to operate a betting business, stakeholders have also questioned whether Caixa will be able to compete with the other already established operators in the regulated sector.

Despite Caixa possibly profiting from incoming restrictions, it will come up against huge international entrants with seismic investments behind them.

H2 Gambling Capital is forecasting players Betano, Bet365, Superbet and Sportingbet as the top four operators in Brazil by market share. Notably, these players have been operating in Brazil since, or even before, the licensed market opened in January.

Caixa holds a state monopoly for the federal lottery in Brazil, and it is reportedly preparing its 15,000 lottery outlets to operate betting options. The bank has partnered with Playtech to supply this technology, ahead of the launch.

Birkin believes Caixa won’t make it to the very summit of the market, despite its existing lottery audience and the trust and loyalty that surrounds such a well-known institution.

“I do not believe that they will be one of the number one operators,” Birkin says. “Lotteries have never done particularly well against commercial operators in the online betting and iGaming market.”

Caixa’s expectations

Vieira has said the bank expects to achieve betting revenue of between BRL2 billion ($371.8 million) and BRL2.5 billion next year. The upper band of that estimate would place Caixa at a 7.5% market share for 2026 according to H2 estimates.

Birkin thinks Vieira’s prediction is “highly ambitious”, with the crossover between lottery and sports betting not historically a hugely successful venture.

“It would be completely unheard of for a lottery operator to get to a podium position, or even a top five position in a commercial market,” Birkin adds.

However, it could be said that Caixa won’t need to match the same levels of marketing investment as competitors that have entered Brazil, as it could lean on its legacy lottery brand and potentially even its player database. This is partly why Birkin believes Caixa will likely be a profitable betting business.

“In terms of the financials, they can be profitable with a lot lower market share than other people in the market,” Birkin concludes.

“They already have all the land-based network there, they already do have online operations. So it financially makes sense for them. It should very much be additive to their earnings. The financials are more compelling than they would be for commercial operators.”

Despite the ongoing political tension surrounding betting in Brazil, the sector has largely operated as normal in its first year. And although President Lula has called on Caixa to discuss its plans, stakeholders believe the bank’s betting business will likely launch as planned.

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.

The policy, rolled out by the government in July, allows for a 5% tax rate on every withdrawal made on any betting wallet, scrapping the previous 20% levy on net winnings. An additional 5% excise duty on deposits also came into effect, which does away with the previous duty of 15%.  

Legal advisors David Sarinke of McKay Advocates and Allan Mzungu of MMS Advocates both believe the new policy could bring about a financial boom for the government.  

Yet, it has also shifted a higher cost burden onto casual bettors and has introduced new behavioral and ethical challenges that gambling regulators must monitor closely.  

“Business Daily [recently] reported government betting tax revenues are projected to nearly double after the rate cuts.” Sarinke tells iGB. “That strongly implies increased betting activity has already started to pick up following the Finance Act 2025 changes.”  

“This change simplifies enforcement because tax is now collected digitally at the wallet gateway rather than at the level of individual bets,” Mzungu explains further.  

“It broadens the tax base, since even people who deposit and later withdraw without [actively] betting are taxed, capturing far more users than before. It will surely ensure continuous cash flow to the Kenyan revenue authorities, as deposits and withdrawals occur daily.” 

‘Wallet-flow’ taxation system  

According to the Parliamentary Budget Office, this “wallet-flow” system could see a doubling of gambling tax revenue. With collection now automatic and seemingly “tamper-proof”, it could mean a projected rise from about KSh5.4 billion to KSh11.4 billion in the 2025-26 financial year. 

“Under the old regime, it was the winners who paid the most – 15% to 20% of their winnings,” explains Mzungu. “Now, all bettors will pay 5% on deposits and withdrawals, regardless of whether they win or lose.” 

Mzungu says Kenya’s new gambling tax policy will stabilise revenue and close loopholes for the government. However, casual bettors will end up paying more as they are taxed even without winning.  

As Sarinke puts it: “This shift has created a cash-flow based tax model rather than a bet-outcome model.” 

The impact on betting behaviour 

SportPesa, Kenya’s largest operator, reported in an August 2025 update that the average wallet balance per active user rose by KSh285 within the first month of the new regulation. This indicated that bettors were now retaining funds for longer periods. 

“In terms of the behavioural impact on bettors, I’d say it is still too early to determine as the regulator has not yet released any official data,” Sarinke notes.  

“But you [expect] the lower effective tax burden [on winnings] would naturally incentivise higher betting frequency and wallet liquidity.” 

Mzungu goes on to clarify the metrics behind Kenya’s new gambling tax system: “Before the reform, a bettor who won KSh10,000 would lose between KSh1,500 and KSh2,000 to the withholding tax on winnings. Now, under the new law, withdrawing that same KSh10,000 attracts only KSh500 in tax, which is a 70% reduction in effective tax liability.” 

The Finance Act 2025 has turned Kenya’s betting ecosystem into a real-time, wallet-based tax network. It simplifies enforcement for government, has boosted revenues and incentivizes continuous betting for experienced punters. 

Mzungu is quietly optimistic in the long term: “If properly enforced and supported by responsible gambling frameworks, the reform could stand as a model for digital tax policy in Africa, balancing fiscal innovation with behavioral insight.”

In July, the gambling regulator in Kenya announced a shakeup of its licensing process, including a significant licensing fee hike.

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.

At the heart of the debate is Morten Rønde, director of the Danish trade body Spillebranchen and managing partner at Nordic Legal. Speaking to iGB on the immediate impact of the changes, Rønde did not mince his words.  

“I am shell shocked to say the least,” he says, capturing the uncertainty and frustration spreading through the sector.  

For more than a decade Denmark has been viewed as a model for balanced gambling regulation – strict enough to protect consumers yet flexible enough to sustain a competitive licensed market. That balance, according to Rønde, has been the key to its success.  

Regulator’s relationship with the sector

In August, Denmark achieved gambling revenue of DKK 714 million – both a year-on-year and month-on-month increase. Sports betting and iGaming markets posted double-digit growth compared to the same month last year. 

“I think the key is that Denmark has struck a balance where you have strict consumer protection and kind of strict, but still pragmatic, rules that are possible to comply with for the operators,” Rønde says. The model, he added, maintained a structure where the regulator has been working “in a very open-minded way”. 

This dialogue-based relationship between the regulator and licensees – praised in a recent comparative report between Sweden and Denmark, ordered by the Swedish trade body BOS – has long been a cornerstone of Denmark’s success.  

Rønde insists the Danish Gambling Authority operates as “the glue in the system”, maintaining trust through direct, transparent communication. “Each operator has two contact persons assigned,” he adds, “a legal contact and a technical contact. So that creates a more personal approach in dialogue with the regulator.” 

A turning point for Denmark’s gambling model 

But that finely tuned balance has come under strain. The government’s new gambling agreement marks a decisive shift. Minister for Taxation Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen of the Social Democrats said it marked the beginning of a reckoning with a gambling industry “that has, for far too long, taken up too much space”.  

She said the new measures were to prevent entertainment “from turning into addiction. It requires both responsible operators, stronger regulations and a sustained political effort.” 

The government claimed nearly 500,000 Danish adults experienced some extent of gambling problem in 2021 – a figure that has doubled since 2016 – with almost 30,000 experiencing serious gambling problems. Twenty-five thousand Danish children and young people have experienced some degree of gambling harm, according to government data. 

“I’m really pleased that we’ve reached a broad agreement that, above all, ensures we can now protect our children and young people much better from advertising for gaming and gambling,” Jan E Jørgensen of the Liberal Party, Venstre, said. 

Denmark gambling addiction debate intensified

As public debate around gambling addiction intensifies in Denmark – fuelled by high-profile media stories about widespread gambling addiction among younger men and political pressure – Rønde argues that the measures being implemented are not evidence-based. 

“There’s been a rise in gambling addiction,” he acknowledges, “but based on a study that is now three years old and had quite inconclusive findings.” The government, he said, is acting largely because “people are just sick of all the gambling adverts, which we agree with – there are too many of them. They are overexposed in the market.” 

Rønde is certain the arguments put forward in the political decision-making process were not supported by meaningful evidence. “In all the proposals that are made, there’s no link to any evidence that this is something that will help gambling addiction. And I am pretty sure that it won’t,” he says. 

In his view, the only sustainable path forward is to manage the balance between consumer protection and an attractive regulated offer. “Advertising in Danish media is the only advantage that a licensed operator has. Because otherwise it’s just restrictions and taxation. When you are [no longer] allowed to advertise, you lose that competitive advantage,” Rønde explains.  

If those advantages continue to erode, he warns, “there’s nothing left other than the branding you can put on your website that says you’re regulated by the Danish authorities.” Outlining the broader risks, he insists restricting the legal market too heavily will tip the balance. 

“And it becomes unviable for the operators, but also for the consumers in Denmark. That leads to leakage in the market and consumers going to the black market. And again, in turn, it would lead to more addiction and more gamblers who get in trouble.” 

Total ad ban threat and the risk of market leakage 

The new rules, agreed to by a broad coalition of political parties, will prohibit betting advertising during live sports broadcasts, restrict outdoor advertising within 200 metres of schools and impose new limitations on bonuses. This could indicate the end of outdoor advertising in Denmark’s major cities.  

Still, Rønde warns the outcome could have been worse: “It looked worse at one point; a complete advert ban was discussed, but it’s still not great where we’ve landed.” The political appetite for stricter measures remains strong. “There are several political parties in Denmark who are in favour of a full advertisement ban,” he notes.  

“What happens if you do impose a ban? Those countries who have tried like Italy and now the Netherlands have seen an explosion in illegal gambling offerings.” He points out the Italian government is now rolling back part of its advertising ban because it was creating too many illegal gambling offers for Italian players. 

Denmark could follow the same path – undermining its once-enviable rate of channelisation. “It’s impossible to block operators from the market,” he says of illegal offerings. Black market presence in the market is heightened by a lack of popular products like crash games and virtual betting, as well as various casino games that are banned.  

H2 Gambling Capital data shows Denmark’s channelisation rate has fallen to 72%, the same as Sweden. It was historically among the highest in Europe, sitting at around 90% in 2022. Rønde attributes much of the decline to player interest in the aforementioned banned verticals.  

Mounting economic consequences 

In terms of economic consequences for the sector, Rønde can’t put a figure on it, but insists the sum of the 20 or more new measures will have a big impact. The trade body is considering what these changes will mean for the industry. Most concerning is the likelihood that operators will exit the market in response. “It will severely impact the market and the whole business of being in Denmark,” he laments.  

TV2, the biggest commercial TV channel in Denmark, which holds the licence to show matches in the Danish football Superliga, said it expects revenue to drop due to the gambling ad ban – potentially up to €12 million per year. “It should be no secret that the regulation comes with significant financial consequences,” TV2’s commercial director, Stig Møller Christensen, said of the impact. Previous government calculations pointed towards a loss in tax revenue in the hundreds of millions in Danish Kroner for the state.  

Denmark was the industry’s ‘beacon of light’ 

In neighbouring Sweden, gambling trade body BOS has been watching Denmark’s developments closely. Gustaf Hoffstedt, BOS’ secretary general, voiced concerns that the new Danish direction could undermine a system long seen as a model for Europe. 

“It concerns me,” he says, “because Denmark, together with the United Kingdom, have been the two beacons of light in Europe when it comes to safeguarding the licensing market.” According to Hoffstedt, H2’s revised estimate of 72% channelisation for Denmark is “totally dissatisfactory”.  

Like Rønde, he warns against measures that risk driving consumers toward unlicensed gambling: “Denmark should pay more attention to how to create an attractive legal licensed market than to implement measures that will scare away more consumers. After all, that’s the number one consumer protection measure that you can take.” 

Hoffstedt cautions that Denmark’s reputation as a regulatory role model is now in question. “Denmark has at least up to this moment been possibly the best example in Europe,” he notes. “Yes, I’m afraid it will change – that Denmark is also choosing a path that in the long run may lead to them crawling in the mud, just as so many other European jurisdictions.” 

The message is clear: tightening regulations without maintaining a viable, competitive legal market risks undoing years of progress in consumer protection and channelisation.

As Denmark’s gambling restrictions move toward implementation in January 2027, time will tell whether one of Europe’s most admired regulatory systems can preserve its balance – or whether it will become, as Rønde fears, another example of good intentions gone awry. 

On 30 September, the SPA published Normative Ordinance No 2,217/2025 and Normative Instruction No 22, completely banning beneficiaries of social welfare programmes such as Bolsa Família from participating in fixed-odds betting.

This followed a November 2024 Supreme Federal Court ruling which upheld an emergency measure to ban gambling with social welfare proceeds.

Operators were given 30 days to comply by closing the accounts of those receiving social welfare from the Bolsa Família and Continuous Benefit Payment programmes.

But with the deadline set to expire, the SPA has moved to extend the timeframe allowed for operators to comply.

No detail has been given as to why the deadline has been extended by the SPA.

Study warns of migration to black market

Following the formal publication of the ban, SPA chief Regis Dudena voiced his confidence that the prohibition would prevent vulnerable Brazilians from betting beyond their means.

However, many in the sector warned those receiving social welfare would still bet, just via the black market.

The National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) has been one trade body to express its displeasure with the ban, particularly as it went against 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.

In an ANJL-commissioned study shared with BNL Data, it was found 45% of social welfare beneficiaries plan to migrate to the black market to gamble when the ban comes in.

Ed Birkin, managing director of H2 Gambling Capital, previously warned this could happen, despite the good intentions of the ban.

“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.”

Proposals span a nationwide ban on collegiate prop bets, federal advertising and affordability standards, and stepped‑up action against illegal offshore operators. Despite repeated introductions over recent sessions, Congress has shown negligible follow‑through since the 2018 repeal of PASPA.

A sports betting hearing in the Senate Committee on the Judiciary in December 2024 quickly turned off topic. The committee has not reconvened on the issue, despite Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill), who chairs the committee, saying it was not the end of the discussion.

Some lawmakers are reviving dormant bills, while others are entering the debate for the first time.

House panel seeks NBA gambling briefing

After the NBA gambling news broke last week, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce requested a briefing from NBA Commissioner Adam Silver.

The committee seeks details about the situation. It also wants to know the actions the NBA intends to take and whether the league’s current code of conduct is effective. Committee members also want to know whether the NBA is reevaluating its position on partnerships with sports betting companies.

“These allegations raise serious concerns about sports betting and the integrity of the sport in the NBA, which harms fans and legal sports bettors,” the letter reads. “The committee has jurisdiction over interstate commerce, consumer protection, and sports.”

The letter details the committee’s investigations of MLB steroid use, Olympic anti-doping measures and sexual abuse of Olympic athletes.

Senate committee wants NBA gambling information

Senators Ted Cruz (R‑Tex) and Maria Cantwell (D‑Wash) asked the NBA to produce documents on any internal investigations into illegal gambling by players and coaches since 2020, with a 10 November deadline.

The senators sent a letter to Silver this week.

“This is a matter of congressional concern,” the letter reads. “The integrity of NBA games must be trustworthy and free from the influence of organised crime or gambling-related activity. Sports betting scandals like this one may lead the American public to assume that all sports are corrupt.”

Durbin backs nationwide prop bet ban

Durbin said in a statement he is committed to banning prop bets nationwide to strengthen sports integrity. Durbin’s office did not return a request for comment from iGB.

“The temptation for athletes, seasoned coaches and professional officials to adjust performances is real,” Durbin said. “Sadly, scandals are becoming more and more frequent. Congress, states and sports leagues must all work to maintain the integrity of sports and prevent future sports betting scandals.”

League compliance teams, regulated sportsbooks and integrity monitors have flagged suspicious wagering that aided investigations.

NCAA President Charlie Baker is leading a campaign to ban college player prop bets across the country. While some states already had the collegiate prop prohibition in place, other state regulators retroactively banned the bet-type, including those in Ohio, Louisiana and Maryland.

But professional prop bets might be a harder lift. US Rep Michael Baumgartner did not include professional props in his bill to ban collegiate prop bets in the US, introduced earlier this year. He told the Washington Post a professional prop ban would be “unlikely” to pass.

Opponents warn bans could push demand for prop bets to offshore markets.

Senators urge DOJ offshore crackdown

Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) and Katie Britt (R-Ala) led a group of 11 bipartisan lawmakers in sending a letter this week to Attorney General Pam Bondi urging the Department of Justice to crack down on illegal gambling operators.

“We write regarding the concerning use of illegal offshore gaming operations by America’s youth, and to ask the DOJ to take action to protect young people from these illegal gaming operations,” the letter reads.

The letter notes all 50 state attorneys general sent a letter to the DoJ earlier this year asking for it to block offshore gambling websites using the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

The letter comes after regulators from across the US have sent hundreds of cease-and-desist letters to illegal gambling operators. In 2023, a group of state regulators sent a letter to the DoJ asking for support in an illegal market crackdown.

Britt recently asked Bondi during a recent Senate Judiciary hearing about offshore gambling.

“Senator Britt remains open to conversations and potential solutions for tackling how sports gambling adversely affects the next generation,” her office said in a statement to iGB. “Her current priority is addressing the alarming rise of illegal sports betting among our youth, especially when it comes to illegal offshore gaming operations. The Senator recognizes that access to offshore sites is one of the main culprits behind the rise in sports gambling among minors and will be taking steps to address it.”

The other sponsors signed to the letter are:

• Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn)
• Cory Booker (D-NJ)
• John Cornyn (R-Tex)
• Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
• Josh Hawley (R-Mo)
• Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
• Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn)
• Mike Lee (R-Utah)
• Thom Tillis (R-NC)
• Peter Welch (D-Vt)

SAFE Bet Act sponsors renew push

Blumenthal and Rep Paul Tonko (D-NY) sponsored the Supporting Affordability and Fairness with Every Bet Act (SAFE Bet Act) for the past two sessions. The bills have sat dormant in their respective committees since reintroduction in March.

The proposal would establish national advertising standards and affordability checks. It would also ban collegiate prop bets and restrict the use of AI to target bettors.

The lawmakers used the NBA gambling scandal last week to renew calls for their proposal. Tonko released a statement last week, blaming the scandal on the “unchecked explosion” of the legalised sports betting industry. He said the “unfettered access to sports gambling destroys public trust in the game”.

Tonko called for the NBA and other leagues to commit to minimum federal safety standards.

“The sad reality is that these scandals will only increase so long as the sports betting industry goes unchecked,” Tonko said in a statement to iGB. “In order to truly address this rising crisis, the federal government must act to establish minimum safety standards. I’ll continue to highlight the importance of this issue to my colleagues and push for this common-sense legislation.”

Blumenthal said in a statement last week the SAFE Bet Act would prevent coaches and athletes from betting on their own games, prohibit prop bets and “ensure that there is finally vigorous oversight of gambling companies”.

“These troubling indictments are the most recent signal that the sports betting industry has corrupted the game to the detriment of fans and victims of gambling addiction,” Blumenthal said last week in a statement. “Letting gambling companies turn sports into the wild west has been an abysmal and absolute failure – it’s time for Congress to enact the SAFE Bet Act into law.”

During the committee session MPs heard from two panels of experts; the first included Jung who is acting interim associate director for economic policy and AI for the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). 

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

“Gaming machines and remote betting are fairly sort of sticky. You can raise the tax more and raise more money, but it also means not everyone will be deterred by higher rates or poorer odds,” he told the committee.  

“And therefore, on its own, I would argue it’s not a sufficient policy to address problem gambling.”  

Jung’s points were made in response to comments from ex-industry stalwart and co-founder of Paddy Power Stewart Kenny. He told the committee that “higher-risk” gambling offerings should be taxed more “to disincentivise bookmakers from sucking [players] from sportsbook into the online casino”.  

Netherlands not a fair example in black market tax hike argument 

Responding to a question on the impact of gambling tax hikes on the black markets, Jung said the Netherlands was not a viable example for gambling tax increases contributing to black market growth.  

The market increased its gambling tax in January as part of a staggered hike and, in August, reports suggested the rise would leave a €200 million black hole in the budget as less tax revenue was being made overall in the market.  

In its most recent report on market activity, the market regulator (KSA) said that this year, for the first time, black market spending had outpaced regulated gambling spending.  

“That is an example that [the industry] will use, but it’s the only example they will use,” Jung said. “In the Netherlands, not only did they introduce tax, they did a whole load of other regulatory changes as well, which we are not proposing.” 

Jung also pointed to very complex legal processes which would hinder black market enforcement in the market.  

“Fortunately, we don’t have that in this country. We are much better and we’re seen as world leaders when it comes to tackling this sort of black-market site,” he added.  

He also used Estonia as an example to show there “is no such correlation between the level of tax and the level of the black market”.  

“Estonia, lower tax, lower share of legal market. One of the problems we have in this area is that it’s very hard to measure, because you’re trying to measure something that’s a criminal activity, so notoriously, it’s always hard to measure,” Jung added.  

Retail connected to online businesses  

In a second panel session, Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) CEO Grainne Hurst and BGC tax committee chair Stephen Hodgson answered the panel’s questions on how a remote gambling tax hike would impact retail operations.  

In recent weeks several operators in the UK have warned they would close high-street betting shops in response to a potential tax hike in the UK.  

Hurst said companies operate as a single profit-and-loss model and therefore any impact to the online sector through increase remote gaming duty would inevitably impact their retail businesses.  

Operators would likely have to pull back investment from other parts of their business, she said.  

Elvis Lourenço, a Brazilian iGaming expert and managing partner at EX7 Partners warns doubling the current gambling tax rate could have catastrophic consequences for the sector.

However, he suggests there may be room to negotiate the newly proposed 24% rate. He believes with intervention from the sector the rate could edge closer to 18%.

The tax 18% rate was previously proposed in Brazil’s initial sports betting bill which was passed into legislation in December 2023. However it was later brought down to 12% of operator GGR.

“The first bill that they proposed back in the day was 18%,” Lourenço tells iGB. “We all know that.

“So if you look for the best worst scenario, it is 15% at least, 18% maximum because that was on the first agenda.

“But 24% is insane. It’s insane and it will collapse the market.”

Where does Brazil’s gambling tax rate stand today?

Discussions over taxation on gambling in Brazil continue to plague the market, with the government determined to increase the rate amid concerns over the social and financial impacts of betting on the population since regulation launched on 1 January.

A provisional measure to increase the rate from 12% to 18% failed to pass through Parliament earlier this month, as did plans to introduce retrospective taxes for pre-regulation gambling activities.

Just a day after the provisional measure was withdrawn, a new bill (PL 5,076/2025) was presented by Lindbergh Farias, leader of the Workers’ Party in Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies, which seeks to double the tax rate to 24% of GGR.

PL 5,076/2025 received urgent status last week and, while it is still unclear when exactly the Chamber of Deputies president Hugo Motta will put the bill to a vote, the industry is once again left nervously awaiting developments.

Gambling being used for political motivations

The Brazil government seems dead set on increasing the tax burden on gambling, with a policy of introducing new taxes on the three Bs – billionaires, banks and betting.

With an election coming up next year, Lourenço suggests President Lula’s government is trying to appease the significant conservative section of the population by increasing taxes on betting operators.

This, according to Lourenço, has been expedited by the humiliation for the government of its failed provisional measure to increase the rate from 12% to 18%, with the gambling sector being used as a “currency of trade” by politicians.

“That’s the main reason that they struck back so fast, because it was embarrassing for them,” Lourenço explains.

“This becomes an election agenda, because this is good for the audience and the public to get votes because we are a conservative country in some ways. So, to put this on their agenda, ‘we increase the taxes of the billionaires, of the gambling world’, it is good for the speech of the actual government.”

Gambling industry the target

Brazil’s regulated sector has endured a mixed start, with hesitant optimism weighed down by lingering concerns over tax rises and new ad restrictions.

Many are frustrated by the threat of tightening regulations so early into the regulated market. Lourenço argues the fact that the licensed sector is still so new is in fact the reason it’s being targeted for tax increases.

“They [the Brazil government] need to collect [taxes] with some industry, and unfortunately we are the industry at target,” Lourenço says. “If they choose retail, commodities, banking, the lobby is too strong.

“So unfortunately, we are the target because we are new, with new regulation, and the conservative country says, ‘they can pay more’.”

Unfair comparisons to other markets

Lourenço also highlights the comparisons some are making to other jurisdictions, with such comparisons ignoring the other taxes that operators in Brazil are mandated to pay.

At present, in addition to a 12% tax on GGR, operators are subject to a 9.25% PIS/Cofins levy and municipal taxes that can reach up to 5%.

They are also taxed on approximately 34% of their profits, comprising 25% corporate income tax and a 9% social contribution tax.

Brazil is also transitioning to a new tax system, with PIS/Cofins being replaced with a dual tax system that Lourenço predicts could raise the total burden on operators to an excess of 50%, if further GGR-based taxes are also added.

Government targeting the wrong side of legality

Another point of frustration for Lourenço and much of the licensed sector is the government’s emphasis on targeting legal operators, rather than their black market alternatives.

Somestakeholders have estimated over half of the Brazilian gambling market’s revenue is generated by the black market, claiming the government’s focus on restricting licensed operators is hugely benefitting operators that act outside of regulation.

With the government seemingly desperate to generate more tax revenue from gambling, Lourenço suggests it should instead focus on bringing more betting onshore rather than simply raising the burden on licensed operators.

If the government can effectively reduce the black market, Lourenço says operators would be more inclined to reluctantly accept lesser tax increases.

“They are targeting to increase the taxes but they are not targeting to combat illegal gambling,” Lourenço adds. “So you have more than 50% in the black market and they’re doing nothing to get this money that is circling through.

“Guys, let’s try to get some money from here [illegal gambling]. If we can lower 50% to 30%, well it’s done.

“And the distribution of the money is too low for the security, for the enforcement. So we know that most of the money must go to health and to health programmes in Brazil and education as well. But you need to fight against the illegal market and you need to get the enforcement strong. But, it’s not happening.”

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.

After months of breakneck pace and a flurry of news from applicants, the process has largely ground to a standstill, at least in public view. Bidders have made their final offers and the many hours of public input from previous rounds have been replaced by closed-door meetings of the GFLB.

The GFLB’s first meeting 8 October was just 15 minutes and was largely organisational. But the rest have run for multiple hours, and although the virtual meetings are open to the public, the audio and video are disabled when the board is in session. Only the opening and closing of the meetings are viewable.

None of the five board members has experience in or connection to gaming, to help ensure neutrality. Four of the five were appointed just this year, the most recent on 30 September.

The board is working toward a 1 December deadline to submit licensure recommendations to the New York State Gaming Commission (NYSGC). So far, a weekly cadence has been established for its meetings. That would indicate that there is a maximum of five more meeting opportunities before the deadline, including Wednesday.

What criteria is NYC casino board considering?

Once its recommendations are submitted, the commission will have final say on the licensing outcome. Regulators could issue all three, less than three or award some at a later date. When the upstate New York casino process was conducted in 2014-15, four casinos were recommended by the GFLB but only three were licensed initially. The fourth licence, which went to Tioga Downs Casino Resort, was issued a year later.

Following a surprise exit by MGM Resorts earlier this month, three applicants remain for the three downstate licences:

• Bally’s Bronx
• Metropolitan Park
• Resorts World NYC

The bidders submitted their final, amended applications to the GFLB 14 October. Each project is being reviewed based on four weighted criteria:

• Economic activity and business development (70%)
• Local impact siting (10%)
• Workforce enhancement (10%)
• Diversity framework (10%)

Bally’s busy across the country

All three bidders have been active as the process unfolds. Bally’s in particular is stretched coast to coast, with ongoing projects in Chicago and Las Vegas in addition to its $4 billion Bronx proposal.

Its Chicago project has seen multiple roadblocks, including recent pushback from lenders financing the project. Bally’s is obligated to open the $1.7 billion casino by 9 September 2026 under its host city agreement but is currently projecting a fourth-quarter opening. The company did not respond to a request for clarification on this point.

On the Las Vegas Strip, Bally’s unveiled new renderings and broad construction timelines this month for its 26-acre plot next to the under-construction A’s MLB stadium. Preliminary plans include four construction phases that would begin as early as April 2026 and finish by March 2029.

The spacing is somewhat condensed, as Phase 1 is slated to open alongside the stadium in spring 2028. That timeline would leave just one year to complete the remaining amenities. Phase 1 only includes infrastructure, dining and retail spaces. The casino, two hotel towers totalling 3,000 rooms, and a theatre would come in Phases 2-4.

Bally’s has faced immense scrutiny for its highly leveraged business model and consistent debt manoeuvering. Much of its funding has come through Gaming and Leisure Properties, which has not ruled out the possibility of investing in a New York project. Bally’s has said its reverse-merger with Intralot reset its balance sheet with  “more than $1 billion of cash and available credit facilities”.

Unlike other New York casino bidders, however, Bally’s would owe an additional $115 million to the Trump Organization if awarded a licence. That controversial kicker was included in the sale agreement from 2023.

Resorts World, Hard Rock all-in as well

Resorts World is also doing some shuffling as it angles for a New York casino licence. Parent company Genting Berhad is attempting to buy out its Genting Malaysia subsidiary for $1.6 billion, to help consolidate its capital structure. A previously announced sale of its Resorts World Catskills property to Sullivan County in upstate New York is on hold until the merger is completed.

With regard to the downstate process, Resorts World remains the most committed bidder in the field. It is proposing the highest licence fee ($600 million), the highest tax rate (56% for slots, 30% for tables) and the fastest speed to market (July 2026). The project received unanimous approval from both the public and its appointed community board. In addition to $5.5 billion in capital investment, Resorts World is pledging $2 billion worth of community benefits.

Metropolitan Park’s casino partner, Hard Rock International, has been the quietest of the three finalists by comparison, though it has several ongoing projects of its own, including a Las Vegas Strip resort. Its finances are perhaps most secure for a New York casino, given the project’s connection to Steve Cohen. Cohen is the owner of the New York Mets and is listed as the 101st-richest man in the world by Forbes.

The company made headlines last week for its donation to a $300 million ballroom project at the White House. No comment was given and no amount was disclosed, but Hard Rock Chairman Jim Allen was previously an executive for the Trump Organization.

MTA counting on a lot of New York casino money

There are two factors at the state level that might complicate the licensing process. The first is the fact that New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) has long earmarked licence and tax revenue for future budgets. Its projections indicate an expectation that all three licences will be awarded, and quickly.

According to an MTA financial outlook from the state published this month, the agency is depending on “$500 million annually during 2026 and 2027, $600 million in 2028 and $200 million in 2029” from casino licensing and tax revenue. That totals $1.8 billion, and the exact figure that will come from licence fees is still unknown.

Resorts World and Hard Rock are pitching a combined $1.1 billion in licence fees, while Bally’s did not indicate a fee preference. The $500 million minimum indicates the total would be at least $1.6 billion, but there is no guarantee that all three bidders will remain in consideration following several withdrawals by other major gaming companies. Time is also of the essence for the GFLB and the NYSGC to make their decisions by year’s end.

“Any delay in the approval would lead to a delay in the MTA receiving license fee revenue and then recurring gaming tax revenue — opening potential budget gaps,” the report said.

New York state already faces a $34 billion cumulative budget gap over the next three fiscal years.

Kalshi lawsuit now top-of-mind

Adding to the New York casino intrigue is a new lawsuit between the state and the prediction market Kalshi. The NYSGC last week became the eighth state regulator to send a cease-to-desist letter to the controversial platform, and Kalshi sued in response. The company is now involved in lawsuits with a total of six states: New York, Massachusetts, Ohio, Nevada, Maryland and New Jersey.

Tribal groups in California and Wisconsin have also filed suit, and several other states have sent warnings or notices to sports betting licensees.

New York has substantial turf to defend as prediction markets expand in scope and prevalence. The Empire State boasts the biggest online sports betting market by revenue and tax generation in the US. Its running total of both retail and online handle is nearing $75 billion, with almost $3.5 billion in tax revenue.

Sports event contracts on prediction markets, including parlay-type offerings, could affect New York more than any other wagering market based on revenue and taxes. This significance has fast-tracked these lawsuits in other markets, meaning there is no time to waste for state officials in the wake of the licensing saga. It remains to be seen what kind of strain this added pressure might have on the downstate process.

Ed Birkin and Robin Harrison kick off this week’s episode discussing the NBA betting scandal. Current and former players are under indictment after an NBA-FBI investigation uncovered potential integrity breaches and even Mafia-run poker games. Was it simply greed driving players to get involved? Or is there more to this whole scandal? 

And does the industry need this sort of headache?

Evolution, Playtech and the unregulated market omertà

Next up is the Black Cube report, commissioned by Playtech and looking into Evolution’s business practices. Both sides are claiming some degree of vindication, but how does anyone come out of this looking good?

This ultimately puts a lot more focus on suppliers and where they operate. There has been a lot of talk across the industry over whether regulated markets are simply too difficult for operators. Whether that’s right or wrong, does this suggest that legal gambling is being squeezed too tightly?

This naturally leads into a slightly meandering parallel with non-alcoholic beer, because it wouldn’t be Right to the Source without a few diversions. 

The company filed the suit in US District Court for the Southern District of New York, targeting the New York State Gaming Commission. Kalshi seeks to block the state from enforcing a cease-and-desist order issued last week, which accused the firm of offering sports betting without a state licence.

Kalshi argues its sports event markets fall under federal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), not state gambling regulators. The New York case adds to a slate of legal battles for Kalshi against state regulators and tribes.

“Kalshi has no option but to seek judicial relief,” the lawsuit reads. “Kalshi has no other practical choice to protect its commercial interests and those of its users except to bring this suit. Absent judicial relief, Kalshi faces the prospect of criminal enforcement and civil penalties in New York as of the date of this filing.”

States push back against prediction markets

New York’s cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi is at least the eighth known order from a state regulator. The other states are:

• Arizona
• Illinois
• Maryland
• Montana
• Nevada
• New Jersey
• Ohio

Kalshi filed lawsuits against four other states:

• Maryland
• Nevada
• New Jersey
• Ohio

Last month, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell filed a lawsuit against Kalshi in an effort to stop sports event markets.

In New Jersey and Nevada, Kalshi received initial injunctions to prevent regulatory enforcement. In Maryland, a judge denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction. Those cases are under appeal. A coalition of 34 state attorneys general filed a brief in support of New Jersey’s legal case against Kalshi.

Several tribal gaming groups, including Wisconsin’s Ho-Chunk Nation and multiple California tribes, also challenged Kalshi in court. Meanwhile, trading platforms like Robinhood and Crypto.com face similar scrutiny over event-based prediction products.

Warnings to sportsbooks on prediction markets

Last week, Illinois became the fifth known regulator to issue a warning to licensed sportsbooks against offering prediction market products. The letter said prediction markets “constitute gambling under Illinois law” and participating or facilitating such products in Illinois, or another state, might “impact that ‘party’s suitability for licensure.”  

Regulators sent similar letters in:

• Arizona
• Michigan
• Nevada
• Ohio

Those warnings come as operators including DraftKings, FanDuel and Underdog have taken steps to begin offering event trading products.

Arkansas AG weighs in on event contract issue

The Arkansas Attorney General’s Office issued an opinion last week stating that Kalshi’s prediction markets violate state law. Senator Bryan King requested an opinion on prediction markets and event contracts, particularly those from Kalshi.

The attorney general’s opinion said Kalshi’s platform allows users to “bet on future events”, based on the Arkansas Supreme Court’s definition of gambling as “the risking of money, between two or more persons, on a contest or chance of any kind, where one must be a loser and the other a gainer”.  

It also notes Kalshi calls the products prediction markets, but that “does not protect it from scrutiny”.

Kambi scores with Holland Gaming Technology

First, Kambi Group has signed a multi-year agreement with Holland Gaming Technology in the Netherlands.

Under the deal, Kambi will provide its full turnkey sportsbook solution to the operator. This includes advanced trading capabilities, an open platform and bet builder product.

The partnership comes after Holland Gaming secured a sports betting licence from Dutch regulator, Kansspelautoriteit. It is already active within the county’s online casino space.

“We’re excited to partner Holland Gaming Technology as they expand into sports betting,” Kambi CEO Werner Becher said. “Their strong marketing and deep industry expertise make them an ideal fit for our turnkey sportsbook solution.”

BetGoodwin launches EveryMatrix sports betting product

Next, EveryMatrix has also detailed a new sports betting venture, linking up with UK-facing BetGoodwin.

The operator has rolled out a full turnkey sports solution from EveryMatrix. This followed the signing of a multi-year full turnkey agreement signed in 2024.

The platform offers more than 200,000 monthly live events and up to 800 live markets on English Premier League fixtures. Betting options include pre-live and live bet builder across 11 sports, cash out functions and odds boost.

Julian Head, CEO of BetGoodwin, said: “This is a milestone launch for us. EveryMatrix’s modern sportsbook gives us a feature-rich platform that will help deliver an outstanding betting experience to our customers.”

Pragmatic Play opens Colombia studio

In other news, Pragmatic Play has expanded its reach in Latin America by launching a new live casino studio in Colombia.

Delivered and operated by ARRISE, the Bogotá-based studio will deliver localised, premium live casino experiences in Latin America. Supported by an investment of over $15 million, the facility is set to create over 1,500 new jobs.

More than 100 tables will be located at the studio. These include roulette and blackjack, all customised to local preferences and hosted by Spanish and Portuguese-speaking dealers.

Irina Cornides, chief operating officer at Pragmatic Play, said: “This new live casino studio in Colombia represents a major milestone in our native content expansion strategy across Latin America.” 

Michigan regulator targets illegal websites

Into the US, the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB) has taken further action against unlicensed gambling operators.

The regulator issued cease-and-desist letters to eight online casinos found to be illegally offering iGaming to Michigan residents. The MGCB regularly sends these notices to tackle unlicensed activities.

Aussie Play, CryptoGames, FortuneJack, Hugewin Casino, My Stake Casino, Play at Harry’s Casino, RuneChat and Slots Garden were all contacted by the regulator.

“These unauthorised websites often appear sophisticated and legitimate, but they operate outside of Michigan law, MGCB Executive Director Henry Williams said. “The MGCB will not hesitate to intervene when we find operators ignoring our state’s gambling laws.”

NCPG welcomes affiliates in Texas and Vermont  

And finally, the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) in the US has announced two new members.

The Texas Coalition on Problem Gambling and the Vermont Council on Gaming and Health have joined the organisation. Both groups will work with the NCPG and other members on supporting those impacted by problem gambling.

While the NCPG advocates for problem gambling support at the national level, its state affiliates focus on regional efforts. With the new additions, NCPG now has affiliates in 37 states.

“Every state has a unique gambling landscape, but the need for prevention and support is universal, NCPG Board President Derek Longmeier said. “Affiliate organisations are vital partners in NCPG’s mission.”

At stake is whether Estonia – already one of the world’s most digitised economies – can convert its technological advantage and forward-thinking tax policies into a credible and sustainable hub for online gaming. 

“Estonia is indeed moving toward positioning itself as a more attractive and competitive jurisdiction for gambling operators,” says Margus Reiland, partner and head of regulation, gambling and tax at Tallinn-based Law Firm Widen. 

Reiland explains that Estonia’s new gambling bill currently being debated in Parliament represents the most significant update to Estonia’s gambling framework in more than 15 years.  

New measures being considered

Among its key measures are: 

• Updated definitions of remote and additional gambling. 

• Broader scope for licensed operators to offer support services such as IT and accounting within the same group. 

• Mandatory audits of annual financial reports. 

• Clearer anti-money laundering data requirements for licence applications. 

• The Tax and Customs Board becoming the single point of contact for licences. 

• Tighter rules on gambling venues located near youth facilities. 

• Tenfold increases in fines and penalties. 

• Perhaps most importantly, a reduction in the remote gambling tax rate. 

According to the bill’s explanatory memorandum, its aim is to “modernise rules that have remained largely unchanged for over 15 years, strengthen supervision and improve the reliability and transparency of the gambling sector”. 

“In other words,” Reiland adds, “the reforms aim to encourage licensed operators to base their operations in Estonia instead of elsewhere in the world.”  

The timeline for reforms remains uncertain but Reiland says the bill is currently under parliamentary discussion and has not yet been adopted. “That being said, if the government coalition remains stable and continues to support the proposal, it is likely that the amendments will eventually pass,” he adds.  

Estonia new gambling bill’s tax reform 

One of the headline changes is the proposed lowering of Estonia’s gambling tax. For Reiland, this sends a clear strategic signal. The proposed bill by MPs from the Eesti 200 and the Reform Party would gradually reduce the remote gambling tax rate by 0.5 percentage points per year, aiming to reach 4% by around 2029.  

“From a regulatory standpoint, the intent appears to be to strengthen Estonia’s position in the gambling sector,” Reiland says. “And that intent is without a doubt positive.” 

Operators have largely welcomed the move, viewing it as recognition that “their long-standing concerns and challenges are being acknowledged by policymakers,” says Reiland. Although he also points out that the wider political debate “has been more divided”.  

The main question seems to be whether lowering the gambling tax truly benefits the wider economy or primarily favours the operators. 

The most prominent opponents are members of the centre-left opposition party Keskerakond The underlining sentiment is that the proposed gambling regulation is a lobby project, with no real positive effect. Industry insiders, however, are cheering the direction of travel.  

In an October blog post, Tim Heath, founder of crypto-driven gaming giant Yolo Group, praised Estonia’s new gambling bill, noting: “Only a year ago, the plan was to raise taxes. Proposing a different course took serious courage, and it shows the Estonian government understands how our industry really works.” 

Yolo has been headquartered in Estonia for years. Lower tax friction, Heath argued, would attract more operators, which in turn could bring “more investment, more jobs and, ultimately, more tax revenue. By going down this path, Estonia is choosing to grow its share of the pie rather than fight over the crumbs.” 

Digital credibility as a competitive edge 

Reiland believes Estonia’s strengths go beyond gambling taxation. “Obtaining and maintaining a licence in Estonia is already relatively fast, cost-efficient and administratively straightforward,” he explains. 

On top of that, “Estonia has strong IT infrastructure, robust cyber security standards and a well-developed anti-money-laundering framework. This raises the regulatory credibility to a high level.” 

In his view: “Estonia has always been a solid and effective choice for getting a licence – it just hasn’t received the same level of international attention as some other jurisdictions.” That could soon change. Estonia’s X-Road data-exchange system – a secure interoperability platform connecting public and private databases – underpins much of the nation’s digital governance and has become a unique asset for regulators. 

“It’s not just used in gambling supervision,” Reiland notes. “It’s also in data exchange across government agencies, health service providers and many private sector stakeholders. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it is a branding exercise but a widely used system that does actually support regulatory efficiency.” 

Yolo Group’s Heath agrees that this technological backbone gives Estonia an advantage few others can match. The market’s use of crypto as a payment method for gambling is a huge benefit to the group. “Estonia’s embrace of crypto in this new regulation helps cement its reputation as the world’s most digital country,” he wrote. “It encourages operator transparency and turns it into a national advantage.” 

Crypto and compliance in the EU  

Unlike many European jurisdictions tightening their stance on digital assets, Estonia is keeping cryptocurrency as an approved payment method – albeit under strict AML and KYC rules. 

“The Estonian approach allows crypto as a payment method for Estonian licensed operators,” Reiland explains. But he cautions that since MiCA – the European Union’s comprehensive legal framework for crypto-assets, designed to bring consistency, consumer protection and financial stability to the crypto sector – it is still a novel regulation and national practices differ.  

“It should be analysed under other target market jurisdictions whether all necessary requirements have been met,” says Reiland. In practice, he says, “the key question isn’t whether to use crypto but whether the operators know how to apply the highest standards of AML, KYC, enhanced due diligence etc under self-regulation principles”. 

In his blog post Heath echoed this pragmatism, arguing that Estonia’s openness “aligns with MiCA and EU best practice”. The integration of blockchain analytics tools such as Chainalysis, he suggests, allows for “real-time tracing and risk-scoring of crypto transactions,” thus enhancing transparency rather than undermining it. 

Crypto casinos, which are largely unlicensed or illegal across most European markets, are gaining rapid popularity among younger players. Last month Yolo announced it would be leaning entirely into regulated markets, and in another blog post Heath said he believed crypto was becoming “mainstream”.

Predictability and digital expertise 

Some in the industry remain cautious of Estonia’s new gambling bill and point to last year’s short-lived proposal to raise gambling taxes as a sign of political volatility. But Reiland dismisses this concern. 

“Estonia has had a very stable regulatory framework for a long time,” he insists. “The only real changes have come in the past couple of years, largely because different interests were competing over how to modernise the system. Right now if the bill is passed, the expectation is that the framework will remain generally stable for many years and the likelihood of a reversed course is very low in my eyes.” 

That sense of predictability – combined with Estonia’s digital expertise – could be decisive in drawing operators who are increasingly weary of the administrative burdens in older licensing hubs. The draft bill also introduces modest reforms to responsible-gambling measures, including expansion of the Estonia´s self-exclusion register, HAMPI. 

“There were different ideas floating on the self-exclusion list amendments but right now the latest parliamentary bill seems to be quite conservative,” Reiland notes. “It is my view still that probably the HAMPI regulation will be overhauled pretty soon since the existing system has been in place for quite some time.” 

Heath, meanwhile, highlighted this as one of the most important improvements, arguing that the reforms “lay the foundation for a safer, fairer environment – one where players can simply enjoy the thrill of the game, confident that they’re spinning in a trusted, regulated space”. 

Estonia’s new gambling bill a blueprint for Europe? 

If Estonia succeeds, could its model influence EU-wide discussions on digital gambling regulation? Reiland is cautiously optimistic. “Hopefully, if Estonia’s system proves effective, it could serve as a model for EU discussions rather than an outlier,” he says.  

“The underlying logic is not to prohibit or overregulate, but to use IT systems and secure information exchange to support legitimate business while maintaining continuous oversight.” 

Marriage of innovation and integrity could pay off 

For now, Estonia’s new gambling bill’s parliamentary journey continues. “It might be expected that after this bill has been adopted, the Ministry of Finance might also present a bill covering the remaining issues,” Reiland says – mentioning future clarification on crypto and the HAMPI system as likely priorities. “No seismic changes are to be expected.” 

As Heath of Yolo Group put it: “What Estonia is proposing right now could become a blueprint for how small, smart countries lead global industries – by marrying innovation with integrity.” And with legal experts like Reiland pointing to stability, efficiency and credibility as the cornerstones of the new framework, Estonia’s gamble on innovation might just pay off. 

These claims were made in a new report commissioned by the BGC and carried out by consultancy EY-Parthenon. Titled ‘Impacts of changes to betting and gaming regulation’, it considered several of the proposals submitted for an amended gambling tax.

The government is expected to set out new gambling tax plans during its upcoming budget on 26 November. Several approaches have been mooted but the government is yet to confirm which approach it will take.

The report considers four proposals, covering the current three core gambling tax rates in the UK. These comprise general betting duty (GBD), currently at 15% of net stake receipts, remote gambling duty (RGD) of 21% of profit and machines gaming duty (MGD) at 20% of profit.

It also took into consideration the impact of ‘elasticity’ when analysing each approach to new tax rules. Elasticity measures the responsiveness of one economic variable to a change in another.

This is based on estimates of ‘central’ price elasticity of demand, produced in 2014 by Frontier Economics for HMRC, and ‘higher’ elasticity, estimated by EY to account for a greater possible impact.

Aligning rates could cost almost 5,000 jobs

In the first instance, the report looked at how aligning rates would impact the industry. This approach would see betting duty rates rise to 21%, remote duty remain at 21% and machine duty stay at 20%.

Based on central elasticity, this measure would raise an additional £250 million in betting duty but also lead to a £400 million increase in black market stakes. As such, the government would forgo £10 million in duties. In addition, 800 direct jobs could be lost and 2,000 indirect jobs.

However, on a higher elasticity basis, this approach could favour the black market more heavily. Betting duty would rise £180 million, whereas black market stakes could increase by £1.2 billion. This could lead to a £420 million drop in gross value added (GVA), the measurement used to estimate the size of the industry and its supply chain, and 4,700 direct and indirect job losses.

SMF tax proposal could pump £8.1 million into black market

Secondly, the BGC’s report considered a proposal made by the Social Market Foundation (SMF). In July, the SMF suggested raising RGD from 21% to 50%, GBD to 25% – but cutting horse racing bets to 5% – and keeping MGD level at 20%.

In a best, central-based elasticity scenario, an additional £1 billion would be drawn from the industry in tax in this scenario. However, the report said black market stakes would rocket $5.8 billion and cut regulated industry GVA by £2.2 billion. In addition, some 22,000 jobs could be lost as a result of the changes.

As for higher impact, research suggested tax revenue would rise, but only by £470 million. This would be due to more players turning to the black market, with illegal stakes forecasted to rise £8.1 billion. GVA would drop by £2.5 billion and more than 30,00 jobs would be lost.

IPPR approach puts 40,000 jobs at risk

The third proposal addressed was from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), a progressive think tank. It suggested increasing all three rates: GBD from 15% to 25%, RGD from 21% to 50% and MGD from 20% to 50%.

Should this be the case, central elasticity basis suggests a £1.8 billion increase in tax, given that all three rates would rise. However, black market stakes are anticipated to rise £6 billion, wiping $2.5 billion off industry GVA. On top of this, the report said 29,100 jobs would be cut from the sector.

However, if there were a stronger, higher response from consumers, the impact of changes would worsen. Tax revenue would rise £1.1 billion but black market stakes would also jump £8.4 billion, leading to £290 million in foregone duty.

As such industry GVA would slump £3.1 billion, while some 40,000 jobs could be lost. This would include 14,100 direct jobs and 26,000 indirect positions.

Fixed increases would still hit jobs

Finally, the report looked at whether a fixed increase should be applied to each rate. In this case, referred to as a ‘ready reckoner’, GBD, RGD and MGD would all increase by 5%.

Based on central elasticity, excise revenue would be higher across all three rates, but other tax revenue would decline. GVA would be lower across each segment, while hundreds of jobs would be lost in the process. RGD would likely be hardest hit, losing an estimated £359 million in GVA and approximately 3,700 jobs.

In terms of high elasticity, again excise tax revenue would increase in each area, but other tax revenue would decline, with an estimated £210 million to be lost in total. GVA as a whole would drop £860 million, while up to 10,000 jobs would go.

Again, RGD would see the worst impact, losing £420 million in GVA and almost 5,000 jobs.

Tax rises a ’threat’ to UK economy

Commenting on the report, BGC CEO Grainne Hurst said it was clear further tax rises would be a “direct threat” to UK jobs and economic growth. She urged the government to tread carefully before committing to higher tax.

Any increases would be in addition to the new statutory levy, which came into effect on 6 April this year.

“Figures speak for themselves,” Hurst said. “Tens of thousands of jobs lost, billions diverted to the black market and a possible £3 billion hit to the economy.

“Tax raids like those proposed would mean fewer betting shops, casinos and bingo halls, fewer jobs and a huge boost to the growing, unsafe gambling black market, while not raising anywhere near the tax claimed.”

With this, Hurst called for “balanced’ regulations and a “stable” tax regime to help support a growing, regulated sector.

“These proposals would achieve the absolute opposite of that and undermine the very consumer protections that keep people safe by pushing customers towards the unregulated black market, where there are no safeguards, no tax receipts, no jobs and no support for the sports we all love,” Hurst said.

“Britain’s betting and gaming sector is a world leader – employing thousands, paying billions in tax, and investing in British sport. The choice is clear: back a successful, sustainable, regulated British industry – or risk losing jobs, investment and growth.”

High street bookmakers echo tax concerns

The report comes after several major operators warned they could close retail locations if the mooted tax rises go ahead.

A Sunday Times report suggested William Hill shop closures could take place if taxes rise. The sources, who were not named, said these closures could range between 120 and 200 – up to 15% of the entire William Hill UK estate.

Flutter Entertainment also set out plans to close 57 Paddy Power betting shops across the UK and Ireland. This, it said, was amid increasing cost pressures with almost 250 staff facing redundancy.

Stella David, CEO of Entain, has also said UK retail shops could close to help save on costs.

The measures are expected to be implemented no later than 1 January 2027. 

On Friday, the Danish parliament passed its ‘Gaming Package 1’, aimed at preventing gambling addiction and strengthening the protection of children against gambling harms. 

The package will introduce a whistle-to-whistle ban on gambling ads during live sports broadcasts, starting 10 minutes before the event and ending 10 minutes after the games conclude.  

This will include bans on live odds being displayed across banners in stadiums and a restriction on the use of celebrities and influencers in gambling ads.  

Package prohibits gambling ads near schools 

Additionally, the package prohibits the use of “free money games” as welcome bonuses. 

Gambling ads on public transport and within 200 metres of schools or other educational institutions will also be prohibited under new rules, while persons aged under 25 will not be allowed to feature in any gambling marketing. 

Denmark’s Gambling Act will be amended to mandate age filters on social media ads to ensure content isn’t targeted at those aged under 18, while gambling addiction treatment centres will receive an additional DKK8 million ($1.2 million) in funding next year.  

These centres will receive further funding of DKK3 million in 2027, DKK5 million in 2028, DKK2 million in 2029 and DKK3 million in 2030. 

Denmark’s Tax Minister Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen said the measures should prove effective in curbing gambling addiction in the country. 

“With Gaming Package 1: A More Responsible Gaming Market, the government, together with a broad majority in the Danish parliament, is taking an important step towards a more responsible gaming market,” Halsboe-Jørgensen said.  

“The work does not stop here.” 

Government’s ‘showdown’ with Danish gambling sector 

Upon revealing the package of restrictions, the government said Denmark had faced issues with rising gambling addiction in the country.  

It claimed nearly 500,000 Danish adults had experienced some extent of gambling problems in 2021, a figure that has doubled since 2016, with almost 30,000 experiencing serious gambling problems. 

The government also stated 25,000 Danish children and young people have experienced some degree of gambling harm, with 2,600 having a serious gambling problem. 

Halsboe-Jørgensen explained the agreement marked a shift in mentality in Denmark, with closer attention paid to restricting the gambling sector and the harms that can come from it. 

“This is the beginning of a showdown with a gaming industry that has been allowed to take up too much space for far too long, so that entertainment does not turn into addiction,” Halsboe-Jørgensen said.  

“This requires both responsible providers, stronger rules and a sustained political effort.” 

Denmark regulator to be strengthened 

The agreement will also seek to further empower Spillemyndigheden, the country’s gambling regulator.  

Spillemyndigheden will be given the authority to block illegal gambling sites, with clearer principles and criteria for calculating fines and sanctions. 

Certain administrative burdens will also be eased, such as the need for gaming providers to send a copy of decisions on closing gambling accounts to Spillemyndigheden. 

Denmark gambling revenue on the increase 

In August, Denmark achieved gambling revenue of DKK714 million, both a year-on-year and month-on-month increase. 

Denmark’s sports betting and iGaming markets both posted double-digit growth when compared to the same month last year. 

The nation’s self-exclusion scheme ROFUS reached 63,488 users by the end of August, with 41,362 of those having permanently excluded themselves from gambling.

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.”

Speaking to analysts during the group’s Q3 earnings call on Thursday, Evolution CEO Martin Carlesund hinted at the December deadline, although he said the Gambling Commission had not specified a timeline for the review.  

Evolution Gambling Commission review stems from supplier crackdown

The GC commenced its review in December, after discovering the supplier’s games were being provided to unlicensed operators in the country. The case indicated a wider crackdown on supplier compliance in the UK, as the commission stepped up enforcement against the growing black market.  

Gambling Commission CEO Andrew Rhodes had previously warned operators to step up their monitoring of business relationships, to ensure partners were not facilitating illegal gambling. 

“When it comes to the UK Gambling Commission timeline, unfortunately I don’t have any other information. It’s in the hands of the regulator and our estimation is that it will be by the end of this year,” Carlesund told analysts.  

Q3 revenue dips on troubles in Asia  

In what has been a pivotal week for the group, as it unveiled that Playtech had commissioned a secret investigation against it, Evolution reported its net revenue for Q3 had decreased by 2.4% to €507.1 million. 

Carlesund blamed Asia for its continued impact on the group’s earnings, as it continued to fight targeted cyber-attacks during the period.  

He also looked to the Philippines iGaming market, noting it had been “very volatile” during its early stages.  

“Other markets such as India, which in our view show signs of moving towards regulation, create a higher level of uncertainty than before,” he said in a statement.  

However, the group reported quarter-on-quarter growth in Europe after a couple of challenging quarters during which the market had been impacted by ring-fencing actions to prevent Evolution’s games from being used in grey markets.  

Europe revenue hit €182.2 million in Q3, up from €180.2 million in Q2. But in a year-on-year comparison, Europe was down 6.5%. The ring-fencing exercise commenced after the commission’s review was launched. The supplier initiated the project to ensure it was meeting compliance requirements across Europe and not contributing to the growing back market.  

EBITDA for the period was down 18.9% to €337 million, while EBITDA margin hit 66.4%, down from 71.7% last year. Profit landed at €252.3 million, down 23.2%.  

Caixa is a state-owned bank in Brazil, which raises questions over whether such an entity should be involved in an industry that divides opinion among Brazilian politicians, despite its strict regulatory framework.

Earlier this month, in an interview with Brazilian news outlet O Globo, Caixa President Carlos Vieira revealed the bank would launch its betting offering in November.

The move remains controversial, however, and on Wednesday Senator Damares Alves hit out at Caixa’s plans.

Alves said the launch contradicted the level of social responsibility expected of Caixa, as a state-owned entity in Brazil, as its product would put bettors at risk of gambling addiction.

“Caixa Econômica Federal’s decision to create its own online betting platform represents perhaps one of the greatest moral and social setbacks in the country’s recent history,” Alves told the Senate plenary.

“It is a contradictory, dangerous and profoundly irresponsible move, coming precisely from a public institution created to promote social development, affordable housing and financial inclusion, not to exploit the addiction and economic vulnerability of the poorest population.”

Why is Caixa’s betting entrance so controversial?

Alves claimed the launch of Caixa’s betting offering goes against the Brazil government’s objective to protect players from gambling harms.

Brazil’s government recently failed in its attempts to raise the gambling tax by 50%, while proposals to retroactively tax operators on their activities prior to regulation also collapsed.

However, the government seems to still be intent on raising taxes on gambling operators, with a new bill in motion to raise the rate to 24% of GGR, while additional ad restrictions are also on the horizon.

With the government believing it is taking steps to better protect bettors, Alves fears Caixa’s betting launch will legitimise the activity of betting and cause potential damage to Brazilians.

“The same government that claimed to want to control the damage now decides to be the agent of exploitation itself, transforming a public bank, a symbol of national trust, into an official betting house,” Alves explained. “It must be said bluntly: this is a tragedy waiting to happen!”

Caixa hoping to be at the forefront of Brazil betting

In the interview with O Globo, Vieira said he hoped Caixa would become a “major player” in the Brazilian regulated betting market.

Vieira estimated revenues of between BRL2 billion and BRL2.5 billion in 2026, Caixa’s first full year in operation.

Caixa’s authorisation to operate in the market was formalised through Ordinance No 1,665, issued on 29 July this year. The licence encompasses three brands, named BetCaixa, Megabet and Xbet Caixa.

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. 

The case, Evolution said, dates back to December 2020 when Playtech began working with intelligence firm Black Cube.

According to Evolution, this is when the controversial report – which it said was intended to “destroy its reputation” – was commissioned by the developer, with input from high-level Playtech executives including CEO Mor Weizer.

Playtech stands by report

Playtech issued an almost-immediate response to Evolution’s statement on Tuesday, insisting claims of a smear campaign are “wholly untrue” and “designed to distract from serious questions about Evolution’s business practices”.

The supplier giant said its subsidiary approached the independent investigator to look into “credible and repeated concerns” from operators, suppliers and regulators about Evolution’s activities in prohibited and sanctioned markets. The probe also targeted the extent of Evolution’s supply to unlicensed operators in regulated markets.

It added that the investigation was undertaken lawfully to understand and verify “concerns of significant regulatory and commercial importance”.

“The report published, as a result of the investigation, clearly evidences that Evolution’s business practices undermine lawful and compliant gambling operations,” Playtech said. “Such conduct damages trust in the credibility of the entire industry and also ultimately impacts government tax collection.

“Playtech stands by the decision to commission the report. Evolution continues to seek to avoid legitimate scrutiny rather than address longstanding questions about its conduct, including its decision to supply operators in illegal markets and to support unlicensed operators in regulated markets.

Evolution under review by GB Gambling Commission

In December 2024, Great Britain’s Gambling Commission initiated a review of Evolution’s supplier licence in the market, as it had discovered the company’s games had been provided to unlicensed operators in the country.

The review is ongoing, with no visible timeline set. In response to the move, Evolution sought to shut down services in grey markets across Europe to tidy up its operations.

Evolution said in its Q1 earnings report in April that it had taken steps to ensure its regulatory requirements across Europe were being met. But it noted that group profitability had taken a hit during the quarter, as a result of these exits.

In July CEO Martin Carlesund said the financial impact of this process had continued into Q2, as it had adopted geo-blocking technology to prevent its products from being used in unlicensed markets.

“We don’t guide on [the impact of] each market, but we are working hard to ensure we are in a position proactively in the European market and that is a little bit more expensive than we anticipated,” Carlesund said during the Q2 analyst call.  

Black Cube’s investigation

Playtech and Black Cube’s investigation dates back to 2021 when the latter was accused of secretly recording conversations and interviews with Evolution employees, using false personas and disguises.

Up to five former Evolution employees and board members are said to have featured. On this, Evolution accused Black Cube of editing videos and audio to create a “misleading and defamatory report”.

In November 2021, law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky submitted the report to regulators in New Jersey and Pennsylvania for analysis.

Evolution flagged a PR company (HeraldPR) which it said was paid $10,000 by Black Cube later the same month. HeraldPR is led by Juda Engelmayer, who, according to a New York Times piece referenced by Evolution, is seen as a “go-to guy among a particular subset of alleged fraudsters and predators”.

Weeks later Evolution filed a lawsuit over the matter. This targeted Calcagni & Kanefsky and, at the time, the anonymous parties behind the report as it sought to understand who had commissioned the document.

The suit made claims about defamation, trade libel, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, fraud and other illegal conduct. It remains ongoing in the Superior Court of New Jersey.

‘Extraordinary’ measures to hide Playtech and Black Cube identities

Evolution went on to say that for years after the lawsuit was filed, Playtech and Black Cube took “extraordinary” measures to conceal their roles in the matter.

However, the case began to unravel in February last year. Regulators in both New Jersey and Pennsylvania found no evidence of wrongdoing by Evolution, including accusations it took illegal bets and inappropriate payments.

Black Cube’s identity was revealed in April this year but the firm denied knowledge of who had commissioned the report. As such, Evolution amended its complaint by adding Black Cube as a defendant in the case.

The New Jersey Superior Court in September ordered Black Cube to identify its client. Within this order, it branded the report as “objectively baseless”.

Now, Evolution has said it will amend its complaint to include Playtech as a defendant. It said it expects litigation to proceed in earnest and likely extend through 2026.

Black Cube: Evolution misled the public and the court

In its statement, Evolution said it was “deeply disturbing” to see one of its competitors take such action. It added that Playtech would have been fully aware of the “extremely harmful repercussions” of its investigation.

“The report, which was furnished to regulators by a law firm representing Black Cube and purposely leaked to the media, was determined by two state regulators in the US to be lacking in evidentiary support,” Evolution said.

“Later, the New Jersey Superior Court also determined that the defamatory report was untruthful and lacked veracity. Notwithstanding those findings, dissemination of the report has resulted in multi-billion-dollar damage to our company.”

In a statement to iGB, Black Cube said it had “proudly submitted its findings in coordination with its client”.

“The case now enters its decisive stage – where years of Black Cube’s intelligence work will finally be brought to light and thoroughly examined. The extensive body of evidence, including countless hours of video and audio recordings, leaves no room for doubt: Evolution knowingly and deliberately allowed its games to operate in sanctioned jurisdictions and black markets – both before and after the report’s submission,” the statement said.

Black Cube then accused Evolution of misleading the public, the Court, and regulatory authorities.

Implications on the wider industry

Commenting on the case, analysts at Regulus Partners raised concerns about how it may impact wider opinion of the iGaming sector. Regulus’ Paul Leyland said the industry “does not need any more help to make itself look dishonest”.

“This latest revelation is simply grist to the mill that the industry as a whole cannot really be trusted to do the right thing even though the majority of operators and suppliers are decent companies staffed by decent people trying to provide a decent product,” Regulus said.

“An industry that can only thrive with its social contract intact simply cannot behave like this. It is worse than tone-deaf from a corporate perspective, it is self-defeating for the whole industry, which Playtech’s clients are also no doubt reflecting on.”

Regulus also noted the long-term impact for Playtech, with 30% having already been wiped off its stock market value since the news broke on Tuesday.

“To commission a deliberately anonymous smear campaign that was clearly designed to do serious regulatory and reputational damage requires the blow to land: the bullet must kill, not wound, or the wounded party can claim damages,” Regulus said.

“The fact that Playtech has lost £300 million from its stock market value suggests that investors realise the financial threat to Playtech might be rather more serious than the embarrassment of getting caught.”

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.”

Yet, the revenue being generated through the “proliferation” of betting houses in the southern African nation was not flowing directly into the treasury, as punters’ winnings were untaxed. To formalise the industry and help boost revenue collection to meet “pressing budget needs”, he introduced the 10% withholding tax on gross sports betting winnings, one of only four taxes that he announced on that day.  

The tax, which came into force on 1 January, applies to winnings at all local betting shops and via online platforms operated by land-based bookmakers.

The Herald, a local daily, reported on 13 March that Zimbabwe’s gambling industry had generated about $120 million in revenue in 2023, with the online segment contributing $45 million.  

Ncube previously projected the economy could collect up to $15 million annually via the punters’ tax, based on his forecast of $150 million gross winnings in 2025. He said about 300,000 locals engaged in online betting in 2024, up 15% on the prior year, with 60% of bettors being between 18 and 35 years old.

“This growth has been fuelled by rising internet penetration and the accessibility of smartphones, with over 5.2 million devices in use nationwide,” the paper wrote.

Zimbabwe withholding tax will prove costly for operators

To comply with the new tax collection system, Marvellous Tapera, the founder and managing partner of WTS Tax Matrix, a leading Zimbabwean tax consultancy, said bookmakers were required to set up or upgrade their transaction and reporting systems to automatically calculate and withhold the 10% levy on all winning payouts across points of sale and online wallets.

“They also had to enhance accounting and reconciliation workflows to produce accurate monthly returns for ZIMRA (Zimbabwe Revenue Authority), train staff on tax procedures and customer communications, improve cash management and banking for timely remittances, and often consult tax or legal experts to ensure full compliance,” he tells iGB.

“Although feasible, these changes were operationally demanding and particularly costly for smaller operators, requiring significant time and financial resources,” Tapera adds.

Citing an anonymous operator, The Herald’s article reported Zimbabwe’s withholding tax would require a system upgrade costing up to $50,000 per platform. This is in addition to the $20,000 the average bookmaker spends on tax reporting yearly.

Tapera observes the betting tax’s flat structure raises fairness concerns. In its current form, he argues, the tax “is socially regressive” as it affects low-income and casual bettors compared to wealthier participants. It has the potential to squeeze operators’ profit margins and cause them to adjust odds to make up the losses.

“Applying a uniform 10% withholding tax without any exemption is regressive in a low-income economy like Zimbabwe’s, as it risks burdening poorer bettors and driving gambling activity to unregulated platforms,” Tapera adds.

He advises the government to adopt a more nuanced structure like the one proposed in South Africa, which is based on the amount and frequency of players’ winnings.

What can Zimbabwe learn from other African markets?

“South Africa’s model – a 15% withholding tax applied only to winnings above R25,000 – demonstrates how such a safeguard can protect casual players, and Zimbabwe would benefit from implementing a similar threshold or accompanying social protection measures,” Tapera suggests.

“Introducing a minimum exemption threshold or adopting a more progressive structure would make the system fairer while still capturing significant revenue from larger winnings.”

In a release on 5 September, Stats SA, South Africa’s national data agency, said the gambling sector generated $3.4 billion in GGR during the 2023-24 financial year. The latest figures from the National Gambling Board (NGB) in October reported an increase to $4.3 billion for the financial year 2024-25.

South Africa’s government announced the proposal to introduce a tax on winnings in 2011, with the aim being to start collecting it in the following year. The levy targets professional or regular bettors, while seeking to exclude casual punters.  

However, according to Deloitte, the government had not yet implemented the tax in February, due to staunch opposition from the local industry. 

Withholding tax must account for inflation

“The current economic climate, characterised by high unemployment and cost of living, calls for a balance between revenue generation and social protection,” the consultancy said in a 10 February note.

“A withholding tax on individual winnings may provide this balance if carefully structured. The minimum value for taxation should be reconsidered, taking into account inflation over the last 13 years since the first proposal. This will ensure that those gambling to supplement their low income are kept out of this tax net and do not turn to illegal gambling activities, which are completely out of SARS’ (South African Revenue Service) grasp,” the note said

In October, the Kenyan government similarly introduced a 5% withdrawal tax to replace its previous 20% tax on net winnings. It expects to collect about $74 million in the 2025-26 fiscal year, more than double the $35 million it collected previously.

Rapidly growing mobile penetration leaving land-based betting behind

Commenting on the new Kenyan model, Parliament’s “The Budget Watch 2025” document said a blanket tax rate could discourage casual participants and push actors from regulated platforms to offshore ones.

An official at one of Zimbabwe’s largest land-based operators expresses a similar concern to iGB. Speaking off the record, he says the withholding tax came into effect at a time when a large number of local punters is increasingly switching to unregulated and offshore operators.

“One now needs a mobile phone, a computer and an internet connection to start betting online,” he says.

“Some workers have been disciplined by their employers for participating in online gaming and betting using their employers’ computers and internet. And this [is on] platforms not subject to local regulations, including the new tax. 

“There are some people who used to visit brick-and-mortar branches who are now not doing so as frequently. [Zimbabwe’s witholding] tax will hasten the traffic to online platforms, leaving physical betting halls empty or for the few that don’t have smartphones and mobile data, and the old, technologically less-experienced ones.”

The Postal and Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe said in its latest quarterly report in October that the nation’s mobile penetration rose from 101.39% in the first quarter of 2025 to 102.64% in the second.  The internet penetration also jumped from 76.19% in March, to 81.83% by June.

In the case of Super Group-owned Betway, a complainant took issue with a YouTube advert that appeared in May. This featured a football fan wearing clothing carrying the logo of Premier League football club Chelsea.

The complainant contended the appearance of the Chelsea logo could have been of appeal to under-18s. As such, the advert could have been seen as a breach of regulations.

In response, Betway said the advert referred to its rewards scheme, rather than directly to its gambling services. It also noted how official guidance allows gambling adverts to include content that “specifically identifies a subject of the gambling activity”. This, it said, includes sports team logos.

Betway also flagged how the advert did not feature any active football and focused on the actual stadium, with rewards club members having the opportunity to win a stadium tour of Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge. It noted how everyone in the video was over the age of 18 and actual competition winners and not actors.

Further defence included that it was permitted to use Chelsea logos under its partnership with the club. In addition, it said the advert was targeted at logged-in YouTube users over the age of 25.

ASA brands Betway ad ‘irresponsible’

However, the ASA disagreed. It said that while guidance does allow for club logos to appear, this only applies to being featured in a standalone context, such as at the end of an advert. It said the fact logos appeared throughout breached this rule and would have appealed to under-18s.

The ASA also dismissed the argument that the ad targeted logged-in YouTube users aged over 25. It said YouTube was a media environment where users self-verify on sign-up and does not use robust age-verification methods. As such, it ruled Betway did not exclude under-18s from the audience.

With this, it flagged Ofcom research based on a 2025 survey that indicated 81% of 8-17-year-olds active on social media used YouTube. It also estimated 20% of this age group with their own profile had a registered user age of at least 18.

“Given that evidence, we considered it was likely that there was at least a significant number of children who had not used their real date of birth when signing up to YouTube and were able to see and access content intended for those aged 18 or older, meaning they could view advertising content from gambling operators,” the ASA said.

“We concluded that the ad was irresponsible and breached the code.”

Kwiff criticised over Lewis Hamilton ad

Meanwhile, the ASA also ruled against Kwiff, a brand operated by Eaton Gate Gaming, over an advert featuring British Formula 1 star Lewis Hamilton.

The ad appeared on X before the 2024 British Grand Prix and featured an image of Hamilton. It also contained a link to an article on Kwiff’s website about the race, as well as an 18+ symbol and GambleAware branding.

The complaint, from a researcher at the University of Bristol, noted the inclusion of Hamilton could appeal to under-18s.

In its lengthy defence, Kwiff made several remarks about the ad. It said that it believed it to be responsible and was published to drive traffic to a blog article, rather than to its gambling site. It also noted the article content was a piece of sports commentary and not about gambling.

Other defence factors included that none of its followers on X were younger than 18. It also said there was no “standardised approach” to age verification on social media and that it took “reasonable” steps to prevent younger people from seeing the ad.

In addition, it took the position that Hamilton would likely be of more appeal to older fans of F1. Kwiff said younger supporters would have more interest in younger drivers, as opposed to 40-year-old Hamilton.

X also issued a response, saying the post was organic and not a promoted or paid-for ad. It added that it has now put in place a multi-step age assurance methodology in line with the UK Online Safety Act. This was not the case when the post appeared last year.

ASA upholds irresponsible ruling

But the ASA disagreed with the operator. It flagged several stand-out issues with the ad and the defence put forward by Kwiff.

Key points included that the ad directly connected to Kwiff’s gambling site. It also dismissed the argument that Hamilton would not be of appeal to under-18s, given that he has won seven F1 World Drivers’ Championships. As such, his inclusion in the post was in breach of official guidance.

Other points were that X did not have in place robust age-verification methods at the time and that it relied on users self-verifying. As such, it said there was potential that some Kwiff followers may have been under 18 and seen the post.

“We accepted that X had an additional measure in place, whereby third parties could report accounts that they believed were under age,” it said. “While helpful, we considered that this measure was unlikely to effectively identify all accounts that had falsely claimed to be over 18.”

It concluded: “We acknowledged Sir Lewis Hamilton was primarily famous for his association with an adult-oriented sport but considered he was very well known to a general UK audience, including to children and young people.

“We considered, based on his public profile, commercial partnerships, media appearances and UK under-18 social media following, that he had strong appeal to under-18s. For those reasons, we concluded the ad was irresponsible and breached the code.”

SkyBet fails with Gary Neville ad appeal

In other news, the ASA rejected an appeal from SkyBet about a historical advert featuring ex-footballer and now-pundit Gary Neville.

In October 2023, the ASA ruled an ad featuring Neville breached regulations as it may have been of appeal to under-18s. The post on X featured an embedded video clip from The Overlap football podcast, with Neville discussing which team might win the Premier League. The SkyBet logo appeared occasionally throughout the video.

SkyBet defended the ad by saying Neville would not have appealed to under-18s, given that he retired from football some time ago. However, the ASA agreed with the complainant that Neville’s fame among the wider football community meant the ad may have appealed to young people.

SkyBet appealed the decision and while the ASA made “minor factual amendments” to the ruling, its decision was the same. It said the ad should not appear again in its current form.

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.”

At present, the only Dutch licence for gaming machines applies to terminals in arcades and hospitality venues, as well as skill machines.

Now, a limited number of new licences will be made available to allow holders to exclusively run skill machines. KSA said this will make it easier for operators that only offer machines to apply for a licence.

KSA defines a skill machine as a terminal that offers games where progression depends on the player’s skill. Such machines should not pay out prizes that are anything other than additional or longer games. Examples of a skill machine include pinball machines where players can win extra balls by scoring more points.

The regulator explained further that any slot machine that is not a skill machine is automatically classed as a gambling machine.

Shorter review for skill machines licence

KSA said on Monday it would publish more information about the application procedure in the coming weeks. However, any companies interested in applying can make a submission immediately.

The new licences will likely have a shorter review process than others, making it easier for operators to begin running machines.

“With this limited operating licence, we’re meeting a need from the gaming machine market,” KSA said.

“Operators that only operate skill machines have indicated that they would like a separate licence, separate from the provision of gaming machines.

“This limited operating licence can have a shorter substantive review process and therefore be issued more quickly.”

Slot machines set for reform

Confirmation of the new licence comes amid possible changes to slot machine rules in the Netherlands. Earlier in October, Arno Rutte, secretary of state for legal protection, said that he will use recommendations from new research to shape new policies on land-based slots.

Rutte referenced five research reports on gambling, including the KSA’s recent piece on the impact of tax increases. The last of these, published in late September, set out a series of proposed changes to regulation on slots.

The report focused on player protection issues facing slots. It pointed out that many regulations related to land-based slots have not been updated since 2000. Areas of focus included user preferences for utilising cash to play and mixed feedback on new ID measures.

With the ambiguity around how many prefectures will actually apply – especially considering the twists seen in Yokohama – other prefectures may make a late bid to snap up a licence. Or only two of three could be awarded.

Toru Mihara, chair of the National Council on Gaming Legislation, Ayako Nakayama, director at the Japan IR Association and Brendan Bussmann, discuss the remaining challenges for the development of the IR industry and make predictions on what the market will look like once the process is complete.

The Providence Journal reported last week that Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha ordered an investigation into illegal online gambling sites. The order came after a request from the Department of Revenue.

The Rhode Island Lottery, which is overseen by the Department of Revenue, this summer sent six cease-and-desist letters to offshore sportsbooks. The six letters went to:

• BetUS
• BetOnline
• Bovada
• MyBookie
• WildCasino
• YouWager

Could Rhode Island sports betting market grow?

The illegal crackdown comes as Rhode Island officials look at potentially expanding the market.

International Game Technology (IGT) is the only legal sports betting operator live in the state, operating the lottery’s Sportsbook RI app through an exclusive contract. The lottery, however, opened a Request for Information process earlier this year to gauge interest from other operators.

Eight operators responded to the request by the 22 August deadline:

• Bally’s
• BetMGM
• DraftKings
• Fanatics
• FanDuel
• IGT
• Kambi
• OpenBet

Bally’s is based in Providence and operates two casinos in the state, as well as online casino, which launched in 2024.

A bill to end the monopoly passed the Senate this year, 30-3, but failed to pass the House. The bill and lottery’s process comes following a Spectrum Gaming Group study this year that recommended adding at least three operators to the state ecosystem.

“With legalised sports betting flourishing across the country, there is ample evidence on how this new industry works best for consumers and the state,” bill sponsor Senator Frank Ciccone said during the Senate approval. “And what we are seeing is that having only one company exclusively operate is not in the best interests of consumers or from a revenue-generating standpoint.”

Offshore sportsbook crackdowns throughout US

State regulators across the US have sent hundreds of cease-and-desist letters to offshore and unregulated gambling operators in recent months. That includes offshore sportsbooks, as well as unregulated, dual-currency sweepstakes operators.

The Michigan Gaming Control Board alone has sent more than 100 cease-and-desist letters to illegal operators.

“We remain fully committed to ensuring a fair, safe and lawful gaming environment for all Michigan residents,” MGCB Executive Director Henry Williams said. “Our actions today underscore our unwavering dedication to holding illegal operators accountable.

“Shutting down these unlicensed platforms is critical not only to maintaining the integrity of Michigan’s regulated gaming industry. It also helps to protect Michigan residents from predatory practices and unreliable gambling experiences.”

This year, California and other states passed bills prohibiting dual-currency sweepstakes operators. Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry vetoed legislation in his state to ban the operators, maintaining that regulators already have the power to enforce state gambling rules. The Louisiana Gaming Control Board then sent 40 cease-and-desist letters to illegal and offshore operators.

Multiple states also sent cease-and-desist orders to prediction markets for offering sports event contracts. Those orders led to state and federal lawsuits focused on whether they constitute illegal sports betting and circumvent state laws. The prediction market operators argue they are federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

The session was presented to the committee by the National Gambling Board (NGB) and the National Lotteries Commission (NLC).

Overall turnover across all verticals stood at ZAR1.5 trillion. “Obviously this figure includes all of the [gambling] sectors, and also across the PLAs,” NGB acting Chairman Lungile Dukwana told members.

PLAs are Provincial Licensing Authorities that have the power to grant land-based and online licenses within their region. There are nine in South Africa today.

GGR from online betting was up 60% on the previous year, the data showed. And taxes and levies collected by regulatory bodies amounted to ZAR5.8 billion ($335 million), with the betting sector accounting for the greatest share of these taxes (59%) at ZAR3.4 billion.

This was followed by the casino industry (30%), which generated ZAR1.7 billion. Limited Payout Machines (LPM) (9% overall) generated ZAR525 million and the bingo industry accounted for 2%.

Provincially, the Western Cape was the major driver in terms of gambling revenue generation (30%), with Mpumalanga coming in second and Gauteng third. Data showed the gambling industry directly employed 33,169 people during the year.

“The [data] gives an indication of the prominence around the area of online betting specifically, which obviously has an effect on the physical casinos,” said Dukwana.

Dukwana was appointed to head the board following the resignation of former head Caroline Kongwa in July, after a forensic audit flagged “irregular spending” within the department, related to a number of bonuses she had received.

Lottery finances in South Africa

Moving on to key financial movements from the Lottery Commission between 2024 and 2025, ticket sales rose from ZAR1.8 billion to ZAR1.96 billion thanks to an increase in the number of major jackpots, digital penetration and marketing.

Operational costs increased from ZAR533 million to ZAR651 million, while grant expenses also increased from ZAR545 million to ZAR958 million. Irregular expenditures noticeably decreased from ZAR44.9 million to ZAR6.8 million.

Commissioner for the NLC Jodi Scholtz outlined the board’s activities across South Africa’s nine provinces, which included erecting new offices in each, as well as morphing into a more purpose-driven organisation.

Impact of the black market on South Africa

During the session, a number of MPs flagged how a surge in mobile phone usage was driving up illegal gambling activity among players.

The regulators told the committee that most of the offshore operators providing unlicensed gambling in the market appeared to be licensed or based in Curaçao.

Dukwana’s presentation also outlined the NGB’s upcoming strategy, which he said would involve the regulator assessing the performance of PLAs “to ensure the national norms and standards established by the NGA are applied uniformly and consistently throughout the Republic of South Africa”.

Additionally, the national regulator would assist the PLAs in detecting and targeting unlicensed gambling activities in the market.

The company’s $2.3 billion plan to renovate and expand its Empire City racino in Yonkers was long considered to be a favourite for one of the three available licences. But the perceived economic return from the project, MGM said, declined over the course of the process to the extent that it warranted withdrawal.

Now, only three applicants remain in contention, all of whom submitted revised bids to the state this week:

• Bally’s Bronx
• Metropolitan Park
• Resorts World NYC

Bally’s projected construction cost is $4 billion, followed by $5.5 billion for Resorts World and $8 billion for Metropolitan Park. Resorts World, like MGM, is an existing racino and proposes an initial casino launch in July 2026. The other two are greenfield projects that would take multiple years to build and longer to reach profitability.

There is no timeline in Bally’s submission and Metropolitan Park only notes that construction would begin in January.

The state’s Gaming Facility Location Board (GFLB) is tasked with reviewing the remaining bids under various financial, environmental and workforce criteria. Its deadline to submit licensure recommendations to the state is 1 December. State regulators may then choose to award up to three licences by year’s end.

MGM bid underwhelming from the start?

With a July 2027 opening date, MGM’s bid was the second-fastest in terms of speed to market but featured few other standout details when compared to the field. The proposal did not include a resort hotel, public park spaces, housing commitments or similar benefits featured in other projects.

The New York casino consideration process once included 11 downstate proposals, and MGM sat lowest of all in terms of confirmed capital investment. A casino atop the Saks Fifth Avenue retail store in Manhattan might have been lower in terms of cost, but those stakeholders never announced concrete details and didn’t submit an official bid.

The pool was whittled down to eight after a first-round deadline in late June. Of those eight, MGM was the only bidder that did not make a presentation to its appointed community advisory committee (CAC) during its initial meeting.

Despite this, the project had solid backing and was squarely in contention at the time of withdrawal. The CAC approved the bid unanimously and both MGM and local officials adopted the messaging that the property needed a commercial licence for survival.

MGM said so in its own application materials and sent dozens of employees to testify in support of the project to the CAC. James Cavanaugh, the chair of the committee, said that the “aging slot parlour” would “wither and die” without a full licence. Yonkers Mayor Mike Spano lobbied for the project for years. But instead of revising its application and proposing a custom tax rate, MGM pulled out altogether.

The company said the “newly defined competitive landscape – with four proposals clustered in a small geographic area” – was cause for concern investment-wise. Its bid was also “predicated on the receipt of a 30-year commercial casino licence” rather than 15 years, which is what it qualified for based on capital expenditures.

Northfield Park sale announced days after New York exit

Two days after the New York announcement, MGM made more racino news by selling the operations of MGM Northfield Park in Ohio for $546 million to private equity firm Clairvest Group. MGM originally acquired the racino’s operations for approximately $275 million in 2019, the same year it purchased Empire City.

CEO Bill Hornbuckle said in a statement that Northfield Park is “a great property with great opportunity ahead”. Yet he also asserted that his company is “focused on growing our digital business, developing our international expansion opportunities and continuing to invest in our leading integrated resorts domestically”.

This seems to be further indication that MGM could also sell Empire City in the near future, but its statement announcing the New York casino exit denied such intentions.

“We know our decision will impact many individuals; we remain committed to operating the property in its current format and believe it will continue to enjoy success serving customers in Yonkers and the surrounding communities,” the company said.

On condition of anonymity, multiple industry sources indicated to iGB that MGM still has time to make a decision. It would be a few years before the downstate licensees really start to compete, sources said, and the property should still perform well in the meantime.

Empire City generated $607.4 million in net win, or hold, in fiscal year 2025 (April-March). The property is slightly ahead of that pace in FY26, generating $311.7 million in the first six months of this fiscal year.

Withdrawals highlight ongoing issues in NYC casino process

MGM was the third major casino operator to voluntarily withdraw from consideration in 2025, joining Wynn Resorts and Las Vegas Sands. The withdrawals all cited different reasons for their exits and each of those reasons would still ostensibly impact any bids that reach fruition.

Sands was the first to exit the race in April. Its primary concern was “the impact of the potential legalisation of iGaming on the overall market opportunity and project returns”. New York legislators have rejected multiple attempts to legalise iGaming but it could gain traction in future years, especially after the downstate licensing process is complete. The state faces a $34 billion cumulative budget gap over the next three fiscal years and could turn to iGaming to help drive tax revenue.

Wynn was next to drop out, in May, citing bad politics related to the rezoning process. It ultimately saw downstate New York to be “an area in which we, or any casino operator, will face years of persistent opposition despite our willingness to employ 5,000 New Yorkers”.

Not alone in political controversy

Both Bally’s and Metropolitan Park have also seen political controversy.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams assisted the Bally’s bid twice in city council, vetoing one vote and lowering the threshold for another. Metropolitan Park owner Steve Cohen sidestepped local Senator Jessica Ramos in favour of Senator John Liu after Ramos refused to endorse its zoning legislation.

MGM’s competition concerns would also still apply to the remaining applicants. All three are within 30 miles of each other.

In a statement following the Tuesday bid deadline, Bally’s told iGB it was “ready and willing to bet on the Bronx”. Resorts World in a release said its proposal was “a promise kept to the people of New York”. Metropolitan Park’s casino partner, Hard Rock International, declined to comment on its bid.

Casino bidders prepare balance sheets, lenders weigh risks

The remaining applicants face uncertainty related to building costs and timelines. From a macroeconomic perspective, rising tariffs, sticky inflation and slow job growth could significantly affect new construction. Bidders must also have the ability to fund or finance such projects, which is no small task for three companies with multiple projects ongoing.

Bally’s, above all, has faced skepticism over its leveraged business model, although the company said its recent reverse-merger with Intralot provided it with “more than $1 billion of cash and available credit facilities ready to commit to the project”. In addition to its interest in New York, Bally’s is building large-scale projects in Chicago and Las Vegas.

Its lenders for the Chicago project are pushing back on Bally’s attempts to modify certain aspects of its $1.9 billion loan term, which could be a sign that its constant debt manoeuvring is running out of room. To this point, the company facilitated much of its growth through financing from Gaming and Leisure Properties (GLPI). Bally’s revised New York casino application said it had a “$2.5 billion investment commitment” from GLPI.

GLPI’s senior vice president of corporate strategy, Carlo Santarelli, clarified to iGB that “there are rarely formal negotiations between the parties nor is anything agreed upon” when including such statements in applications. The company will await the final licensing outcome before making any commitments, he said.

Santarelli added that GLPI “would be willing to work with other bidders and was in fact working with other bidders, whose projects did not advance to this stage of the process”.

Costs, timelines likely to rise amid economic turmoil

Resorts World parent company Genting Berhad has also been aggressive in rejigging its balance sheet this year. It sold its Resorts World Catskills property to Sullivan County in a complex transaction and is in the middle of a $6.8 billion expansion of its flagship Resorts World Sentosa resort in Singapore. The broader Genting is pushing to buy out its Genting Malaysia subsidiary for $1.6 billion, in efforts to better facilitate these growth plans.

Metropolitan Park is perhaps the safest economically despite the high price, as owner Steve Cohen is listed by Forbes as the 100th-richest person in the world, with a net worth of $23 billion.

Duane Bouligny, managing director for Wells Fargo Securities, said that current downstate New York casino projections are “aggressive”. But every lending opportunity is itself a gamble, he said, and banks must have faith in operators’ ability to execute.

‘What we’ve found is that the properties actually get there, it just takes longer to get to those cash flow numbers in their projections.’

“So it’s not year one, might not be year two, it might be year four, year five … it takes time to get there,” Bouligny said. “So we have to have faith from a balance sheet perspective that they’re going to get there at some point.”

His belief is that costs will “go up, not down” based on the current economic landscape.

Battle of New York casino tax rates, licence fees

Another major component for the remaining applicants will be tax rates. The state allowed bidders to pitch their own, with a minimum of 25% for slot revenue and 10% for other gaming.

According to materials posted to the GFLB website, the three bidders proposed the following rates:

• Bally’s Bronx: 30% for slots, 10% for tables
• Metropolitan Park: 25% for slots, 10% for tables
• Resorts World NYC: 56% for slots, 30% for tables

The downstate licence fee was set at a minimum of $500 million but bidders were free to offer more. Metropolitan Park offered $500 million, Resorts World offered $600 million and Bally’s did not indicate a fee preference. As MGM noted, bidders learned in August – after official submissions were due – that licence lengths also would depend on capital investments.

The structure is:

• Total investments under $1.5 billion get a 10-year initial licence
• Investments between $1.5 billion and $5 billion get a 15-year initial licence
• Investments between $5 billion and $10 billion get a 20-year initial licence
• Investments above $10 billion get a 30-year initial licence

Based on cost projections for the finalists, Bally’s would qualify for a 15-year licence, whereas Metropolitan Park and Resorts World would qualify for 20-year terms. Only two downstate proposals – Wynn’s Hudson Yards bid and Soloviev Group’s Freedom Plaza – would have eclipsed the $10 billion threshold to unlock a 30-year licence, but neither is a finalist.

New York gaming regulators now in spotlight

The five-member GFLB now becomes the centre of the New York gaming universe. None of the five appointees are familiar with or have experience in gaming, although that was by design to ensure neutrality. Board Chair Vicki Been took it a step further, telling Bloomberg this summer that casinos are “nowhere I want to spend my time”.

Four of the five members were appointed to the board this year. The most recent was Cindy Estrada, who was appointed on 30 September, the same day as the CAC deadline. Only Been has served for more than one year, having been appointed in 2022.

There have been two GFLB meetings this month – the first on 8 October and then again on 15 October. The 8 October meeting ran for just 15 minutes and was largely organisational. There is no available archived audio or video from the 15 October meeting, which was scheduled for three hours.

The next meeting is set for 22 October at 2pm EDT.

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.”

In a notice issued on Wednesday afternoon, the board said that offering contracts on sports, elections or pop culture events constitutes “wagering activity” under state law. This is regardless of whether the contracts are listed on an exchange under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission or not, the board said. The CFTC is the federal financial regulator that oversees prediction markets.

Licensees that offer these contracts or strike similar partnerships in Nevada, another state or on tribal lands could now face suitability evaluations or further discipline.

“Examples of event contracts that the board specifically considers to be wagering subject to its jurisdiction include event contracts based on the outcome or partial outcome of any sporting or athletic event, or other selected events such as the World Series of Poker, the Oscars, esports and political elections,” the release stated.

“Offerings for sports and other events contracts may be conducted in Nevada only if the offering entity possesses a nonrestricted gaming license with sports pool approval in Nevada and meets the other requirements for sports wagering including, without limitation, wagering accounts and sports book systems.”

Warning echoes comments at latest Nevada hearing

The notice piggybacks on comments made by NGCB member George Assad at the board’s most recent hearing 8 October. Assad railed against prediction markets, calling them “nothing more than a word salad”. He celebrated recent court rulings against platforms Kalshi and Crypto.com in Maryland and Nevada, respectively.

“A derivative contract or whatever you want to call it is nothing more than a sports wager,” Assad said. “A sports wager is a sports wager. Every bet made in this town is a contract.

“You can call it a derivative contract or a credit default swap like they did during the housing bubble. Whatever you call it, it’s still a sports bet.

“Therefore, it’s under the jurisdiction of the Nevada Gaming Commission and Nevada Gaming Control Board.”

Nevada has fought a multi-front legal battle with prediction markets in 2025. The state was the first to send a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi in March. Kalshi sued in response and won a preliminary injunction in April to continue operating for the time being. That case is currently under appeal.

Cease-and-desists were also sent to Crypto.com and Robinhood, and both sued in response as Kalshi did. Crytpo.com filed suit in June and Robinhood filed in August.

Notably, as Assad alluded to, Crypto.com saw its injunction request denied this month by Judge Andrew Gordon, the same judge who previously ruled in favour of Kalshi. The two suits were largely the same in terms of context but the specific legal arguments varied slightly.

Gordon found Kalshi likely to succeed on its claim that federal commodities law preempted state wagering law, but was unconvinced in the Crypto.com case about its definitions of “swaps” and whether they apply to sports event contracts. The Robinhood case has yet to see a ruling.

Fostering innovation while ensuring compliance

Prediction markets were top-of-mind last week at the Global Gaming Expo in Las Vegas. NGCB Chair Mike Dreitzer appeared on a regulatory panel to discuss several pressing issues, including anti-money laundering concerns in state casinos and prediction markets. Dreitzer took his post in June and is the fifth NGCB chair in the last six years.

While he noted that “Nevada’s stance on prediction markets is well known”, his stance seemed more open than Assad’s regarding the burgeoning technology. The NGCB’s cease-and-desist letter against Kalshi was issued by his predecessor, Kirk Hendrick.

“We want to foster innovation, we want to find a way to bring it to Nevada as early as possible, but it has to be done in conjunction with the legal requirements,” Dreitzer said. “That’s just one example of many where we’re happy to have ’em here, but let’s figure out a way to get it in under our roof.”

Dreitzer said he wants to instil the message that Nevada is “open for business” when it comes to innovation and new technology. His tone was more nuanced than other senior regulators who have spoken about prediction markets. That includes Mike Leara, executive director of the Missouri Gaming Commission, who sat next to Dreitzer and decried the platforms in the same conversation.

But for Dreitzer specifically, the message is consistent with his career in gaming. Prior to joining the NGCB, he held senior roles at tech-focused companies like BMM Testlabs, Gaming Arts and Ainsworth Game Technology.

Which companies inquired about prediction markets?

The NGCB said in its release that it had received “direct inquiries” from licensees about its prediction market stance. Notably, FanDuel and DraftKings, the two largest commercial bookmakers in the US, do not operate in Nevada largely because of its in-person account registration requirement.

Some sports betting and DFS companies expressed interest in the sector or inked partnerships. Examples include FanDuel’s CME Group deal and Underdog’s partnership with Crypto.com.

Others, like Caesars Sportsbook and BetMGM, have refrained from substantial investments. The two platforms are the largest sports betting operators live in the state. Neither company responded to a request for comment, although neither has publicly endorsed or signalled interest in prediction markets.

The state’s biggest retail casino operators are vocal opponents of prediction markets, led by casino trade group Nevada Resort Association, which was approved as an intervenor in the state’s appeal against Kalshi. NRA President Virginia Valentine told iGB at the Global Gaming Expo that the platforms are simply “gambling with no regulation” or consumer protections.

“There are no requirements for responsible gambling, they don’t pay any state income tax. So it looks a lot like gambling, and we’ll see,” Valentine said. “Is it the future of gambling or is it the end of sportsbooks? I don’t know, but we’re going to be watching that very closely. I imagine that this will be in the courts for a while, so we’re just keeping a close eye on it.”

The CGA issued a press release following media reports earlier in the week that claimed Curaçao’s Prime Minister Gilmar Pisas had assumed control of the gambling regulator after the entire supervisory board had resigned.

In its update, the CGA confirmed the resignation of its supervisory board in September, but clarified that responsibility for the regulator had transferred to Minister of Justice Shalten Hato on 19 August. Previously, it fell under the ministry of finance’s remit.

The process to appoint new members of the supervisory board has begun and the CGA stated there would be no impact on the performance of the authority’s supervisory duties.

Additionally, the implementation of the LOK, which started in 2024, will continue. All licensing and supervisory activities are expected to continue uninterrupted.

“The Curaçao Gaming Authority remains committed to ensuring the integrity and reliability of the gaming sector in Curaçao,” the CGA press release read.

CGA PR advisor slams ‘fake news’

The CGA’s marketing and PR advisor, Aideen Shortt, hit out at media reports which claimed the administrative changes had impacted the rollout of Curaçao’s LOK framework.

On Tuesday, Shortt said in a LinkedIn post: “Despite sensationalist headlines and fake-news articles there is no delay or deviation in the rollout of the LOK, and no disruption to the CGA’s licensing or compliance programmes.

“The resignation of the supervisory board is an administrative process following government transition. CGA supervision, enforcement and licensing activities continue without interruption. The rollout of the LOK remains unchanged.

“Once again I find myself having to urge caution to all readers about intended or unintended misinformation and conjecture about the CGA and the rollout of the LOK legislation.”

The LOK marks new era for gambling in Curaçao

Last December, Curaçao’s Parliament approved and passed the LOK on a 13-6 vote.

The move ushered in a new era for gambling regulations on the island, with the intention of improving Curaçao’s previous reputation as a haven for grey market operators.

Under the new regime operators have had to reapply for new look licenses, as the previoud ‘master licence’ system was scrapped.

Minister of Finance Javier Silvania previously called the LOK a “safety net” against offshore operators.

Senator Marty Deacon introduced Bill S-211 this year after a previous iteration, S-269, failed when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned in January and ended the legislative session. The previous gambling advertising framework bill was introduced in 2023.

The legislation would require the Minister of Canadian Heritage to create the framework. The previous attempt passed the Senate in November 2024 and would have included restrictions on the number, scope and location of gambling advertisements.

The Senate last week restarted discussions, lasting less than 10 minutes, on Deacon’s legislation in the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications. It advanced to its third hearing in the Senate following multiple hearings on the issue last year.

“We need a common approach, a national standard similar to alcohol, similar to tobacco ads, that is not patchwork. And that’s why the government has to take the lead on this,” Deacon told the CBC last month.

Pushback on sports betting advertising

A Maru Public Opinion Poll last year reported that 59% of Canadians were in favour of a ban on gambling advertising. That came two years after Ontario opened up its online gambling market to commercial operators and flooded the market with ads. A Leger study released last month stated that 75% of Canadians who reported seeing sports betting ads thought there were too many.

However, such advertising has been waning, according to testimony offered during hearings on the advertising framework bills.

Research group ThinkTV said that out of 28,000 ads reviewed in 2024, 189 were gambling-related. In 2022, the group said there were 442 gambling-related ads. Meanwhile, the Canadian Gaming Association and nonprofit group Ad Standards also are working on their own advertising code for gambling operators.

The Canadian Football League, National Football League and National Hockey League all opposed Deacon’s legislation.

Canada sports betting market

Canadian lawmakers legalised single-event sports wagering in 2021, leading to Ontario, the fifth-largest jurisdiction in North America, opening up its gambling industry to commercial online sports betting and casino operators. It remains the only open commercial market in Canada, but Alberta is working toward a similar industry framework.

Ontario regulators opened the market with some of the strongest advertising guidelines in North America. Those rules were later fine-tuned, including a ban on using celebrities and athletes to promote gambling. Regulators fined multiple operators in the first year of operation for violating those advertising rules.

Canadian lawmakers are not the only ones in North America looking to alter the advertising landscape for sports betting. In the US, Senator Paul Tonko introduced a proposed federal ban on gambling advertising, although it has not gained traction in Congress.

Multiple regulators and industry stakeholders have argued that complete bans on gambling advertising would push bettors back to illegal operators.

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 tension in the room was palpable. Operators, lawyers,and regulators gathered in a large hall: 16 tables, two companies per table, with KSA staff mingling at the edges.

When the Dutch remote‑gambling market launched in 2021, licences were granted for five years. The first 10 operators – TOTO, FPO, Holland Casino, NSUS Malta, Play North, Tombola Malta, Hillside, Bingoal, Betent and LiveScore Malta would face renewal in October 2026. Both LiveScore and Tombola exited the market in 2024.

With that date approaching, speculation had grown that the KSA would tighten rules – making the relicensing process laborious and punishing. Many feared a reset, rather than a renewal, that would overwhelm even well‑established operators.

‘Past behaviour’ requirement sparks concerns among operators

The anxiety was partly caused by statements made before 1 October. The KSA chair had hinted that it would look into past behaviour when considering new and reapplications for gaming licences.

In its public announcements, KSA said: “Providers that made mistakes in the past five years must explain during the application process how they have learned from previous mistakes and how they intend to prevent recurrence. If we find this explanation insufficient, the permit may be denied or additional conditions and restrictions may be imposed.”

Bjorn Fuchs, chairman of VNLOK – the Dutch iGaming trade body – confirms that wild rumours circulated among operators prior to the meeting.

“We [thought we] were going to be punished for bad behaviour. Maybe we get five years, maybe one year, maybe we lose it altogether. These were some of the concerns,” he says.

Operators also feared that every facet of their business would be re-scrutinised. Would new demands be imposed on advertising, addiction prevention, AML and player funds? Might entire chunks of existing policy be deemed insufficient?

What came out of the operator KSA licence renewal meeting?

But after the meeting, as Fuchs recalls: “There was a sigh of relief going through the room when it was presented,” although the tension was not entirely dispelled.

Rather than a crackdown across the board, what is emerging is a more regulated renewal framework.

Fuchs summarises: “If you have a clean sheet, there are some hoops, but for various modules you can just send a declaration which states that you’re compliant.”

He emphasises the new system will make burdens less demanding than before, but the new “exit plan” requirement and sharper duty‑of‑care definitions do bring some added complexity.

Justin Franssen, a regulatory lawyer and partner at Franssen Tolboom, likewise tells iGB the KSA is not imposing extreme hurdles on existing licensees, as some had feared would be the case.

Although new measures such as more comprehensive responsible gambling policies and civil judgment compliance are being introduced, these largely build on existing structures, he explains. “The gambling authority strives to make the reapplication process as smoothly as possible,” Franssen says.

The formal session on 1 October opened with KSA addressing submitted questions across various licensing modules. A detailed programme had been circulated in advance.

Operators asked pointed questions: How much weight will prior fines carry? How is behaviour/activity abroad assessed? When does the new licence take effect relative to the old one?

Various operators and law firms pushed hard for more clarity, Fuchs said, and the KSA acknowledged that need for clarity.

Unpacking the KSA’s exit plan requirement

Most notably, all submissions must now include the aforementioned exit plan – a new obligation that applies across the board. This requirement, intended to ensure orderly market withdrawal, marks a move toward embedding long-term risk management into the licensing process.

It requires operators to describe in detail how they will responsibly wind down their operations should their licence not be renewed or be revoked. Or if they decide to leave the market midway through the five years between renewals.

In short, it is to ensure players are not left vulnerable in the event of sudden market withdrawal. This includes ensuring proper handling of player balances, communication strategies to customers, technical shutdown procedures and data retention compliance.

In another marked departure from previous practice, the breach-prevention module (overtredingspreventie) is no longer confined to new entrants. Existing licensees seeking renewal must now also submit detailed protocols on how they proactively prevent regulatory breaches.

Several modules, including those related to financial security, player fund provision and internal oversight, can now be approved through signed declarations rather than full evidence-based submissions. Should doubts arise, the KSA may demand supporting documentation.

Non-compliance with KSA licence renewal rules could end in licence revocation

Other areas are heading in the opposite direction. The Central Data Bank (CDB) module has seen a notable hardening of requirements: operators must now submit a detailed control plan, present evidence of system conformity and provide a test programme.

Meanwhile, advertising and recruitment remain documentation-heavy areas, showing little regulatory leniency amid public and political sensitivity about consumer protection and market integrity.

Background checks have also become more intrusive in the KSA licence renewal process. The reliability assessment now obliges applicants to disclose previously unreported persons – individuals who were involved with or connected to the gambling operation but were not disclosed in earlier applications – or past behaviour linked to the operation and to map out corporate and personal affiliations.

Perhaps most consequential is the now-strictly enforced clause on civil judgment compliance. Operators who have failed to comply with enforceable rulings – be they related to player winnings, losses, or data subject access requests – could have their licence revoked.

As Franssen warns: “If an operator does not comply with civil judgments, they will not get a licence. The licence can be pulled.”

Political pressure on the market

Overall, the feeling among operators is that the regulatory changes reflect a market recalibrated for oversight and accountability.

As chair of the trade organisation, Fuchs’ stance is a mix of cautious optimism and realism. In his view, many new demands are not radically burdensome.

He notes that operators may now submit declarations in many modules rather than full packages, reducing paperwork in some cases. The real burden falls on areas like exit planning and the finer detailing of duty of care.

But Fuchs worries about one big overhang for the online market: political pressure. He described how for years in the Netherlands, gambling had “no friends in politics” and was subject to opinion-driven restrictions by Christian and socialist parties.

Those parties, such as the Christian Union and SP, have steadily pushed for tighter regulations or even prohibition. The coalition politics of 2021, reliant on such parties, suppressed the fact-based dialogue and liberal push-back, Fuchs expressed. The result: increasing constraints and shrinking product flexibility for legal operators.

Deregulation in Netherlands is ‘unrealistic’

Fuchs believes a turning point came earlier in 2025, when Parliament and a government roundtable began acknowledging how large the unregulated market had become and how detrimental that is to regulation and player protection.

Anti‑gambling voices like national addiction rapporteur Arnt Schellekens – who has previously been very vocal about banning online play – have moderated, admitting that prohibition would only drive players towards the unregulated market.

“The National Rapporteur is not in favour of a gambling ban, because it would drive people into illegality,” Schellekens said recently. Fuchs thinks that outright deregulation is politically unrealistic, even if opposing parties gain influence.

Franssen accepts that new entrants to the market will face burdens – even more than in 2021 – but he doesn’t expect the KSA to place unachievable demands on existing licence holders.

He warns, however, of “overarching playing limits” in the pipeline. Currently, deposit limits are set operator‑by‑operator. A regime to enforce a limit across all operators would devastate monetisation, he said.

Overall, Franssen calls the market situation in the Netherlands “a death by a thousand cuts”. Some smaller operators, he predicts, will drop out or be consolidated.

No friends in politics – but hope

Gambling remains a topic fraught with moral questions in the Netherlands, and few parties risk openly embracing it. For the operators, the tax hikes and tightening of regulations reflect more political caution than logic.

The gaming tax, starting at 29% at market launch, has climbed to 34.2% and is expected to reach 37.8%. The media, social pressure and anti‑gambling campaigns reinforce a political narrative that gambling needs constant control, stakeholders tell iGB.

Fuchs argues that the political tide appears less venomous now, as serious attention is turning to illicit gambling growth and the limits of prohibition. Yet he is aware that “gambling has no friends in politics” – and that upcoming elections may again bring forward stricter stances rather than liberalisation.

Franssen echoes this: many of the restrictions, such as advertising bans and deposit limits, were quickly introduced after the 2021 launch in response to political backlash. Any operator considering entering the Dutch market now must weigh a difficult climate of political fragility, he explained.

Fuchs hopes that in the future, fact‑based regulation replaces stacking of new burdens. “If you keep squeezing the legal industry, people go to the illegal offering,” he adds.

Indeed, many in the sector point to the growth of the unlicensed or offshore market and remain skeptical of early KSA claims that channelisation was 80–20. He believes the illegal sector was always larger, and that recent tight regulation has driven more players outside KSA’s purview.

Still, the hope among operators is that if KSA gets relicensing right – clear, proportional, consistent – they may strengthen legitimacy and player trust in the long run and could gradually push out illegal operators.

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.

The Rhode Island Department of Revenue Lottery Division issued a Request for Information earlier this year to gauge interest if it were to open the market to more sports betting operators. International Game Technology has held an exclusive contract to operate online sports betting through the lottery’s Sportsbook RI app.

“[The] Lottery is moving ahead with its examination of whether adding more apps is feasible,” lottery spokesperson Paul Grimaldi said in an email to the Rhode Island Current.

The lottery received responses by the 22 August deadline from eight sportsbook operators looking to access the market. IGT’s exclusive contract runs through November 2026. The operators that responded were:

• Bally’s
• BetMGM
• DraftKings
• Fanatics
• FanDuel
• IGT
• Kambi
• OpenBet

Bally’s is based in Providence and operates two casinos in the state, which also have in-person sportsbooks. The state also became the seventh state to legalise online casino gambling in 2023, and Bally’s launched its Bally Bet platform in 2024.

Push to end Rhode Island sports betting monopoly

In the last Rhode Island fiscal year, the state generated $14 million in taxes from the effective 51% tax on IGT’s sports betting revenue.

State sports betting monopolies have often received negative reviews from bettors, and on 7 September, during the first weekend of the NFL season, IGT’s servers went down for 75 minutes for Rhode Island betting customers.

Earlier this year, state lawmakers discussed a bill to expand the market. Senator Frank Ciccone’s bill to end the IGT monopoly passed the Senate 30-3, but the House did not take it up before the session ended in June.

“With legalised sports betting flourishing across the country, there is ample evidence on how this new industry works best for consumers and the state,” Ciccone said during the Senate approval. “And what we are seeing is that having only one company exclusively operate is not in the best interests of consumers or from a revenue-generating standpoint.”

Lawmakers introduced a similar bill in 2024.

The lottery published a Spectrum Gaming Group study earlier this year that recommended adding at least three and up to five new operators to the state.

There are multiple other sports betting monopolies across the US. In Florida, the Seminole-owned Hard Rock Sportsbook is the only operator, while DraftKings is the sole option in Oregon and New Hampshire.

BetRivers is the single sportsbook provider in Delaware. Like in Rhode Island, Delaware lawmakers have looked at potentially expanding their sports betting market.

In Montana, Intralot has an exclusive deal with the state lottery.

Newsom signed Assembly Bill 831 Saturday, the day before the deadline for him to act. The law prohibits dual-currency sweepstakes casinos, which are platforms that mimic online casinos and sports betting products. It goes into effect 1 January 2026.

According to analysts on a panel last week at the Global Gaming Expo in Las Vegas, the measure will wipe out roughly 20% of the sweepstakes industry’s US revenue.

West Virginia Delegate Shawn Fluharty, president of the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States and head of government affairs at Play’n GO, said the unanimous legislative votes in California were a strong mandate against the sweepstakes industry.

“[Sweepstakes] couldn’t get one vote in California. You know how hard that is? They can’t agree on the colour of the carpet,” Fluharty said on the panel.

The panellists declared the sweepstakes industry essentially defeated after a push that drew lots of attention from gambling companies, regulators and legislators.

“This entire business model is essentially a too-clever-by-half attempt to offer online casino gateways to the public,” American Gaming Association Vice President of Government Relations Tres York said. “The so-called sweepstakes model that runs all of the time isn’t like any traditional sweepstakes model I’ve ever heard of.”

Other action on sweepstakes in California

Before the legislative action, Los Angeles City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto’s office filed a lawsuit in August against sweepstakes operator Stake.us, arguing it is an illegal gambling site.

“Under the moniker of ‘America’s Social Casino’ and, despite claims that it is just a game, Stake.us is a rogue and real money gambling racket with destructive repercussions for its players,” Feldstein Soto said in a release. “We are holding Stake.us and its accomplices accountable for violating the law, targeting California for these illegal activities and facilitating addictive gambling behaviours.”

The lawsuit also included Stake’s suppliers and the streaming service Kick. Many of those suppliers exited the market with Stake shortly after the lawsuit was filed.

The G2E panellists said the suppliers “are the real choke point” to shutting down the sweepstakes casinos.

Sweepstakes casinos on their last leg?

Lawmakers and regulators have increased action against sweepstakes casinos in the past year, arguing the platforms exploit loopholes to offer gambling products by offering non-monetary “gold coins” and another currency known as “sweeps coins” that can be exchanged for real money products.

California joins other states that banned online sweepstakes casinos this year, including Connecticut, Montana and New Jersey.

New York and Louisiana lawmakers also passed bills banning sweepstakes platforms. Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry vetoed the bill, explaining that the regulators already had the power to enforce gaming laws. The Louisiana Gaming Control Board then sent 40 cease-and-desist letters to unregulated gambling sites, including multiple sweepstakes sites.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul has yet to act on S5935, but state Attorney General Letitia James sent 26 cease-and-desist orders to sweepstakes operators in June.

“These so-called ‘sweepstakes’ games are unscrupulous, unsecure and unlawful,” New York State Gaming Commission Chairman Brian O’Dwyer said in a news release. “I have been very vocal about the need to crack down on these operations, and I am thrilled that Attorney General James has taken this significant step to eradicate the illegal gambling market.”

The letters from Louisiana and New York are just a portion of the more than 100 cease-and-desist letters sent from gambling regulators across the US to sweepstakes operators. Other states to take significant action against the industry include Arizona and Michigan.

After the California bill made its way through the legislature last month, Eilers & Krejcik Gaming revised its 2025 sweepstakes casino US revenue estimate, reducing it from $4.7 billion to $4 billion. It predicts a 10% decline in 2026.

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.”

What Gambling Commission GSGB numbers say

The 2024 GSGB shows a decline in past-year participation, from 61.5% in 2023 to 59.6%.

“Problem gambling” prevalence, defined as PGSI scores of 8+, rose slightly from 2.5% to 2.7%, while moderate-risk gambling fell from 3.7% to 3.1%. For certain groups, harms appear to be easing: the proportion of gamblers reporting severe adverse consequences declined, particularly among women, where it fell 18%.

Serious financial harm indicators dropped by nearly a quarter, and more than halved among 18–24-year-olds.

However, other harms moved in the opposite direction. Reported rates of harm to “affected others” (such as partners, families and friends), including violence and abuse, increased.

These complexities are often lost in the headline framing: the figure that has dominated media coverage is the 2.7% PGSI rate, extrapolated to imply 1.4 million “problem gamblers” in Britain.

From caution to ‘official statistics‘

Until this year, the Gambling Commission had insisted on a health warning: GSGB survey data could not be scaled up to national totals due to methodological uncertainty. That caveat has now been removed, with the regulator describing the survey as “official statistics” and encouraging licensees to use the figures in risk assessments.

Melanie Ellis, partner at Northridge Law, believes this shift was a mistake: “It was premature of the UKGC to call these ‘official statistics’ and to take away the health warning, without sufficient scientifically rigorous testing to give confidence that the data is accurate,” she says.

Ellis stresses that while the commission was right to modernise its GSGB survey methodology, it failed to pause when early results diverged drastically from NHS health survey benchmarks. “The regulator blinkered itself to the impact these figures would have on the industry,” she adds.

Gambling Commission’s GSGC ‘an almighty headache‘

Dan Waugh, partner at Regulus Partners, is even more blunt. He describes the GSGB as the regulator’s HS2, an over-budget, politically committed project that cannot be reversed even if flawed.

“The survey has uncovered a previously unheralded huge degree of gambling participation overall. … It suggests a massive unlicensed market which was not picked up in the health survey. So, either the commission has not understood the market it is regulating, or it has let rampant gambling disorder flourish,” Waugh warns.

The removal of caveats, he argues, creates “an almighty headache for DCMS” as campaigners will now lobby ministers armed with the regulator’s own statistics.

“This will absolutely feed into the discussion on tax,” he adds. “You will see intense lobbying over further ad bans. And it will effectively have the GC’s badge on it.”

Bias, capture and sunk costs

Regulus’ own analysis frames the GSGB controversy as a case study in regulatory bias and institutional inertia.

The Gambling Commission, it argues, has shown a willingness to find vindication where none exists. Researchers at the London School of Economics conducted inconclusive experiments comparing survey modes, yet these have been cited as justification for lifting safeguards.

“The willingness of the commission to find vindication where none exists smacks of a prior bias,” Waugh wrote in an analysis sent to Regulus clients. “The alacrity with which some academic researchers have abandoned previously held views may indicate the presence of ‘in-group bias’ or worse.”

The problem is compounded by selection bias and self-reporting inconsistencies. Hard industry data on actual participation often fails to align with Gambling Commission GSGB responses. Waugh suggests in his written analysis that there are three possible explanations:

1. The survey overstates gambling prevalence due to selection bias.
2. There exists a vast unlicensed market previously undetected.
3. Respondents misunderstand questions or answer inattentively.

None of these explanations, the consultant argues, inspire confidence that the GSGB can yet serve as a sound basis for policy.

Industry in denial?

Another theme emerging from Waugh’s critique is industry complacency. For years, operators have dismissed or downplayed research framing gambling as an “unhealthy commodity” akin to tobacco. By failing to engage seriously, they now face the risk of punitive tax rises and stricter controls.

“Within the next 12 months, UK Research & Innovation will start to distribute £20 million a year in levy funding, with gambling described as a ‘health-harming industry’,” Waugh notes. Without a coordinated response, the industry faces “over-taxation and over-regulation”.

Waugh suggests that operators have failed to mount a serious challenge. “The industry has just sat there and done nothing,” he says. “I can’t see that this will not negatively affect the industry.”

Black market blind spots

For Ellis, the critical missing piece is the role of unlicensed operators.

“If [the Gambling Commission] wants to assess whether player protection measures imposed on the licensed industry are effective, it urgently needs to be able to segment its GSGB data into customers using licensed and unlicensed operators,” she notes.

The commission has acknowledged this challenge but progress is slow. Without it, assessing whether regulatory interventions reduce harm risks becomes meaningless. Worse, restrictions on licensed operators may push consumers into the unregulated sphere, undermining protections altogether.

From survey to supervision

For licensees, the key issue is how the Gambling Commission GSGB will be operationalised. Commission CEO Andrew Rhodes has “strongly encouraged” firms to use GSGB data to assess risk within their customer bases.

Does this mean operators must assume that one in 10 online sports bettors are “problem gamblers,” as the GSGB suggests? If so, this would transform the expectations around customer monitoring and affordability.

Yet ambiguity persists. Ellis cautions that if the commission bases enforcement on GSGB-derived thresholds, “it must ensure that decisions are defensible and acknowledge methodological caveats”.

The politics of harm

The political consequences are already visible. The Guardian and other outlets have amplified the “1.4 million problem gamblers” figure, fuelling calls from campaigners for advertising curbs and affordability checks.

Ministers such as Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy have been attacked for not moving faster, while the Treasury eyes potential increases in Remote Gaming Duty.

For campaign groups, the GSGB is a gift: the regulator’s own data, stripped of caveats, can be used to push for prohibitionist-style measures. For operators, the risk is being judged and punished on contested statistics.

An unstable foundation

The GSGB represents a landmark for UK gambling regulation: a home-grown survey, positioned as the definitive evidence base. But critics warn it has an unstable foundation and is vulnerable to bias, misinterpretation and political misuse.

For Ellis, the task is ensuring accuracy and distinguishing between licensed and unlicensed activity. For Waugh and Regulus, the concern is deeper: that the commission has locked itself into a flawed survey, driven by sunk costs and institutional bias and, in doing so, has unleashed a wave of political and fiscal risks for the sector.

What seems certain is that the GSGB will dominate the debate for years to come. The challenge for the industry is not to deny its existence, but to engage critically, demand transparency and prepare for a regulatory environment shaped by numbers that – for better or worse – now carry the imprimatur of “official statistics”.

Farias proposed PL 5,076/2025 on 9 October, notably just a day after the Brazil Chamber of Deputies withdrew a provisional measure that had intended to raise the gambling tax from 12% to 18%.

Under Farias’ bill, half of the revenue from the 24% tax rate would go towards social security and actions within public health, while the remainder would be split between sectors such as sports and culture.

In his justifications for the bill, Farias noted the huge volume of betting in Brazil, which the bill reported now sits behind just the US and the UK in terms of highest betting consumption, according to a 2023 Comscore study.

“This growing increase in bets and the number of bets is accompanied by several social and economic problems,” Farias’ bill read. “What often begins as a joke can eventually lead to gambling addiction.

“Gambling addiction, in addition to having a strong impact on the mental health of gamblers and their families, can have a significant impact on personal and family finances, leading to significant indebtedness.”

Workers’ Party trying again to hike gambling tax in Brazil

Farias is a member of the Workers’ Party, currently in power and led by Brazil President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

However, the failure of the Workers’ Party to pass any new rules on gambling tax last week has cast major doubt over its ability to fulfil its economic policies.

The previous tax increase bill, PM 1,303, initially intended to raise gambling taxes by 50%.

However, this was scrapped in the lead-up to last week’s vote on the provisional measure, with a retrospective tax programme on licensed operators’ pre-regulation activities also vetoed.

This new bill, PL 5,076/2025, marks a new attempt to try and increase gambling taxes and aid the government’s economic agenda.

“This proposed law increases Brazilian taxation on betting to a higher level than the average for other activities – which is justified by the fact that betting is an activity that is harmful to health and the family economy,” PL 5,076/2025 reads.

“However, it is important to emphasise that, even with the proposed increase, the Brazilian tax rate will still be below the rate of other countries, such as France and Germany.

“Therefore, to try to reduce this epidemic, in addition to all the regulations being developed by the federal government, we must increase taxes on betting so that bets become a little less attractive and so that the country obtains the resources necessary to invest in its healthcare system.”

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.” 

It has been a somewhat tumultuous start to life for the legal gambling sector in Brazil since the regulated market launched on 1 January this year.

Gross gaming revenue from licensed gambling across the first six months of regulation stood at BRL17.4 billion ($3.2 billion), contributing BRL3.8 billion in tax for the country in the meantime.

In terms of regulation, the sector is facing new potential ad restrictions and was threatened with a retroactive tax programme to make operators pay for gambling services in the 10 years prior to regulation. However, this was withdrawn by politicians this week.

Speaking to iGB prior to the vote, Studart called for policymakers to avoid overregulation, something he believes could result in black market growth.

Studart highlighted an Instituto Locomotiva study earlier this year, which warned that 61% of Brazilian bettors placed at least one illegal bet in 2025.

“These findings show that the combination of high taxation, bureaucracy and advertising bans can produce the opposite of the intended effect: pushing consumers toward unregulated platforms that do not follow user protection rules or contribute to tax revenues,” Studart told iGB.

“Caution is needed when it comes to balancing tax burdens, advertising restrictions and the overall attractiveness of the regulated market.”

A time of great opportunities for Brazil betting

Studart said the current regulation marks a “fundamental step” towards ensuring a safe and responsible licensed betting sector in Brazil.

“The progress of regulation has laid the foundation for a more balanced ecosystem — one that combines innovation with responsibility,” he said.

“Flutter Brazil sees this new scenario as fertile ground for sustainable growth.”

Flutter Brazil was created by powerhouse Flutter Entertainment last year, when it agreed to acquire a 56% stake in NSX, the parent company of Brazil-facing brand Betnacional. The deal was completed in May, with Flutter announcing NSX Group CEO Studart would lead the Flutter Brazil business.

In Q2 this year, Flutter announced its Brazil revenue had grown 144% during Q2 to $44 million.

Brazil was Flutter’s fastest-growing market in Q2, and Studart believes the business is well placed to continue capitalising on the new regulation in Brazil.

In September 2024, the company stated its acquisition of NSX Group had led Flutter to an 11% market share in Brazil, placing it among the top three betting companies.

Flutter Brazil eyes podium position through localisation

Flutter Brazil has approximately 500 employees, focusing on creating the best experience possible for its users by focusing on technology, marketing and customer service.

“The Brazilian market is going through a phase of consolidation that brings great opportunities for operators who invest with seriousness, a consumer-first mindset and a commitment to best practices,” Studart added.

He emphasised the business’ reliance on local expertise, noting: “Flutter Brazil has chosen to maintain a team with the spirit and expertise specifically oriented toward the Brazilian market. With Betnacional as part of its brand ecosystem, the goal is to sustain an operation centred on Brazilian talent and local insight.

“By combining global scale with a deep understanding of local specificities, we aim to actively contribute to the sector’s maturation — offering relevant and safe experiences to users while reinforcing the pillars of trust, transparency and Brazilian culture that underpin our brands.”

Kalshi filed a lawsuit against the Ohio Casino Control Commission and the Ohio Attorney General’s Office in the US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Eastern Division this week. The OCCC issued a cease-and-desist order against Kalshi in the spring and later warned sportsbooks against offering event contract products in August. In June, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost was among 34 attorneys general who filed briefs in support of New Jersey’s efforts to regulate prediction markets.

The Ohio case joins a growing list of federal and state lawsuits testing whether sports event contracts constitute illegal sports betting or circumvent state laws.

In the lawsuit, Kalshi asked for a preliminary injunction to prevent Ohio from enforcing its gaming laws on the platform. As in the other lawsuits, Kalshi argues it is federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which allows it to operate nationwide above state gambling laws.

“Ohio’s attempt to regulate Kalshi intrudes upon the federal regulatory framework that Congress established for regulating derivatives on designated exchanges,” the suit argues. “The state’s efforts to regulate Kalshi are both field-preempted and conflict preempted. This court should therefore issue both a preliminary and a permanent injunction, as well as declaratory relief.”

Industry talks prediction markets

Prediction markets were a main discussion point during the annual G2E conference in Las Vegas this week, including during educational panels on sweepstakes casinos, how regulators are cracking down on illegal and offshore operators, and a panel titled, “Unpredictable: How the Emergence of Event Contracts Challenges the Paradigm of Regulated Gaming.”

During that panel, Kevin King, partner at Covington & Burling LLP, said the lawsuits are an issue of three Ps: preemption, procedure and patience. Currently, the main issue is whether federal law governing the futures market preempts state and tribal authority over sports event contracts. The prediction market operators contend that’s the case, while multiple states and the American Gaming Association, for which King signed a supporting brief, argue otherwise.

King described the more-than-a-dozen lawsuits in progress and said it is probably “the first quarter” of action in those cases. Kalshi has secured initial injunctions to prevent regulatory enforcement in New Jersey and Nevada. Meanwhile, a Maryland judge denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction. Despite granting Kalshi its initial injunction, a Nevada judge recently denied an injunction for Crypto.com.

Dustin Gouker, owner of Closing Line Consulting, told the G2E audience that while common sense would suggest Congress did not mean for sports betting to be legal in 50 states, sports event markets on platforms like Kalshi could ultimately be legal sports betting based on future decisions as cases make their way through the court system.

“That’s what we’re really going to spend the next two or three years of being in court finding out,” he said.  

States continue turning up heat

Gouker said that while regulators and legislators are taking action, perhaps they should do more on a proactive basis. He pointed to a letter sent by Kevin O’Toole, the executive director of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, to Pennsylvania’s two US senators and 17 US representatives raising concerns about sports betting through prediction market platforms.

“Sports prediction markets operate under the assertion that they are financial derivatives, or swaps, and therefore claim to not be gambling under state law,” O’Toole wrote. “These markets effectively create a backdoor to legalised sports betting, operating parallel to, but outside of, the state-regulated system and without strict oversight.”

Gouker also mentioned more actions should be taken beyond those by regulatory agencies, like the lawsuit filed against Kalshi by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell.

Still, state regulators continue to put pressure on the prediction market industry. This year, beyond Ohio, multiple gaming regulatory agencies – including those in Michigan and Arizona – have issued warnings to sportsbooks against including prediction markets among their product suites. Those warnings came as sportsbook operators such as FanDuel and Underdog announced their intentions to launch event contract products.

“When we look at it, prediction markets are ignoring state policy. There’s a myriad of different protections in place and our state laws,” Arizona Department of Gaming Director Jackie Johnson said on the G2E panel. “We have this comprehensive framework of how gaming works in Arizona, prediction markets are essentially ignoring it.

“We’re looking at consumer protection, protecting the integrity of our current market, and you can’t just sit on the sidelines and allow it.”

Congress gets involved in prediction markets

The PGCB’s letter is not the first time federal lawmakers have been involved in concerns about prediction markets.

A group of US senators, led by Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Curtis of Utah, sent a letter to the CFTC objecting that state laws are being overstepped.

“We have laws on the books right now that the CFTC needs to enforce,” Cortez Masto said in an interview with The New York Times earlier this month. “Using event contracts that facilitate sports betting illegally circumvents the authority of state and local governments like Nevada.”

Under President Joe Biden’s administration, the CFTC commissioners worked to stop prediction markets from accepting money on elections and last year proposed a rule to ban sports event contracts. A federal court overturned the CFTC’s order to stop Kalshi’s election contracts in October, and the platform took more than $700 million in contracts during the 2024 presidential election.

Since President Donald Trump took office, four CFTC commissioners have stepped down, leaving acting Chairwoman Caroline Pham as the only commissioner. Trump initially nominated Brian Quintenz as CFTC chairman but pulled the nomination this month.

In January, Kalshi named Donald Trump Jr as a strategic adviser, and it began offering sports event contracts shortly after.

Last month former CFTC commissioner Kristin Johnson, meanwhile, warned in a farewell address about the risk of having “too few guardrails” on the prediction market industry.

                                                                       .

The measure was included this week in an amended version of PM 1,303, which sought to address a number of economic policies in Brazil. 

The retroactive tax would have replaced initial plans for a permanent increase in gambling tax from 12% to 18% of GGR. 

This tax rise was introduced in June as a provisional measure. But operators will return to paying the original 12% now the measure has been scrapped.  

The bill was approved by a congressional joint committee on Tuesday, with members voting in favour, 13-12.  

But as it hit its final stage on Wednesday, PM 1,303 failed to gain the required support to pass through Congress. 

The Chamber of Deputies withdrew the bill due to it not having the necessary support to pass. Members voted 251-193 in favour of the bill’s withdrawal.  

Senator Rehan Calheiros, the chair of the joint committee that analysed PM 1,303 on Tuesday, said the bill’s failure to pass could have huge ramifications for Brazil. 

In its amended form, the bill which included other economic measures was expected to generate BRL17 billion ($3.2 billion) in additional revenue over 2026. 

“This is very bad. It ends up affecting public finances. I think it’s regrettable,” Calheiros said. 

What does this mean for betting operators in Brazil? 

The retroactive tax scheme, dubbed RERCT Litígio Zero Bets, was introduced within the bill as a voluntary programme, requesting operators pay a 15% tax on gambling operations carried out between 2014 and 2024, prior to regulation on 1 January this year. 

Operators joining the programme would also pay a 15% fine, leading to an effective total tax charge of 30%.  

Udo Seckelmann, head of gambling & crypto at Brazilian law firm Bichara e Motta Advogados, told iGB this week the programme could have offered legal certainty for licensed betting operators in Brazil, helping them to avoid tax disputes in the future. 

What happens now? 

The expiry of PM 1,303 means retrospective taxes will not happen in the short term, but it is likely they will be revisited in the not-so-distant future. 

The government had expected to raise approximately BRL5 billion specifically from the retrospective tax programme.  

Notably, this would have been equivalent to three years of increased gambling tax revenue.  

With such a significant revenue stream on the table for the government, stakeholders expect the government will review similar opportunities again.  

The matter has been one of the key focuses of the GTI-Bets, a working group created in January between the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets and the Federal Revenue Service (RFB) which aims to ensure the licensed sector is meeting its tax requirements. 

Robinson Barreirinhas, special secretary of the RFB, told the parliamentary inquiry commission on betting in March that the government should seek to recover taxes that went unpaid in the grey market. 

Brazilian iGaming expert Elvis Lourenço believes retroactive tax will be revisited.

“Politically, the [failure of PM 1,303] signals limited congressional appetite for a fast-track fiscal package tying betting taxation to broader revenue measures,” he tells iGB. 

“Expect the government to reframe or refile elements in a new bill/MP, but timing is uncertain.”

Before the vote took place, a previous preliminary measure to increase gambling tax to 18% of GGR was hastily removed from the bill.

The government expects to raise around BRL5 billion ($560 million) from the retroactive tax programme, the equivalent of three years of revenue if the tax rate were to increase to 18%.

Heading into this week, the regulated betting market in Brazil had been prepared for the worst as PM 1,303, which contained the proposals for the 50% tax rate increase, awaited approval.

But the bill’s rapporteur, Carlos Zarattini, presented last minute amendments to PM 1,303 ahead of the vote, including removing the tax rate increase, which some believe did not have enough support to pass through Congress.

However, Zarattini’s amendments also included the creation of the Special Regime for the Regularisation of Exchange and Tax Assets (RERCT Litígio Zero Bets), which would seek to retrospectively tax operators for their activities prior to regulation on 1 January.

Vote approved by 13 to 12

On Tuesday, the amended PM 1,303 was approved by just a single vote in 25, with the bill now headed to both houses of Congress for a second vote, which is expected on Wednesday.

The approval followed a day of political negotiations, including a meeting with Finance Minister Fernando Haddad.

If the text doesn’t receive approval by the Senate and Chamber of Deputies by the end of Wednesday, the bill will lose its validity.

This means operators would go back to paying the 12% GGR tax rate enforced before the provisional measure was introduced in June.

Alongside the changes to the tax proposal, Zarattini’s amendments also included a clampdown on illegal operators.

Under the amendments, internet service providers will have 48 business hours to suspend content flagged as illegal gambling.

Brazil retrospective gambling tax will be ‘voluntary’

Notably, the bill said the retrospective tax requirement (RERCT Litígio Zero Bets) would apply a 15% tax rate on gambling activities between 2014 and 2024. It would also include a 15% fine.

Brazilian iGaming expert Elvis Lourenço explains to iGB that this means that operators would have to pay 15% income tax on the value of any online gambling assets they owned between 2014 and 31 December 2024, the day before the licensed market was launched.

Lourenço says operators would also be subjected to a fine equal to the tax rate, for operating in the grey market. This would lead to an effective total tax charge of 30%.

However, participation in the scheme is voluntary and licensed operators will have 90 days from the publication of the text to join the programme. This must be done through a voluntary declaration of assets.

“We’ve done everything we can to ensure that the funds from bets, which weren’t paid under the previous administration, now reach the public coffers,” Zarattini said following the vote’s approval.

A working group in August estimated that the retrospective tax scheme could raise up to $2.3 billion for government coffers.

Why would Brazil betting operators join the programme?

The voluntary nature of the retrospective tax programme may raise questions over why licensed operators would choose to join.

Udo Seckelmann, head of gambling & crypto at Brazilian law firm Bichara e Motta Advogados, tells iGB it could offer legal certainty for Brazil betting operators moving forwards, helping them to avoid prolonged tax disputes with the government.

“Voluntary participation might limit future liabilities, demonstrate good faith toward regulators and stabilise relationships with authorities,” Seckelmann tells iGB.

“However, many operators may question why they should pay retroactive taxes at all, since they entered the market under different legal and fiscal rules.”

Lourenço agrees it could offer licensed operators a pathway to legitimising past undeclared assets or profits, although he believes operators who deem retrospective taxes to be unconstitutional could threaten legal challenges rather than joining the programme.

Lourenço warns the proposal is still subject to political negotiations, with the potential for approval or further amendments, as well as the lapsing of the bill altogether.

Do operators win or lose from the amendments?

While the removal of the tax rise is a positive for operators, those companies that operated prior to regulation may feel uneasy about reporting prior undeclared assets.

Seckelmann suggested the proposal could raise concerns among those that entered the market under clearly defined tax expectations, which made no mention of this policy.

“Applying retrospective taxation could undermine legal certainty and investor confidence, discouraging compliance and future investment,” Seckelmann adds.

“A fair and forward-looking approach would be far more beneficial for the development of Brazil’s regulated betting market.”

On the other hand, Lourenço feels the amendments bring “greater clarity and predictability” to the Brazilian market, which is a positive development in terms of regulatory stability.

“For operators that generated profits in the pre-regulation period, it provides a clear voluntary route to settle potential liabilities,” Lourenço says.

“For those that operated at a loss or break-even, there may be little or no taxable base to declare, making the programme less relevant.

“Separately, operators that consider any retroactive taxation unconstitutional retain the option to litigate.”

If PM 1,303 passes, Seckelmann says he hopes the industry will actively participate in public discussions to ensure the measures are fairly implemented.

“If the PM is approved with such proposal, operators should analyse the fiscal impact, engage with industry associations and prepare for regulatory or judicial developments,” Seckelmann declares.

The introduction of deposit limits follows a recommendation made in the Gambling Act review white paper. Mandatory limits are becoming common practice and are already enforced in the Netherlands and Germany.

From 30 June 2026, all UK online operators must provide users with the opportunity to set a deposit limit. Clarifying this, the Gambling Commission said these limits must be based on the amount customers pay into their account over a set duration.

As part of the scheme, gambling operators can also offer loss limits or limits on withdrawals, on top of the required deposit limits. These, the regulator said, could be loss limits based on gross deposits, meaning total deposits made during a period, rather than deposits minus withdrawal.

October deposit limit deadline around the corner

The new rules will be introduced in stages, with the first set of amendments effective from 31 October.

From the end of October, operators must ensure new customers are met with a prompt to set a financial limit before they make their first deposit. This, the regulator said, should be easy to review and alter.

Operators will also be required to remind consumers every six months that they must review their accounts and transaction information. Licensees must also offer financial limits using free text at an account level to help customers set meaningful limits

Other changes include operators providing financial limit-setting facilities via a link on the homepage and deposit pages. These must be clearly visible and accessible, and require a low number of clicks to reach the facilities.

Finally, operators will be required to respond immediately to customer requests to decrease their financial limit.

Changes are to empower customers

The commission said the changes mainly focus on how limits are to be defined and communicated to customers. This, it said, will help consumers better manage their gambling habits.

Helen Rhodes, director of major policy projects at the Gambling Commission, added that the new rules will give players more control over their gambling. She added that the new-look limits will “empower” consumers.

“These further changes will also bring consistency and clarity for those consumers choosing to set deposit limits, while still supporting gambling businesses to offer customer choice for different forms of limits,” she said.

Consultation heralds mixed responses

The new rules are based on responses from a Gambling Commission consultation launched in March. This review sought to help the sector understand what the incoming measures could look like.

The consultation focused on three main proposals: setting gross deposit limits as default, whether to allow consumers to select “net” limits – deposits minus withdrawals – and the definition of the term “deposit limit”.

It received mixed responses, with some respondents raising concerns over the regulator making gross deposit limits mandatory. There were also some calls to make implementation guidance clearer, as well as to place restrictions on the use of “deposit limit” as a term.

Taking this into account, the commission first sought to clarify certain terminology to reduce the risk of confusion. One example being that only limits that meet the “gross” deposit limit – total deposits made during a period – can now be defined as a “deposit limit”.

The regulator also concluded that operators must offer deposit limits as a minimum but can also set other limit types. However, these must be given equal prominence on the operator’s website.

Reducing confusion among consumers

In terms of technical settings, it was decided that when a consumer sets timeframes across several limit types, the one with the most restrictive setting must apply.

The commission also reiterated that consumers who set a deposit limit cannot deposit again until this period has ended or they opt out of the limit, with the latter subject to a 24-hour “cooling off” period.

As for operator guidance, the commission said the term “spend limits” will be replaced by “stake limits”. This, it said, better aligns with gambling behaviour and will be less confusing for consumers.

Other points included clarifying what “loss limit” means to the consumer. Operators should make clear that this is defined as total stakes minus any winnings within a set timeframe.

In addition, the commission had advocated for the introduction of the term “net deposit limit”. This, it said, is defined as deposits minus withdrawals within a selected period.

The licences permit Yolo to supply iGaming content to the regulated market in the UAE. Both permits were issued by the General Commercial Gaming Regulatory Authority, an independent entity of the UAE government.

In securing the licences, Live88 will become the first online live casino studio to be approved in the region. Yolo said product development and testing will remain in Estonia before it scales across the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries.

The UAE is the first jurisdiction in the GCC region to regulate gambling.

“Obtaining these licences in the UAE is more than a regulatory achievement,” Yolo founder Tim Heath said. “It is a statement of intent. Yolo Group is committed to building the future of gaming on trust, transparency and world-class innovation.

“The UAE is setting the stage for what modern, regulated gaming should look like and we are proud to be part of that journey.”

Regulated market focus for Yolo Group

The new UAE licences form part of Yolo’s pivot towards regulated markets. Previously, the company was heavily focused on unregulated crypto casino but recently changed tack.

This came with confirmation it will incorporate its Sportsbet and Bitcasino brands into the single Yolo.com brand. Yolo said the primary aim is to bring Yolo.com to Tier-1 regulated markets. This followed a three-year process of research and preparations for the shift.

“The direction is clear: the regulated landscape is the future of gaming and we’re ready to lead with the same fearless innovation that got us here,” the company said at the time of the announcement.

However, Juan Ignacio Ibañez, general secretary of the MiCA Crypto Alliance, raised certain questions over the switch. Speaking to iGB, he said entering regulated markets is not just a case of paying a licence fee.

“You might think getting a licence is just a fact of spending an amount of money on the law firm and telling them to go get it,” Ibañez said. “But it turns out that you need to actually adapt your processes a lot, right?

“In order to be able to report a lot of the items that you need to report in the process of getting a licence, you need to change your own internal processes, or set up processes that you didn’t have before. So organisationally, it is quite transformative to get ready to operate in a regulated market. It really changes how you function and your team.”