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.

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.

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.

Hosted by Dr Eyal Loz, there’s no surface-level chatter here. Dr Eyal and his stellar list of guest speakers focus on answering the big questions, and embark on some serious taboo-orientated, myth-busting and thought-provoking conversations.

In this sixth episode, Dr Eyal and former BETonSPORTS CEO David Carruthers tap into how overzealous regulators create a black market in their own back yard. But is this a good or a bad thing for iGaming? With the natural shift many companies take from unregulated activity that brings fast cash flow, to regulated activity that brings long term value, the pair examine the two different attitudes from regulators – one that attempts to create a thriving iGaming ecosystem and one that tries to shut it down. 

You can also catch the episode on Apple here.

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.

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.”

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.

Estimates suggest global annual esports betting revenue will have reached $2.8bn by the end of this year – a 12% year-on-year increase and more than double the figure of just four years ago. Next year, the total is projected to surpass $3bn.

This sharp growth in the 2020s has led to an inevitable increase in regulatory scrutiny. However, the relatively nascent nature of the vertical has left many watchdogs playing catch-up. 

In many jurisdictions, there is a lack of regulatory clarity that appears to be borne out of an intrinsic lack of understanding of esports, as well as esports betting. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the US. Despite the growing popularity of esports, traditional sports wagering is still legal in more than twice as many states as esports betting, and 19 states are considered grey states, meaning they lack specific legislation related to esports betting.

Building understanding and trust

Across the world, regulatory oversight of the vertical is still in its infancy in many territories. For esports betting solutions supplier Oddin.gg, the challenge is to work with policymakers in different regions to build understanding and ultimately trust.

“We are trying to educate regulators about what esports actually is,” Oddin.gg co-founder and managing director Marek Suchar says. “We are locally present [in different markets] so essentially our staff are on hand to address concerns in native languages. 

“The goals are different for different regulators, so we are trying to have open discussions and do the educational part at the same time as building relationships with regulators. Many times it is about addressing the mainstream perception of esports betting.”

One of the key misconceptions regarding esports is that the activity engages those under the legal age to bet. 

“There have been a lot of misconceptions around esports betting. Many of those are tied to mass media messaging.”

Whilst it is true that esports has long been touted as a vehicle to engage a younger audience, with the 18- to 43-year-old age group accounting for 87% of the activity’s betting audience, the average age of an esports bettor is comfortably above the lower threshold in regulated markets. 

For instance, the average age of an esports punter hovers between 29 years old for League of Legends and 31 for Counter-Strike – two of esports’ most popular titles. 

“There have been a lot of misconceptions around esports betting,” Suchar says. “Many of those are tied to mass media messaging – the assumption is that there is underage betting because the players themselves are underage. That is not true.

“We have run our own analysis and found that, out of the top 100 esports teams, only one would have been classified as underage. Furthermore, when it comes to underage bettors, the operators require proof of age.”

Worldwide experience

Oddin.gg provides a range of esports betting solutions spanning odds feeds, risk management, iFrame solutions, marketing and more for leading iGaming operators like Betway, Yolo Group and Aspire Global in a range of markets. This worldwide experience allows them to draw upon substantial know-how and share their learnings with operators and regulators in different jurisdictions.

“Each region has a different perception about esports betting, but the concerns are often similar,” Suchar adds. “We can usually tell regulators how we have already answered these questions in other markets, so we have the narrative prepared. 

“At Oddin.gg, we hold multiple licences across the world. In North America, for example, we are licensed in Arizona, New Jersey, Colorado, West Virginia, Ohio, and Ontario – and that gives us credibility if we start speaking to regulators in other states.

“We are basically saying, ‘look, we are already regulated across multiple jurisdictions and we work with reputable brands’. When it comes to betting, we understand the trends and we understand how the industry works.”

That understanding extends to the nuances of the esports sector, which, unlike traditional sports, does not have a universally recognised international governing body to provide ultimate oversight. 

Given the growth of esports, regulators in this vertical will likely need to move fast to keep pace with the industry. According to Oddin.gg’s Esports 2024 report, betting volume climbed sharply year-on-year, with one major title recording up to a 175% increase and average bet count rising by 131%. Total wagered amounts and average stakes also climbed across major tournaments compared to 2023, underlining the strength of the game publisher-dominated landscape.

The broader esports umbrella goes beyond games like Counter-Strike 2 and League of Legends to include fast-bet e-simulator games, which offer a completely different proposition. Understanding these distinctions is crucial not only for operators, but also for regulators seeking to design effective frameworks.

“The core esports audience for the likes of Dota 2, Counter-Strike and League of Legends is different as they have been playing and watching these games for years and are heavily invested in the games and what they bet on,” Suchar says. “Then you have a separate audience which bets on electronic simulators such as e-football and e-basketball where it is essentially these sports being played in a studio on a console.”

What’s important for operators and regulators to understand is that esports fans represent an attractive segment of the market. They are more likely to be in full-time employment and have a university degree than the general public, and nearly half earn more than $100,000 per year, according to an executive at a prominent esports team.

The importance of education

However, there is still work to be done on educating esports followers, as well as gambling regulators. It is noteworthy, for example, that one in three esports fans who do not wager on the action say they are ‘unsure how betting works’, according to iGB’s Esports Betting Report 2024.  

A step in the right direction can be taken by considering the consumption habits of younger adults, who represent the primary market for esports betting.

“When we are looking at millennials and Gen Z bettors, what is critical for them is having content on demand,” Suchar says. “If they want to watch a movie, they just go to Netflix. If they want to listen to music, they go to Spotify. If they want to consume a certain type of content, they go to YouTube.”

This ‘always on’ element is one of esports’ biggest advantages over traditional sports, which have natural breaks in the schedule and calendar throughout the day, week and year.

“With esports, they can bet almost all the time, and we have more than 15 live markets for the titles that we trade,” Suchar explains. “There are multiple opportunities to bet within each game.”

In the final quarter of last year, nearly half of all Counter-Strike bets were placed during contests, while the proportion of wagers that were props increased to 13%, showing a growing interest in the players at the heart of the competitive action.

“In sport, many of the players have a bigger following and fan base now than the teams themselves – and this trend is even greater in esports,” Suchar says. “So there are lots of reasons why bettors can come and stay engaged.”

A question of integrity

Collaboration with partners and regulators alike is a vital element of Oddin.gg’s strategic approach. With this in mind, the integrity question is one that has to be addressed openly and honestly from the outset, with the provider working closely with organisations like the International Betting Integrity Association (IBIA).

“In terms of match-fixing, robust risk management systems are in place with the right algorithms and the right personnel, so we are able to identify in real time any suspicious activity and inform our partners,” Suchar says. “On an annual basis, we see perhaps a couple of billion euros bet on our lines – and the question is, are we able to identify suspicious patterns when we look at the gameplay, like with traditional sports?

“What we see in esports is that we are able to identify those patterns, because we can analyse data from our traffic and our partners and compare it with previous events. If something is potentially suspicious, our title experts will then look into the gameplay and provide feedback to our partners on whether anything has happened that requires further investigation.

“With the tournament organisers and the integrity bodies, this is how we are trying to build confidence in the ecosystem – by showing that we are taking care and can produce a paper trail of evidence if something happens.”

“It is vital to educate regulators about how esports betting should be regulated, because they do not want it to go underground.”

Suchar is adamant that nurturing a “three-pronged partnership in terms of regulator, bookmaker and provider” is essential for success.

“Especially in a highly regulated market, this kind of collaboration is a critical element,” he adds, citing Oddin.gg’s recent work with its partners in Brazil.

“It is vital to educate regulators about how esports betting should be regulated, because they do not want it to go underground.”

Ultimately, Oddin.gg’s mission is about more than compliance. By combining technological sophistication with advocacy and collaboration, the company is helping to shape a safer and more sustainable future for esports betting.

Marek Suchar, co-founder and managing director, Oddin.gg

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.” 

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. 

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.” 

“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.

“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 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.”

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.”

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.

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.

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 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.

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.”

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.”

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. 

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. 

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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 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.

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.”

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.

Some have estimated the black market could account for up to 70% of the total betting sector in Brazil but, speaking to iGB in a recent interview, Flood believes it is closer to 15%.

While many operators and other industry stakeholders highlight illegal operators as their main concern, Flood and Superbet maintain that their strong start in the market is their main area of focus.

“I don’t wake up every day thinking about the illegal market,” Flood tells iGB. “The competitive intensity would be what wakes me up every day, or what I think about when I wake up.

“I think there’s a lot of data out there that suggests that it’s quite meaningful in terms of total size. I think there’s ways that that gets big and scary when people use deposit volume to size that market.

“In actual terms of maybe revenue capture, which is a better marker of what players are spending, I think it’s a good bit lower than most people’s estimates.”

However, Flood does say he is concerned about the threat the black market poses for players in terms of player protection standards.

Superbet looking to maintain podium position

Superbet has enjoyed an impressive start to the regulated market in Brazil, ranking among the top three licensed operators for market share, according to H2 Gambling Capital’s data.

Flood has a “high degree of confidence” that Superbet is currently in a firm podium position. He also believes the company is closing in on second place.

Like many, Flood expects consolidation in Brazil as the market matures. Three top brands are expected to dominate the market as smaller operators fall away due to high costs and lack of competitive edge against Superbet, Betano and Bet365.

“What we see is there’s going to be a wave of consolidation at some point in the market as the unit economics of competing get a bit harsher,” Flood continues. “High tax burdens, the cost of advertising, you see some sponsorship prices going through the roof.

“It’s incredibly expensive to raise awareness in Brazil about a brand and to build trust. We see that probably some of those smaller brands may fall away at some point in time and the market will probably be dominated by three big players, that would be our estimate. We would hope, and are quite confident, that we will be one of the three.”

Localisation key to Superbet’s success

Prior to 1 January, there was some speculation that international brands may struggle to get a foothold in Brazil, with local operators winning out due to localisation and an enhanced knowledge of their home country’s diverse culture.

But Superbet has invested heavily in local talent, deepening its connection with Brazilian bettors.

“If you were to ask why we’ve been successful, I would say it’s because we’ve invested in finding local people to really help us connect with the Brazilian audience, the Brazilian fan base,” Flood explains.

“That goes deep into how we communicate with customers, even the brand tone, these types of things.

“You cannot take a European proposition and just stick Brazilian flags or change it into Portuguese and put it out there to customers. You really have to find ways to connect.”

Superbet’s investment has extended to sponsoring the 2025 Rio de Janeiro Carnival and Série B, the second-highest football league in Brazil. Additionally, the club is also the front-of-shirt sponsor of top-flight clubs Fluminense and São Paulo.

“The Brazilian fan base is so passionate about sports and so emotionally involved in it, that there’s just different ways to connect,” Flood says. “And we’ve brought that to life.

“But it’s not just putting a badge on that shirt. It’s how we’ve brought that to life in terms of the activations. They are ways for us to connect with those local customers and local audience in a much, much deeper way.”

Superbet Brazil marketing investment to continue

Flood says Superbet has “definitely” achieved what it sought from its initial marketing investment in Brazil.

“When you look at the brand we’ve built in such a short time in Brazil, it’s probably one of the things I’m most proud of,” Flood continues. “That’s testament to the local marketing team that we’ve built out, who make all these decisions day to day.

“When you look at our brand awareness, it’s gone incredibly well. We think that’s what’s translated into what we [believe] is a clear number three in the market at this point.”

This investment in marketing will continue, according to Flood.

“We’ll definitely keep a portion of our investment efforts in this space, because of how effective we’ve found it to be,” Flood concludes.

“We do think it’s part of our superpower of connecting with the local customers and how well we’ve executed in those spaces. For the foreseeable future, we’ll continue to pursue that.”

With the introduction of Gibraltar’s new Gambling Act 2025, the jurisdiction is embarking on a broad reform of its regulatory framework – designed to reflect the realities of a fast-evolving gaming industry in a post-Brexit landscape.

This legislative overhaul replaces the long-standing Gambling Act 2005, and aims not just to modernise but to reposition Gibraltar as a top-tier regulatory hub, after it was recently removed from the European Commission’s list of high-risk jurisdictions.

According to Victoria Reed, a regulatory consultant and founder of Better Change, the 2025 Act – effective since 1 October with a transitional period of six months – represents a “substantive and directionally aligned” leap forward.

”Gibraltar was one of the first jurisdictions to build a reputation as a credible, well-regulated hub. We’ve got a low corporate tax rate, access to skilled people and, crucially, a regulator that struck the right balance between commercial awareness and strict oversight which undoubtably helped attract many of the industry’s biggest brands,” she tells iGB.

Its close link to the UK gave operators access to the market, which cemented Gibraltar’s importance for many of the UK’s tier one players.

”After Brexit though, it lost the ability to passport licences across the EU, so its value became even more tied to its guaranteed UK market access. That shift meant Gibraltar had to double down on reputation and substance and the new act is designed to do exactly that,” says Reed

The framework, she explains, expands scope, embeds economic substance, strengthens oversight of the full value chain and maintains an active enforcement stance.

What’s included in Gibraltar’s new Gambling Act?

The new Gambling Act is comprehensive, placing new classes of businesses under supervision, introducing individual accountability for senior managers and enforcing real local economic presence.

As Andrew Lyman, head of Gibraltar’s Gambling Division, puts it: “Any gambling business now managed and controlled in or from Gibraltar potentially falls within scope.”

Key innovations within the new act include:

• Substantive presence requirements: Licensees must now demonstrate real economic substance in Gibraltar – through staff, offices, infrastructure and local tax contribution. The goal is to eliminate “brass plate” operations that offer little benefit to the jurisdiction.
• Expanded licensing perimeter: The act creates distinct licences for B2C, B2B and “Gaming operator support services”. Activities such as marketing and CRM, managed trading and software hosting now require their own approvals.
• Approved persons regime: For the first time, senior decision-makers will require personal vetting and licensing, similar to the UK’s Personal Management Licence. This enhances accountability at the individual level.
• Marketing oversight: All marketing activities conducted “in or from Gibraltar” will be subject to new regulation – bringing affiliates, group marketing hubs and even creative agencies into scope.
• Enforcement powers: The Gambling Commissioner’s powers are significantly bolstered. The commissioner can now issue administrative fines, cease-and-desist orders, conduct inspections and impose suspensions where warranted.
• Digitalisation and reporting: Operators must prepare for increased digitised reporting, particularly in relation to AML, financial disclosures, technical standards and safer gambling initiatives.

Gambling Appeals Tribunal introduced to review regulatory enforcements

Crucially, a Gambling Appeals Tribunal is being introduced. The independent body established under the updated Gambling Act is designed to hear appeals against decisions made by the gambling commissioner. These may include licence refusals, suspensions, revocations or other enforcement actions.

The tribunal’s creation marks a key milestone in Gibraltar’s broader regulatory reform, legal experts have said, reinforcing its position as a jurisdiction committed not only to robust regulation, but also to fairness, transparency and legal accountability.

Ultimately, it adds another layer of trust that should help to attract serious operators to the market.

Gibraltar’s new Gambling Act: Impact on stakeholders

Steven Caetano, partner at Isolas law firm, notes: “The act raises standards for all stakeholders, with the greatest operational impact on operators and their key personnel.”

Operators must overhaul their group structures to map out which business units will require licensing. For multinationals, this may mean multiple licence applications and reorganised internal governance. B2B providers and third-party support services – including marketing, technology and CRM services – must now assess whether they require standalone licences.

Similarly, senior personnel face new responsibilities, with the “Approved Persons” regime emphasising personal accountability front and centre.

Regulators gain more authority – but also a heightened responsibility to ensure fair, consistent and transparent enforcement.

In the end, players stand to benefit through stronger consumer protections, responsible gambling requirements and greater market integrity.

Navigating the challenges

Stakeholders have welcomed the new regulation, but it doesn’t come without significant challenges. Among them are increased compliance costs as new licence applications, reporting obligations and staffing requirements will drive up outlay – especially for smaller operators or those transitioning from leaner compliance models.

If the new act succeeds in attracting more business to Gibraltar, there will likely be demand for more local staff, though a relatively small labour pool in Gibraltar may pose recruitment challenges.

However, the anticipated UK-EU border agreement is expected to ease the movement of frontier workers from Spain, by removing the need for border checks between Spain and Gibraltar.

There is also a degree of transitional complexity. Although current licensees will be “grandfathered” into the new system, they will still need to undergo fresh applications within six months of the Gambling Act’s commencement.

Uncertainty around licensing categories in Gibraltar’s new Gambling Act

Speaking to iGB, legal experts agree there is a level of uncertainty around how some of the the new rules should be implemented.

Victoria Reed points to the uncertainties around licensing categories: “The government has said marketing carried out ‘in or from Gibraltar’ will generally need its own licence but has also indicated it may carve out some intra-group activity on a case-by-case basis. Until more secondary rules and precedents are published, operators can’t be entirely sure which affiliates, agencies or shared-service teams fall inside scope and which don’t.”

She also highlighted new rules around support services leaving room for interpretation.

”The act lists functions like managed trading, RNGs, hosting and advertising as ‘support services’, but leaves room for interpretation,” Reed adds.

”Multinational groups will need to decide whether in-house teams that straddle multiple hubs — for instance a centralised risk team partly in Gibraltar — require licensing.”

Caetano flags additional guidance could be needed to clarify B2B versus B2C licensing:

“The distinction between B2B and B2C activities is clearer, but some hybrid or cross-border models may require further guidance.”

In essence, it is unclear if dual licensing is needed or whether it could be covered under one tailored licence.

Credibility in a crowded field

Gibraltar’s iGaming sector, which employs more than 3,200 people across 54 operators, continues to be a cornerstone of the peninsula’s economy, generating 20% of its GDP.

Last year the sector contributed £110 million in corporate tax and £40 million in PAYE contributions. There are currently 83 licensees appointed – 49 B2C and 34 B2B.

In a reality where jurisdictions like Malta, the Isle of Man, and emerging offshore hubs are all vying for operator attention, Gibraltar’s message is clear about its brand: credibility, not convenience.

Where a place like Malta offers flexibility, and the Isle of Man applies rigid structure, Gibraltar positions itself in the middle as a risk-based market, but also with regulatory discretion and pragmatism, Reed explains

As Gibraltar’s Minister for Justice, Trade and Industry Nigel Feetham noted in his recent parliamentary budget address, Gibraltar has never operated a “no-questions-asked” model and the jurisdiction expects its licensees to respect local laws in other markets and take local licences where appropriate. This ethos is embedded in the 2025 Act.

“If we drive business away, it will be business we don’t want,” Lyman notes.

The real test begins now, where both regulators and businesses will be adapting to the new act, but the tone is optimistic.

“We’ve already seen renewed interest in the jurisdiction,” says Lyman. Caetano agrees the act “ensures Gibraltar remains at the forefront of the global online gambling industry for years to come”.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tax rise risks affecting investment into Brazil’s betting sector

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

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

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

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

IBJR searching for new executive president

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

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

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

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

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

However, the market’s gambling trade body JDigital has criticised the measure, warning that comparisons between gambling and tobacco are unreasonable.  

In a statement to Infoplay on Thursday, the trade body said the measure was “difficult to justify” and “did not correspond to the nature of regulated online gambling in Spain, which is one of the most monitored and controlled activities in Europe”.  

The rule has already been implemented into Spain’s gambling laws this week as part of the Royal Decree 958/2020, which covers marketing and gambling communications.  

Spain gambling warnings to help prevent addiction

The announcement was made by Minister for Social Rights Pablo Bustinduy at a safer gambling event on Wednesday. He said the messaging must be displayed across online games and in any banners and marketing messaging on social media.  

Current messaging which includes “play responsibly” will be replaced by warnings such as: “Gambling addiction is a risk of gambling”, “The probability of being a losing gambler is 75%” and “Losses for all gamblers are four times greater than their winnings”.  

“The responsibility should not fall on users but on the authorities, who have the democratic duty to ensure that the environments they access are safe,” Bustinduy told attendees.  

These new warnings are based on 2024 addiction research published by the Spanish Ministry for Health, which formed part of the country’s National Drug Plan. The report sought to determine the prevalence of gambling, both online and in-person, among the Spanish population. 

Within its findings, the research said up to 82% of treatment admissions in Spain during 2022 were related to gambling addiction. 

The minister said the new measure would help prevent gambling addiction and problem behaviours before they occur.  

Referencing land-based betting, he said “unscrupulous” companies have no qualms about taking advantage of those in greater need. This, he said, is also happening online.  

Ban on celebrity advertising back on the cards 

Notably, the minister is also working to reinstate regulations banning celebrities and influencers from promoting gambling activities and banning welcome bonuses aimed at young people.  

This change is being processed through the Spanish Congress and he did not offer a timeframe for the measure to be reinstated.  

It relates to a host of previous measures passed in November 2020 restricting marketing activities for gambling operators. These included banning sponsorship deals with operators and welcome bonuses.  

However, these were partly reinstated in April last year, meaning operators could once again use celebrities to market their products and could offer welcome bonuses. But some stakeholders have hinted that certain measures could be reinstated, as Minister Bustinduy indicated on Wednesday.  

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

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

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

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

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

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

Supreme Court ruling sends a message to illegal sites

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

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

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

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

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

Fresh calls for online gambling regulation in Chile

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How will the ban work?

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

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

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

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

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

Responsible gaming ordinance amended to include ban

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bolsa Família ban splits opinion

The ban has certainly been divisive in Brazil.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Indeed, while gambling regulations can bring significant benefits in areas such as safer gambling, fairness, data protection and tax revenues, compliance is widely viewed as a major headache that can monopolise resources, derail plans and curb growth. 

Even operators in long-established gambling markets are not immune from such challenges. In the UK, for instance, analysts expect increasing regulations to be one of the key factors that could stifle the sector’s expansion. 

From geolocation and fraud prevention to anti-money laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) checks, operators face an increasingly stringent checklist to avoid falling foul of the watchdogs. 

Proactive compliance is the holy grail  

However, amid this complex space, in which operators from across the globe have faced eye-watering sanctions, there is increasingly a shift from a reactive to proactive approach.  

For an industry that is used to predicting outcomes and setting odds, operators are now betting that anticipating regulatory headwinds and preparing for the compliance requirements could be a huge commercial enabler.  

This transition is supported by enterprises like Vector Solutions – which has operated as multi-sector compliance specialists since the late 1990s and established five offices across the United States. 

In April, Vector, which already worked with more than 350 casinos on AML compliance, acquired ArdentSky – which has been providing compliance technology solutions to the gaming industry for over 15 years. 

ArdentSky has a huge portfolio spanning global gaming manufacturers, operators, and suppliers. Its established client list includes the likes of DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM, IGT, Aristocrat, Playtech and Rush Street. 

According to a Vector Solutions spokesperson, there are several reasons for the transformation that is taking place with how gaming organisations are handling gambling licence requirements, risk management and compliance training. 

The primary reason is the expansion into new and stricter markets, each of which comes with its own complex licensing rules, meaning operators must juggle more licences, deadlines and regulators than ever before.  

Simultaneously, digital transformation has fundamentally shifted the way organisations operate, with compliance systems moving away from manual, paper-based processes towards centralised, automated platforms – a shift that has made it easier to track requirements and delivery.  

Meanwhile, regulators are also intensifying their scrutiny, with even relatively minor lapses punished severely. Additionally, vendor oversight has become more important, with jurisdictions like Nevada requiring background checks on suppliers, forcing operators to be responsible not only for their own compliance but also for third parties. 

Driving cultural change 

However, according to a Vector Solutions spokesperson, the biggest change is cultural. 

“Compliance is no longer a defensive exercise; it’s becoming a business enabler,” the spokesperson says. “Companies are embedding compliance into their strategic planning, so licensing and risk processes actually support faster expansion.  

“The entire industry is moving from reactive, manual compliance toward proactive, digital, and integrated approaches – and of course the past 18 months in AML enforcement have really underscored the stakes.” 

MGM Resorts and Wynn Las Vegas are just two major operators that have faced multi-million-dollar financial penalties so far in 2025 – and regulators are increasingly holding both executives and companies liable. 

“The shift toward formalised, risk-based AML programs, expanded KYC, and attention to global networks like Chinese Money Laundering Organizations means compliance has to be smarter, more tailored and more technology-driven,” the spokesperson adds. “It’s no longer about ‘checking the box’. It’s about protecting both the business and its reputation.” 

Innovating under pressure 

In light of record enforcement actions, squeezed budgets and heightened scrutiny, many compliance teams are being asked to do more with fewer resources.  

Moreover, hiring the right individuals to join the compliance team can take time – leading to a greater risk of missing filings or leaving auditing gaps. 

“There’s no question compliance teams are under pressure,” the spokesperson says, adding that gambling compliance jobs increasingly cover a broad range of areas, ranging from AML to health and safety to cybersecurity. 

“When you add in staffing shortages, the burden becomes almost impossible to sustain, and it shows up in turnover. Casinos end up spending heavily on recruitment and onboarding, only to risk losing talent because compliance budgets and salaries often aren’t commensurate with their value. This is despite the fact that a strong compliance team and programme can save companies millions in avoided fines.  

“But there are opportunities, too. The pressure is forcing teams to innovate. We’re seeing more automation, tighter integration with other departments, and smarter use of data analytics. In some cases, being leaner pushes compliance to align more closely with business goals. Those organisations that adapt will end up with more resilient, efficient, and strategically integrated compliance programmes.” 

Facing a unique challenge 

With more than a quarter of a century of experience in regulatory compliance, Vector Solutions, with ArdentSky under its wing, is well placed to offer its perspective on the unique challenges of the gaming industry. 

According to the spokesperson, the patchwork nature of gaming regulation means licensing is unlike almost any other industry. 

Additionally, the practicalities of obtaining a single gambling licence can be daunting, with applications that can have hundreds of pages and forensic background checks that extend beyond the company and to its shareholders, executives and employees.  

Given the complexities of these processes, approval times can be wildly unpredictable – dragging on for months or even more than a year. 

“For vendors entering new markets or operators looking to expand partnerships, those delays can put major business plans on hold.” the spokesperson says. “Licensing issues with vendors can affect an operator’s licence, so the responsibility is shared on both sides.”  

Licensing management as a strategic imperative  

When compliance failings occur, the fallout can be disastrous for a business, draining resources and driving up legal costs.  

“From a reputational standpoint, regulators lose trust quickly when they see sloppy licensing practices,” the spokesperson says. “That leads to slower approvals, stricter oversight and less flexibility in the future. In a highly regulated industry like gaming, even one publicised violation can undermine brand credibility with customers, partners and investors.” 

Furthermore, there are ongoing reporting requirements for vendors and operators, including deadlines, renewals and mandatory disclosures of any regulatory action.  

“If a licence is suspended, even temporarily, it can shut down operations in a key market. That means refunds due to lost deals, or even breach-of-contract claims,” the spokesperson adds. 

“The bottom line is that licensing management isn’t just an administrative task – it’s a strategic function. Done well, it enables growth. Done poorly, it can cripple both operations and reputation.” 

Implementing role-specific training 

Organizations can take a big step in the right direction by investing in training that is “comprehensive, ongoing and impactful” to satisfy watchdogs, rather than the box-ticking exercise of years gone by. 

“We’ve seen enforcement actions where failures were tied directly to weak or inconsistent training,” the spokesperson adds. “Regulators expect training to be risk-based and role-specific. A VIP host faces very different scenarios than someone in accounting, and the training has to reflect those realities.”  

“The threat landscape is evolving too quickly for static, annual training – and the personal accountability piece cannot be overstated. We’ve already seen executives criminally and civilly penalised for Bank Secrecy Act violations. That raises the stakes dramatically.” 

Above all, training programmes must ensure the organisation is proactively working to prevent issues – and not just reacting to them. 

“Compliance is no longer a defensive exercise; it’s becoming a business enabler”

“By dedicating time, resources, and commitment to training, casinos demonstrate that compliance is a priority at every level. That message resonates with both regulators and employees,” the spokesperson says. 

“It builds trust and reinforces accountability – and culture really does start at the top. Regulators assess not just policies, but leadership’s commitment to compliance.” 

Built into the process 

Whether it is an operational function such as hiring or onboarding, or market expansion, the key is for compliance to be integrated into existing systems from the outset so that licensing checks, risk reviews and training requirements can be built directly into the process. 

For example, integrating human resources platforms with learning management systems can enable new hires to be automatically assigned the right AML training from day one.  

“Triggers and automation can ensure that new employees, vendors, or market expansions immediately prompt the right compliance steps,” says the spokesperson, who also underlines the importance of communication.  

“Compliance leaders need to frame requirements not just in regulatory terms but in business terms – how compliance avoids fines, speeds up launches, and strengthens partnerships.”  

From a training perspective, onboarding represents a prime opportunity to get ahead of the curve and mitigates the potential for future problems. 

“Role-specific modules deepen that understanding, and refresher courses or check-ins after onboarding help with retention,” the spokesperson adds.  

“Ultimately, aligning compliance with operations reduces risk and builds efficiency. It transforms compliance from being seen as a hurdle into being recognised as a core part of the employee experience and the business’s strategic growth.” 

On Monday, several industry CEOs made a rare public appearance at a roundtable on SEC-CFTC harmonisation. For months, sports wagering insiders eagerly anticipated the event to gain insight on how the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission could modify federal regulations on prediction markets.

Although the CFTC and the US Securities and Exchange Commission outlined numerous measures that could result in further collaboration, the participants barely addressed prediction markets at the four-hour event. In many respects, the executives spent more time cracking jokes than discussing prediction market regulation.

Three executives appeared on a panel on how regulatory harmonisation efforts could unlock economic value for platforms across the industry:

• Shayne Coplan of Polymarket
• Terrence Duffy of CME Group
• Tarek Mansour of Kalshi

Two others, JB Mackenzie of Robinhood Markets and Nick Lundgren of Crypto.com, appeared on another that addressed how the initiative could reduce costs for investors.

For the most part, however, stakeholders who looked for insight on regulatory changes for prediction markets came away thirsting for more.

Lighthearted moments on prediction market panel

Last month, the CME Group signed a groundbreaking partnership with FanDuel. Under the deal, the two will form a joint venture to create event contracts on certain derivatives including oil prices, index trades and economic indicators such as the national GDP. At Monday’s appearance, Duffy made a brief reference to the FanDuel joint venture in passing.

Duffy told the audience that he had spent little time inside a Las Vegas casino on a trip to Sin City over the weekend. Instead, he was preoccupied with his trades on Kalshi, a new prediction market.

It prompted Mansour to ask whether Duffy closed out of his trades by turning a profit. “You made money, I broke even,” Duffy responded with a laugh. “There’s a lot of fees over there, buddy.”

Coplan, 27, also brought the jokes to Monday’s roundtable. The Polymarket CEO playfully jousted with his elders in poking fun at their incumbent status. When several panellists chided Coplan on his age, he retorted, “If you can’t find me after this, contact my attorney.”

Little clarity on key regulation on Kalshi, Polymarket

However, the roundtable never broached CFTC Rule 40.11 that prohibits event contracts on matters such as terrorism, war, assassination and gaming. Polymarket, for instance, offers contracts on whether Hamas will release all captive Israeli hostages by 31 October.

The industry has sought clarity on the regulation, as a host of jurisdictions have filed litigation against prediction markets, claiming they run afoul of state laws.

Unsettled matters in CFTC regulation

The roundtable opened with a brief address by SEC Chairman Paul Atkins, a rumoured candidate to be nominated by US President Donald Trump for the same position with the CFTC. Atkins remains a long shot because of a provision in the Securities Exchange Act that prohibits the chairman from leading another government agency at the same time. Atkins noted that the two agencies are focused on collaboration rather than a merger, which would require approval from the executive and legislative branches.

“Fanciful talk of reorganising the government risks distracting us from the monumental opportunity we have in front of us,” Atkins said in prepared remarks. “What matters is building a framework where our agencies coordinate seamlessly, reduce duplicative regulation and give markets the clarity they deserve.”

Mansour stressed the importance of self-certification for certain markets in the current environment. He emphasised that if Kalshi has to wait due to regulatory uncertainty, he contends impatient customers will simply go offshore.

CFTC interim chair Caroline Pham spoke near the start of the roundtable, but also largely ignored prediction markets. Pham plans to leave the agency when a new chair is confirmed. Brian Quintenz, the president’s previous nominee, saw his confirmation vote delayed twice this year. As a result, the White House has reportedly begun the process of vetting new candidates to lead the nation’s regulator on derivatives.

But the long-awaited update is unlikely to solve some of the market’s deeper-rooted struggles relating to the proliferation of illegal gambling.

The changes were proposed by the Ministry of Finance’s investigator, Marcus Isgren, who authored the report outlining amendments designed to strengthen the regulatory framework.

If enacted, the changes – scheduled to take effect on 1 January 2027 – would represent the most significant reform of Sweden’s regulated gambling regime since its re‑regulation in 2019.

The proposal would redefine which gambling services fall under Swedish law, significantly expand the administrative tools available to regulators, and shift responsibility for compliance from the state to the operators.

A positive response to Sweden’s Gambling Act update

For a market grappling with falling channelisation since 2019, this could be a turning point.

Anna Johnson, CEO and president of Svenska Spel, the state-owned operator, celebrated the report, as have other prominent stakeholders in the market.

“The investigator’s proposals are long-awaited and welcome. We have long pointed out that the regulations around illegal gambling need to be tightened. It’s about improved protection for consumers, but also about safeguarding trust in the entire Swedish gambling market. Ensuring that gambling is conducted in a responsible and sustainable way is the very foundation of our operations,” Johnson said.

A spokesperson for the Swedish Gambling Authority, Spelinspektionen, similarly praised the government’s review. In a comment to iGB, the regulator said: “We have brought to the government’s attention the need to amend the scope of the Gambling Act with regard to online gambling. We therefore view the investigator’s proposal positively, as it strengthens our ability to work more effectively against unlicensed gambling.”

Change is positive

One of the architects of the longstanding industry pressure that led to this reform is Gustaf Hoffstedt, CEO of industry trade body BOS. Speaking to iGB, Hoffstedt struck a positive tone, even if it is unlikely the law will come into force for at least another year.

“I’m all fine with my patience right now, when I can notice that we are ticking boxes during the path. I don’t have a problem with waiting until 1 of January 2027, because, as an ex-politician myself (Hoffstedt represented the Moderate Party in the Swedish parliament between 2010 and 2015), I am fully aware that the legislative process takes that time. What was so frustrating was the initial five or six years, when nothing happened,” he said.

Hoffstedt supports the shift to a participation-based model, but his optimism is measured. The reform, he estimates, might improve channelisation – but not enough to meaningfully stem the flow of Swedish players to unlicensed sites and barely making a dent in the current leakage to the unlicensed market.

“From the industry’s point of view, we are quite certain that it will substantially contribute to a strengthened channelisation. However, substantially means maybe two or three percentage points. Even if this reform is successful, it certainly doesn’t solve the general problem.”

Consumer appeal the real challenge

According to Hoffstedt, the deeper issue is not legal enforcement, but consumer appeal. Sweden’s licensed market, he says, lacks the attractiveness needed to retain players – especially in a sector driven by thrill, incentives and fast-moving innovation, with offshore platforms offering more bonuses, more games and faster payouts.

“We have an alcohol monopoly in Sweden that is easier to uphold since alcohol is a physical product,” he notes. “But I can just take my smartphone and gamble on hundreds of illegal, unlicensed gambling companies.”

The legislative instinct across Europe, he argues, is to build legal walls – through DNS blocking, payment restrictions and repressive licensing regimes. But this alone won’t work.

“This review was a niche product. But we’re now advocating for a general, broad inquiry into how to improve the channelisation of the Swedish gambling market.”

He hopes the government will launch such a review before the next general election in September 2026. “That could be the most valuable contribution to a functioning market.”

Reframing the law: what’s in Sweden’s Gambling Act update?

Under current law, online gambling operators fall under Swedish jurisdiction if they target the Swedish market. This so-called “riktningskriteriet”, or “directional criterion,” relies on visible cues – such as use of the Swedish language, local currency (SEK), or Swedish branding – to establish intent.

However, many foreign operators have circumvented the rule by offering platforms in English, using the euro, and avoiding overt national markers. In doing so, they’ve been able to legally accept Swedish players without a licence – remaining outside the regulator’s reach.

For years, this loophole in Sweden’s Gambling Act has enabled player leakage to unlicensed operators. According to BOS, which represents 19 gambling companies operating in the market, prior to the re-regulation, channelisation was slightly below 50%. Immediately after the re-regulation it was plus 90%. But those numbers quickly dropped.

Spelinspektionen currently estimates it to be at 85%. Channelisation for online casino in Sweden is estimated at 72%–82% – a number which BOS describes as “catastrophic”.

In comparison, channelisation in neighbouring Denmark, where the market is significantly more liberal, is estimated at around 90%, with an equal distribution between different product groups.

The core reform is a shift from asking whether a gambling site is targeting Swedish users to whether people in Sweden participate in the game. Under the new law, it wouldn’t matter how the site is marketed – if someone in Sweden can play, the law applies.

From intent to activity

Effectively, the legal burden would shift from proving intent to target to proving active exclusion. Operators wishing to stay outside Swedish jurisdiction must implement “appropriate and effective measures” to block Swedish residents from accessing their platforms. Even sites with no Swedish branding or language – if accessible to Swedes – could face legal action.

These are the key enforcement shifts in the amendment:

• Responsibility: Operators will be required to take “appropriate and effective measures” to prevent Swedish residents from participating – not only to avoid targeting them.
• Exemption test: To fall outside the law’s reach, an operator must show that exclusion measures have been implemented – not merely that they do not target Sweden.
• Promotion ban expansion: The prohibition on promoting unlicensed gambling would extend to payment processors, financial services, administrative or technical support and other intermediaries facilitating unlicensed operations.
• Presumption of participation (for payments): Payment intermediaries that handle transactions linked to unlicensed gambling must assume Swedish residents are participating from Sweden unless clear evidence suggests otherwise.
• Criminal liability adjustments: The criminal provisions of Sweden’s Gambling Act would be updated to explicitly cover unlicensed gambling and the promotion thereof, under the new participant‑based framework – potentially expanding liability to those who knowingly facilitate unlicensed activity.

Is there an appetite for deeper reform?

According to Hoffstedt, a big issue is also that unlicensed operators are sophisticated enough to mimic the branding of legal operators, so that even well-meaning consumers are gambling on illegal sites without knowing it.

“That’s one of the main problems in Sweden,” he said. “And it’s actually not easy to solve, because crooks can, for instance, just steal the sign of the Swedish Gambling Authority and place it on their homepage.”

And while the government has run limited public awareness campaigns, Hoffstedt believes more could be done.

“The Gambling Authority launched one or two such campaigns, but I do think we should do more – perhaps within the industry as well. I know the Danish trade association launched their own campaign. Maybe that’s something we should look at too.”

If passed, as is expected, the new law would nevertheless mark a major turning point in Swedish gambling enforcement. But its true effect remains to be seen.

Without reforms that make Sweden’s licensed market more attractive to consumers – alongside stronger enforcement – the most muscular legislation may still prove leaky, he stresses.

“The proof of the pudding is in the eating,” Hoffstedt said.

With a general election in Sweden looming next year, the political appetite for deeper reform may soon be tested.

Last Tuesday, Yolo announced plans to incorporate its Sportsbet and Bitcasino brands into the single Yolo.com brand, with the aim of bringing Yolo.com to Tier-1 regulated markets.

This followed a three-year process of research and preparations for the shift. With Yolo at a “crossroads”, as the company described it, founder Tim Heath and co have opted to leave grey markets behind.

However, having thrived as an unregulated crypto casino operator, the move does raise questions over the challenges and potential rewards of transitioning to regulated markets.

Entering regulated markets isn’t just a case of paying a licence fee, explains Juan Ignacio Ibañez, general secretary of the MiCA Crypto Alliance, an initiative aimed at simplifying regulatory compliance across the crypto industry.

“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 tells iGB. “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.”

Why has Yolo made this move into regulated markets?

Yolo in part attributed its decision to pivot to regulated markets to the belief that crypto is becoming “mainstream”.

“It’s therefore our responsibility to bring the crypto casino experience to regulated domestic markets, working within sensible frameworks and combining speed and freedom with safety and oversight,” the company said.

Its previous strategy of operating in unregulated markets proved to be hugely successful, bringing cryptocurrency to the masses.

So why has Yolo made this transition?

Kovach agrees with Yolo’s claim that crypto has gone mainstream, saying the crypto gaming world is at a “pivotal point”.

“The genie is kind of out of the bottle,” Kovach explains. “Having been in the space for seven, eight years, it’s definitely moved beyond a very core niche into something much, much bigger.

“Obviously regulation in the US seems to be moving at a record pace at the moment under [Donald] Trump, but even under Europe with MiCA et cetera, it’s being accepted. Whether we agree with all of the regulations or not, it needs to be regulated. It is being regulated.

“But I think it’s more than that, and they [Yolo] see the opportunity now being within regulated markets. I think it’s going to be fascinating to watch how they go about that.”

Finland, Sweden and Canada seen as opportunities alongside the UAE

In its announcement, Yolo identified Canada, Sweden and Finland as three markets it plans to expand into.

The company also announced it is closing in on securing two B2B vendor licences for the soon-to-be regulated market in the UAE.

iGaming and sports consultant Stefan Kovach believes building credibility compliance in smaller markets before advancing into bigger markets could prove a successful strategy. This belief is based on his previous experiences with Poker Stars and Party Gaming.

“I think even if you’re a big and experienced operator like Yolo, you want to be taking baby steps initially,” Kovach says. “There’s definitely an advantage of getting in early, but there’s also an advantage of being a fast follower and not biting off more than you can chew.

“I don’t know what their exact plans are, but I would imagine the prize is in the bigger markets. And I would also imagine they’re pretty bullish on being able to innovate and disrupt even in markets in which most people are like, ‘you don’t want to enter because it’s done’.”

A double-edged sword

Ibañez agrees starting in smaller regulated jurisdictions could make sense, particularly if these regulators are more readily available to communicate over contentious regulatory issues.

“In smaller jurisdictions, you may have the opportunity to pick up the phone and ring the supervisor and use that relationship to go over any misunderstandings and so on,” Ibañez says. “There’s lots of paperwork, lots of formal errors and things that can go wrong procedurally.”

However, he also feels this could be a negative, adding: “At the same time, a smaller jurisdiction can be a more under-resourced jurisdiction, especially if they are late to the technology.

“So a single team supervising this within the supervisory authority needs to deal with various market niches, which means they will lack expertise here and there. So that can backfire.

“It can be that they’re a bit overworked, they don’t know the technology or the business model that they’re dealing with, and they don’t see this every day. That can also slow down authorisations and so on. It can go both ways.”

This could be a costly endeavour for Yolo too, especially with its plans to operate in a number of regulated markets.

“It’s not just cookie cutter, we do one regulated market and then we just take that and we replicate it in another,” Kovach continues. “There are different financial obligations.

“There’s different, albeit I think, increasingly similar, player responsibility, safety, KYC et cetera requirements. So yeah, there definitely are higher costs.

“I’m sure Tim and the Yolo group, they’ve been looking at this for three years, they will have done their homework and they’re a premium operation. Their customer service, their security checks et cetera are pretty close to being what Tier 1 requires anyway, I would imagine.”

Will regulators welcome Yolo with open arms?

Yolo itself acknowledged in its announcement that domestic regulators offering licences “are not keen” on continued operations in other pre-regulated markets.

Even its status as a crypto operator could cause concern among Tier-1 regulators, says Elizabeth Dunn, partner at UK law firm Bird & Bird.

Dunn notes the UK Gambling Commission has previously refused licences to companies due to not feeling comfortable with those business’ crypto-funded origins.

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

“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.”

However, Dunn also believes some regulators may view the licensed entry of a gambling giant such as Yolo in a positive light.

“Some regulators may see an operator like Yolo seeking a licence as an opportunity to bring previously unregulated activity within the scope of its regulatory powers and tax regime, therefore ensuring its residents are able to access Yolo’s services on a regulated, tax-paying basis,” Dunn explains.

A forward-looking investment for Yolo

In Ibañez’s view, this is very much a move with the future in mind for Yolo.

This is especially true for whether Yolo seeks additional outside investment.

“It’s a forward-looking move, is something I would speculate,” Ibañez says. “It really depends on the circumstances of what Yolo is looking for, right?

“If you are trying to get, for instance, some more enterprise customers or partners, some of these partners, they just might not want to work with unregulated partners or providers. So, it opens a different kind of game.

“And I guess it sort of makes sense. You start, you prove your business case in the unregulated market, you build sufficient capital, you build sufficient strength and brand recognition and then you’re ready to make the next step, which is sort of difficult to do the other way around.”

Significant impact expected on Yolo’s margins

In terms of margins, Kovach suggests this move could affect Yolo “quite significantly”, although, like Ibañez, he views this as a long-term play.

“You’re subject to the tax regime of that licence, so it will without question on any of the Tier-1 licences be significantly higher than if you’re operating on a Tier-2 or Tier-3 licence,” Kovach explains. “That’s an inevitability.

“But I also think as the world becomes more and more regulated, as the world adopts cryptocurrency and more than that the kind of culture that has permeated around crypto casinos, that is increasingly engaging. There’s just a massive opportunity there.

“The biggest opportunity actually is a generation that gambling companies are failing to engage with who do use crypto, who do expect a different experience and are increasingly in regulated markets. So you might well take a smaller margin, but actually, you have a bigger audience there and a more sustainable path to growth and value creation, if ultimately you want to spin this up on the stock market or sell the business.”

Where could Yolo excel?

Yolo prides itself on innovation and its role as a true pioneer in the crypto gambling sector.

The company says its next chapter will connect “land-based excellence with digital innovation”, with the hopes of providing seamless wallet experiences for players across physical and online betting.

It is that mindset that Kovach believes will stand Yolo in good stead as it transitions into this new era.

“I do think it’s a culture,” Kovach declares. “I do think it’s about understanding the audience and understanding that this crypto audience, which is becoming mass market, particularly among the younger generation, is demanding more.

“It’s demanding more from a user-experience point of view. It’s demanding more from transparency point of view, ease of payment point of view, community, game evolution, et cetera. I think it will be a big advantage for them.”

As crypto continues to evolve from niche to mainstream, Ibañez expects Yolo to be at the forefront of the movement due to its “native” origins to the sector.

“What we are seeing is that the way in which these more traditional Web2 companies are adopting this technology is a bit arm’s length,” Ibañez says. “If you’re native with a technology, you are using it to its fullest extent, right?

“And you are really just adopting partially something that is unfamiliar to you, because you want to ride a trend.

“Native acquaintance with the technology, and just the ability to operate with the technology at all levels of an organisation, allows you to use the full potential. That’s probably a competitive advantage.”

Could regulation harm innovation?

Dunn suggests the company’s entrance into regulated markets can be conducted in two ways.

“There are two options for Yolo here – enter markets organically or seek to acquire already licensed entities, which it may then rebrand with the Yolo offering,” Dunn says.

“We have seen at least one other crypto-first operator enter a regulated market through acquisition, and this can (rightly or wrongly) be seen as an ‘easier’ way of obtaining a licence.”

Kovach describes Yolo’s operation as “very shrewd and very sound”, although he also suggests the company’s move into regulated markets could steer it away from what has made it such a success.

“I think they will be able to deliver against what’s required,” Kovach adds. “But I guess the risk is it takes up more resource and more effort than they’ve certainly been used to. Does that then quash their ability to be as consumer-centric and innovative as they have been?”

Although he acknowledges the risks, Kovach believes Yolo is all-in on the move, in line with the company’s, and especially Tim Heath’s, core principles.

“What they’re doing, he’s not paying lip service to this,” Kovach concludes. “They’re obviously going for it.

“I know Tim, he’s a gambler. He likes to place big bets and I think he’s placing a big bet on it becoming more and more mainstream.”

Tapped by the White House to head the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Quintenz has seen his nomination stall amid urgings from the Winklevoss twins to delay the process. If Quintenz is passed over, the move could deliver a major blow to prediction market supporters given his association with Kalshi. Quintenz, a former CFTC commissioner, has largely indicated that sports event contracts fall under federal jurisdiction, rather than with individual states.

Ahead of next Monday’s anticipated roundtable on cryptocurrency and prediction market regulation, speculation has intensified that Quintenz will be replaced by the White House. Last week, Bloomberg reported that US President Donald Trump is mulling potential replacements for the position.

So who might be the next CFTC chair?

Could the new CFTC chair be a former director?

Josh Sterling, a partner at Washington DC-based firm Milbank LLP, is being vetted by Trump’s administration, Semafor reported this week. For prediction market detractors, Sterling would not be the preferred choice.

For one, Sterling has represented Kalshi in numerous cases over the past 18 months. At Jones Day, Sterling’s previous stop, he represented the prediction market in KalshiEx LLC vs CFTC. There, attorneys for Kalshi argued that so-called Congressional Control Contracts should not be prohibited by the derivatives regulator.

The trades gave customers the ability to predict which political party would gain control of the Senate and the House of Representatives in the 2024 election. Kalshi eventually won a stay in US District Court that allowed the site to offer contracts on the presidential election. Weeks later, Kalshi began listing the contracts on sports.

What Sterling said at gaming legislation conference

In July, Sterling made an appearance on behalf of Kalshi at the National Council of Legislators From Gaming States summer meeting in Louisville.

At the event, the former CFTC director mused that it is not up to the courts to decide whether market participants are using the contracts to engage in speculation or hedging.

Sterling also drew a comparison between sports contracts and derivatives on commodities such as WTI oil futures. As of 2025, no states have imposed regulations on wheat derivatives, he noted.

“How many contracts are event-dependent – oil, wheat, interest rates, or foreign exchange rates?” Sterling told iGB following the panel. “This is an industry-wide issue that has very little to do with events.”

A Sterling appointment as CFTC chair should largely be viewed as a favourable development for prediction markets. As an agency director, Sterling oversaw approximately 3,300 financial firms that registered with the CFTC to participate in the global derivatives market, according to his LinkedIn page.

During Sterling’s tenure (2019-21), he expanded the agency’s oversight, examination and enforcement referral programmes with those firms and completed more than 60 major rule and relief initiatives, the attorney wrote on LinkedIn.

Beyond Sterling, there are strong indications that the other candidates are under consideration for their experience in crypto matters.

Crypto-friendly lawyer under consideration

In comparison with Sterling, Mike Selig’s expertise on prediction market litigation and regulation is more limited. The SEC appointed Selig as chief counsel of its newly Crypto Task Force in March, one tasked with “creating workable solutions to difficult crypto regulatory problems”, according to then-SEC Commissioner Hester Pierce.

Before joining the SEC, Selig served as a partner at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, a leading international law firm.

Selig, who began his career as an intern at the CFTC, is a protege of former chair Chris Giancarlo, the author of 2021 book “CryptoDad”.

Notably, the Winklevoss twins made an appearance at a Manhattan event celebrating the book launch. Giancarlo, who lauded Selig for the appointment, provided an insider’s account of the rise of cryptocurrencies in the book.

While with Willkie Farr, Selig discussed leveraged trading activity as futures contracts in a 2022 memo. If no exception applies to such transactions, then retail commodity transactions must be traded on a designated contract market, the memo states. In CFTC parlance, a designated contract market is also known as a prediction market. Opponents of prediction markets likely would prefer the appointment of Selig over Sterling.

Another CFTC chair hopeful from crypto space

As with Selig, Tyler Williams’ bailiwick is crypto regulation, not prediction markets. In February, the Treasury Department appointed Williams as a counsellor to Secretary Scott Bessent on digital assets and blockchain technology policy. Prior to joining Treasury, Williams served as global head of policy at Galaxy Digital, a digital assets and data centre infrastructure business.

Williams’s views on prediction markets are largely unknown. In June, Williams spoke to FIA Market Voice, a futures’ industry podcast.

The conversation centred on stablecoins, digital assets and future use cases of blockchain technology. Prediction markets were not covered.

Also this summer, Williams sat down with TRM, a blockchain intelligence company, for an extensive chat on crypto policy. The discussion focused on a landmark White House report on digital assets released weeks earlier.

The 166-page report referenced DCMs 10 separate times, but it did not mention sports event contracts.

Other trading regulator chair candidates

Earlier this week, an attorney from crypto law firm Brogan Law wrote in a blog that SEC Chairman Paul Atkins has emerged as a potential candidate. The author, Veronica Irwin, wrote that multiple sources told her that Atkins is “first in line” for the position.

Such an appointment would be unlikely under the auspices of the Securities Exchange Act. According to the 1934 law, the SEC wrote that “no commissioner shall engage in any other business, vocation or employment than that of serving as commissioner”.

Caroline Pham, the interim chair of the CFTC, already announced that she intends to leave the commission when a successor is appointed. Former US President Joe Biden nominated Pham to the commission in 2021.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The risk of overregulation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stake optimistic in LatAm

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

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

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

Akpabio bemoaned the absence of regulatory action against bad actors that are collaborating with fintech companies to bypass regulations in the country and deliver uncensored betting ads.

As in many emerging markets, gambling addiction rates are growing in the West African market and this advertising loophole is having an impact.

“Fintechs have turned into extensions of gambling operators and no one is saying a word,” Akpabio tells iGB.

“You can now place a bet from your Opay app as it takes you to a gambling site through the app. Opay is not licensed by regulatory authorities to do so. They are bombarding some underage people with over 15 messages to gamble per minute.”

Opay Digital Services Limited is a very popular personal finance app in Nigeria, currently serving several millions of users, due to its lightning-fast mobile payment ability. Many online operators are adopting it as a payment solution, alongside Palmpay, another mainstream choice.

Currently, these fintech brands have over 30 iGaming companies each as their client providers. However, while they are licensed and regulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria and insured by the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation, they are not approved to provide or advertise betting in any way to their users.

Nigerian operators falling foul of responsible gambling?

“Last week, a bettor sent us a screenshot of over 11 messages received in just a minute, asking him to fund his betting account, prompting him to click on an ad to get a free bet,” says Akpabio.

“Another ad read, ‘If you deposit in your betting account daily, you stand a chance to win an iPhone.’ Stuff like that is horrible.

“In what country is that permissible? For something that could get extremely addictive, no one should be prompted to bet [through these instant payment apps],” he added.

“Bettors should gamble for entertainment, and with monies they can afford to lose. Not every day would a bettor want to lose money, but now the operators are pushing them into doing this as often as they can.”

Gabriel suggested that regulatory bodies could have directly or indirectly contributed to the problem as they have refused to respond to letters and calls to action from Gamble Aware.

“I have reached out to the LSLGA, the biggest regulator in Nigeria at least 22 times this year, sent them at least four letters in hard copy as well,” Akpabio says.

Gambling addiction threat in Nigeria

Last month, Nigerian state regulator LSLGA launched SafePlay, a national self-exclusion portal for problem gamblers, but Akpabio insists problem gambling rates are still on the rise, including among minors who are being targeted by these fintech apps.

“Over 60 million Nigerians are gamblers and more than 14% of that number are actually struggling with the addiction that comes with it,” he adds.  

“Today, there are a lot of minors being exposed to betting through these fintech apps. We handle cases of underage gamblers a lot, and when you try to ascertain how they got introduced to this the answer is always the same – through these apps.”

Lagos State Lottery laws for operators require gambling ads to be “ethical”, Akpabio explains, with 15%-20% of the ad’s running time to be used to raise awareness of gambling addiction.

He says the charity is not anti-gambling but is calling for better protections for players.

“Awareness about the harmful effects of gambling needs to be created. It shouldn’t be just us, or Gamble Alert [doing that work]. It really should be championed by the regulators and these operators. If not, the worst could happen.”

Last week at SBC Summit Lisbon, a panel discussed the challenges of meeting stringent KYC rules, particularly in the newly regulated online gambling market of Brazil, where tough measures hindered operator growth in the licensed sector’s early days. 

Esportes Gaming Brasil CBO Hugo Baungartner, Stake compliance director Barbara Teles and Betboom compliance counsel Laura Beatriz de Souza Morganti agreed that local KYC providers had been the most suitable option for gambling operators in Brazil, largely due to an increased trust and understanding of local players.  

“When we knew that we had to do the process of KYC in Brazil, I saw a movement of international companies and local companies trying to provide the solution for the operators,” Baungartner said.  

“What I’ve heard is the tools that are not Brazilian were kind of complicated to work with. In our operation, we use a Brazilian third-party solution and, of course, the ones that we trust. Not everybody is trustworthy.” 

Third-party aspect crucial in Brazil 

Teles agreed with Baungartner’s decision to opt for a third-party solution, saying such an important process should be left to experts outside the business. 

“We are in the entertainment industry,” Teles explained. “We are not a KYC supplier. 

“Trusting third-party KYC suppliers, especially in Brazil, it is a better solution than to provide it yourself. We don’t know yet a lot of things, because we only have been in the regulated market for nine months.” 

Morganti echoed the sentiment: “Our main service is the betting experience, so we have to focus on that. Delegating the difficult part and the very technical part seems to be a better solution.” 

Education vital to KYC success for gambling operators 

A major pain point for operators, especially in the first three months of regulation, was customer confusion over the importance of KYC. 

Pre-regulation, little information was required from bettors. But as of 1 January, players had to provide extensive personal information and facial recognition to operators.

Education among players has been crucial to ensure they understand the importance of KYC for their protection. 

“That’s something we all went through between December and January,” Baungartner continued. “From the first of January, they need to complete everything before making first deposit.  

“It was difficult, of course. We had big friction [points] in January. Everybody’s traffic went down. Month by month we communicated that they have to complete 100% of the KYC – otherwise they cannot make [an account].” 

The education goes both ways, Morganti explained. 

“I think it was a good opportunity for everybody,” Morganti said. “Right now, we are educating [players], but we are being educated too, especially on what is the hardest thing for the client to do. 

“We also have to educate ourselves on making their lives easier. So this has been challenging, but this has been good because a lot of new tools are being discovered.” 

Staying one step ahead 

As to be expected, operators have needed to remain vigilant to prevent Brazilians from circumventing KYC requirements. 

“Brazilians are very creative,” Morganti added. “The KYC providers should anticipate what can happen, what they can do to [prevent] fraud – for example, a proof of age, a proof of likeness. We do have that in Brazil.” 

Operators will have to try and stay one step ahead of those looking for ways to bypass KYC, Teles believes. 

Teles has looked to other jurisdictions to learn from and collaborate on KYC, as well as Brazil’s incoming self-exclusion scheme, which is expected to be live by the end of 2025. 

“In Brazil every day we see a new challenge being assumed,” Teles concluded. “We have to be more creative. 

“We have an opportunity to learn from the other countries. We have an opportunity to develop new tools and everything. 

“If we can share [data on] the self-excluded [players], we can put all of the athletes together that cannot bet. If we put [that information] in the same database, everybody will be safer.” 

As confirmed by draft legislation, the tax increases were originally scheduled to commence on New Year’s Day 2027, under plans approved in December 2024. However, the timeline has been shortened following a broader spending review by ministers last month.

The government is also accelerating plans to close down the country’s Lottery and Gambling Supervision Inspectorate (IAUI). The regulator will be consolidated into Latvia’s State Revenue Service (SRS) on 1 April – three months earlier than initially expected.

Latvia gambling tax hiked to 18%

From 1 January, Latvia’s gambling taxes on interactive gambling and telephone-based betting revenues will increase from 12% to 15% of GGR and 15% to 18% respectively.

Annual gaming machine taxes will rise from €6,204 to €7,440. Meanwhile, contributions on roulette, card and craps tables will increase from €33,696 to €40,440 per year.

The Ministry of Finance estimates that Latvia’s gambling tax increases will raise €9.2 million. Of that total, €175,000 will be handed to municipalities, with the rest to be pumped into the state budget.

Cost savings

Meanwhile, according to Finance Minister Arvils Ašeradens, the earlier-than-planned closure of IAUA will bring several benefits, including administrative cost savings.

Until the start of April, Latvia’s gambling industry will continue to be overseen by two regulators. The IAUI focuses on regulatory compliance and oversees licensing matters, while the SRS is responsible for tax issues.

However, their responsibilities overlap in several areas. Both have the power to enforce sanctions, conduct investigations and implement anti-money laundering measures.

“The integration of gambling oversight into the SRS will allow us to establish unified management faster, make better use of our resources and deliver higher-quality services to the public,” Ašeradens said.

Spending review

The decisions on gambling taxes and regulation were taken following a government cabinet meeting in late August. Ministers at the meeting discussed the state budget and spending plans across various areas through to 2029.

The government is trying to raise €565 million in additional funds for security, family support and education in the budget for 2026.

A package of draft laws relating to the budget – including the gambling tax increases – will be submitted to Latvia’s Parliament for approval on 15 October.

In an announcement on Tuesday, Yolo Group said it plans to bring its single Yolo.com brand to Tier-1 regulated markets.

“It’s our responsibility to bring the crypto casino experience to regulated domestic markets, working within sensible frameworks and combining speed and freedom with safety and oversight,” the group said in a statement on its Substack.

“It has become abundantly clear that domestic regulators who are offering licences are not keen on other group operations continuing to operate in pre-regulated markets. In other words, you cannot be white and grey; you have to pick a side. This means a crossroads has been reached and a decision must be made. Do we go left or do we go right?

“That’s why we’ve decided it’s time for our next chapter: to bring the best of what we’ve built into Tier-1 regulated markets.”

The company said it is in the final stages of securing a pair of B2B vendor licences for the soon-to-be regulated market in the UAE.

As part of its move Yolo Group will use its skills and experience from the crypto casino experience to enter regulated domestic markets, following a three-year process of research and preparations.

“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 group added.

Yolo Group at a ‘crossroads’

The announcement marks a distinct shift in strategy for Yolo, as it found itself at a “crossroads” prior to its decision to move into the regulated space.

Yolo said it believed licensed regulated markets are the sector’s future and will enable the company to connect its land-based and digital businesses through seamless wallet experiences via the Yolo.com brand.

“This isn’t about walking away from the past,” the Yolo statement continued.

“It’s about taking everything we’ve learned, everything we’ve pioneered, and applying it in environments where operators, regulators and players can work together, creating a stronger and more sustainable ecosystem for everyone.”

Alongside its plans in the UAE, Yolo is also aiming to expand into markets such as Canada, Sweden and Finland.

Changes to senior team

Yolo Group has made a number of changes to its senior team of late, with Lara Falzon brought in as CEO of its B2B brands.

Falzon’s role encompasses overseeing brands such as the Hub88 aggregation platform, Live88, Odds88 and OneTouch.

Stephanie Eddy also joined after over a decade with Betway, taking over at chief revenue officer of the B2C arm Yolo Entertainment.

Across European markets, governments are imposing or proposing steep gambling tax hikes on operators, many of which last year contributed €3.8 billion in taxes to the European economy as a whole, according to the European Gaming & Betting Association (EGBA).

In most cases, policymakers have said they are turning to the sector to help plug budgetary holes. And gambling is a seemingly easy target for governments that can play into the public health argument against the industry.  

“Gambling has traditionally been viewed as a good source of relatively painless government revenue. Tax policies in European countries are also increasingly focusing on excise taxation, particularly environmental and public health excise duties, to raise much-needed public revenue,” explains Virve Marionneau, associate professor and tax expert, as well as director of the Centre for Research on Addictions, Control and Governance at Helsinki University. 

However, the returns from these gambling tax policies are uncertain and are likely to negatively affect the broader sector. So, what lies behind the political decision-making? 

Netherlands gambling tax hike impact already being felt

Let’s first take a look at what’s going on in the Netherlands. Lawmakers there approved a sharp increase in gambling tax, from 30.5% to 34.2% of GGR, starting in January 2025, with a further rise to 37.8% in 2026.

The Dutch Treasury had expected an additional €200 million in tax revenue annually, but figures from the licensed Dutch online gambling providers, represented by VNLOK, suggest that GGR in the first half of 2025 will be down 25% compared to the previous year, resulting in a shortfall of €200 million. 

Both VNLOK and the Dutch regulator KSA have expressed concern about the government’s plan for a further tax increase. 

When taxes increase on gambling operators, they often pass additional costs on to their customers. This could manifest in higher betting odds, higher fees or less attractive bonuses and promotions. As a result, players may turn to the more lucrative but also riskier unlicensed market. 

“The tax hike will have a negative impact on our market. Channelisation rates will decrease. We are worried about that, because we believe a strong legal market is key in combating illegal offerings,” Marloes Derks, spokesperson for KSA, tells iGB. 

Despite this, the Dutch government has stated that its tax policy will not change, even though expected revenue is falling short of expectations.

In accordance with budgetary rules, windfalls and shortfalls in tax revenue are reflected in the balance after policy is adopted. Therefore, the revenue shortfall, from this perspective, is not seen as grounds for a compensatory policy, according to State Secretary for Taxation Eugène Heijnen, who addressed the Dutch parliament earlier this month. 

A strategy doomed to fail 

The Dutch tax hike has drawn attention from other markets. 

“As I understand it, the message from Dutch politics is that they consider the concept of channelisation to be irrelevant. They simply ignore it in favour of various moral views on gambling. And then, of course, it becomes easy to raise taxes,” says Gustaf Hoffstedt, secretary general of BOS, the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling. 

He observes a trend across Europe of tightening conditions for licensed gambling companies, with tax increases being just one example. 

“An important component of that trend is the lack of interest in how such deteriorations affect the ability of licensed gambling companies to keep out unlicensed competitors,” Hoffstedt says. 

In his home country of Sweden, the Ministry of Finance was expected to raise €50 million a year through an increase in tax from 18% to 22% on GGR, effective from July 2024. But Hoffstedt – who calls the political reasoning behind the tax hike “profit hunger” – believes those figures are more likely to be around €20 million-$40 million. And it will come at a cost, he adds. 

“Reduced channelisation and around a thousand new gambling addicts as a result of the transition from licensed to unlicensed gambling,” he predicts. 

Trend across Europe 

Looking toward Eastern Europe and Tier 2 markets, Romania has imposed a 27% GGR tax on online operators from July 2025, up from 21%, and is also introducing higher licensing fees.

In the Czech Republic, the government increased the GGR tax for online betting, bingo and poker from 23% to 30% in 2024 to fund public spending. 

In Slovakia, where activity in the online casino market rose by almost 30% year-on-year in 2024, Environment Minister Tomáš Taraba has called the gambling industry “profiteers of human misery”. The government has proposed raising the tax rate for online gambling to 30%. 

Meanwhile, in Germany, every euro wagered on slot machines and poker faces a 5.3% levy. Because of this rule, up to 80% of online slot play now takes place with unlicensed operators, estimates the German Online Casino Association. German online casino tax revenue saw a decline of 16% in 2024 and, since 2022, there has been a 47% drop. 

France is already one of Europe’s most expensive markets to operate in, but the government is planning to expand GGR taxation and charges. It aims to generate an additional €1.6 billion in gambling-related revenue. 

“A few European jurisdictions like Malta and Estonia stand out with exceptionally low tax rates to attract onshore gambling operators. Other countries, like France, use high tax rates as a means to control entry to the market. The aim of French gambling policy has been to keep the number of licensees low,” says Marionneau, tax expert from Helsinki University. 

UK gambling tax decision will affect the whole sector 

And then there is the UK – Europe’s biggest market for online gambling – and for a long time, known in the industry as the voice of reason in Europe when it comes to a balanced approach to gambling regulation. However, for the industry, that perception may be about to change.

In April, the UK government proposed bringing the current three-level tax rate system for remote gambling under one consolidated rate. 

The industry has expressed concerns over the changes, believing it could result in all gambling verticals facing a 21% duty.

Several voices are pushing for a much bigger tax increase on the gambling sector. Among them, former Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). They argue that a tax increase on the sector should be used to help fight the rising child poverty in the UK.

IPPR has recommended increasing remote gaming duty from 21% to 50%, and machine games duty from 20% to 50% of operator profit. General betting duty would rise from 15% to 25%, estimating that this could generate around €1.5 billion. 

The UK government is expected to present its plans in the 2025 autumn budget on 26 November.

UK government sending mixed signals

The UK’s Betting and Gaming Council has called the proposal “reckless” because it will drive players toward the unlicensed market, a claim that IPPR has chosen to dismiss. 

“There appear to be three drivers here: the economy, policy and politics. HM Treasury keeps all taxes under review and we know that it has been looking at online gambling for a while. It may take the view that the online gambling market can sustain higher levels, which will be unresented by the population at large,” says Dan Waugh, partner at Regulus Partners. 

The government is sending mixed signals regarding its attitude toward the gambling industry, and this has raised alarm bells, he says. 

“The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) adheres to the traditional view that gambling is a legitimate pastime that can involve negative health consequences. It therefore favours a balance of freedom and protection. The Department of Health and Social Care, on the other hand, perceives gambling as the ‘new tobacco’ and wishes to do various unspeakable things to it enroute to prohibition.  

“Prudent operators will be looking at how they can mitigate the costs of any tax increases.” 

Whatever happens in the UK will affect the entire market in Europe, says Hoffstedt. 

“The UK, together with Denmark, has been able to show that it is possible to combine high channelisation with high consumer protection. If channelisation in the UK declines in the future, it will negatively affect all gambling markets in Europe.” 

Hoffstedt hopes that governments will eventually recognise the negative consequences. 

“In the end, it becomes obvious to everyone that a gambling market that lacks consumers – when they’ve gone to the unlicensed gambling market – lacks relevance and legitimacy. It is a strategy that is doomed to fail in every jurisdiction that uses it.” 

These associations have become increasingly pivotal in challenging policymakers and holding regulators to account against tightening policies across Europe.  

But LiveScore CEO Sam Sadi told the audience he believed they faced an impossible job in representing the entire sector, due to the conflicting interests of large and small operators. 

Are some welcoming incoming restrictions?

Sadi said some tier one players were welcoming new measures like advertising restrictions and tax hikes, as they help to consolidate a market and improve the position of leading operators.  

“You’ll see some super large operators being able to absorb advertising restrictions or increased taxes and even benefit, because the marketplace consolidates at the top and smaller operators have to leave the market.” 

In Spain, Codere Online has said on numerous occasions that it has been impacted by the rollback of advertising restrictions in the market in 2024.  

In November, Codere Online CFO Oscar Iglesias said the reintroduction of welcome bonuses had had a slightly negative impact on profit margins in Spain in Q3 due to the costs involved and increased competition from newer operators.   

“When competition is higher, the prices are increasing both in digital and in traditional media, which eventually leads to a higher CPA and then later, maybe to a slower ROI (return on investment) until we are able to cover those CPAs,” CEO Aviv Sher told analysts during the operator’s Q3 earnings call on 27 November.    

Sadi said these conflicting interests made it “an almost impossible job to represent the entire industry, where so many objectives are in place”.  

Gambling trade bodies should define goal of entire industry

The mood across many of the panels discussing the challenging position facing the sector in Europe and further afield was particularly negative throughout the event.  

Many insisted the continued uncertainty around new regulations and the political stability in some markets across Europe were proving hugely challenging to navigate.  

FDJ CFO & Strategy Officer Pascal Chaffard told the audience that trade bodies should be working to represent as many operators as possible across the global sector. 

He said: “The purpose of those trade associations is to define what is the goal of the whole industry and not let one or two black sheep damage our reputation. 

“If you have one black sheep in the industry, it will let down the reputation of the entire industry.” 

On tax, the European leaders’ panel discussed how increasing tax rates are hindering growth across various markets.

BoyleSports CEO Vlad Kaltenieks said: “This is a big debate and I look at it from the overall social and economic impact.

“My real desire is to build a sustainable environment. And that looks like an environment where companies can continue to grow and innovate and invest in technology and employment to build that ecosystem for the economy to flourish.  

“Tax is one of these vehicles that can really affect how the companies move in that direction. So if the tax regime is clear and beneficial, that could be very productive. If it is becoming more restricted, it can lead to uncertainty and problems within the wider market,” he added.

Regulatory issues had caused Betway Africa to reduce its operating business in Nigeria, but the company is now “very excited” about the market’s potential.

This is partly down to increased clarity on regulatory issues, with a November 2024 Supreme Court ruling seemingly ending the conflict between states and the federal government on who should regulate gaming, in favour of the states.

Nigeria’s population of over 235 million is the largest in Africa and sixth largest globally, with a total addressable market of $2.6 billion.

Speaking at Super Group’s investor day last Thursday, Betway Africa CEO Laurence Michel said Nigeria is now ready for “super investment”.

“We’ve been in Nigeria for a while, we do have a profitable business there,” Michel said. “However, we have been a little bit gunshy given some of the regulations.

“We kind of are seeing that the regulatory environment has now improved. Federal versus state has now been cleaned up, and we’re ready to now give it a go.

“We think that we can make a big difference. We think that online, we have the smarts and the wherewithal to give it a full go now, which we’re going to do.”

Super Group looking to consolidate in Africa

Already in podium positions in seven of its eight markets, Betway Africa is setting its sights on future growth in the region.

Betway Africa launched in 2015 and has since enjoyed impressive growth.

This was evidenced by Super Group’s Q2 earnings, where the company announced its Africa and Middle East segment’s revenue grew 38.8% year-on-year to $229 million, accounting for 40% of the group’s total revenue.

But Betway Africa is still eyeing further expansion, beyond its existing markets of South Africa, Mozambique, Malawi, Zambia, Botswana, Tanzania, Ghana and Nigeria.

The company holds a podium position in all of those, bar Nigeria.

 “The upside is enormous,” Michel said. “When Africa thrives, so does our business.

“Africa is a massive opportunity with a total addressable market of $12 billion in locally licensed markets, over 1.5 billion people and some of the fastest-growing populations and economies in the world.

“Our deep local knowledge and expertise and operations are our competitive edge. Our portfolio currently stands in eight countries and the estimated TAM for the rest of Africa that we’re not in is a potential $2.5 billion.”

In its investor day presentation, Super Group highlighted Ethiopia, Angola, Namibia and the Ivory Coast as future prospects for expansion.

Botswana has been a particular success story for Super Group and Betway Africa. Having launched there in February 2025, Betway Africa now holds 95% market share.

“Botswana is a blockbuster for us, our best country launch ever,” Michel stated.

Casino fundamental to Betway Africa’s strategy

Betway Africa wants consistent growth across the African continent, with three main areas of focus: casino and mobile penetration, as well as new market development.

Casino is Betway Africa’s dominant vertical, generating 68% of its net revenue. Casino wagers have increased by 757% since 2022.

Betway Africa’s casino-only Jackpot City brand is currently in four African countries, and has become the seventh biggest brand in South Africa within just 16 months of launching.

The company hopes Jackpot City will soon join the podium positions in South Africa. It’s also planning to launch Jackpot City in Ghana in Q4 this year.

The battle to retain customers

Betway Africa has cemented a strong position in the market and the company is placing real emphasis on maintaining that foothold.

The company has developed a proprietary product platform called Synapse, which has improved the business’ scalability, performance and its ability to quickly deploy features.

Additionally, the company has enriched its live scoring app Betway Scores with sports content, and Michel believes value-adds such as this will help customer retention.

“We know that our business thrives when we retain customers well into the future,” Michel added. “Acquiring customers means nothing if you can’t retain them, and we do.”

Betway Africa’s customer retention was displayed in its H1 GGR, where 93% came from pre-2025 cohorts.

Vieira joined the IBJR in October 2024, before becoming the trade body’s executive chairman in March this year.

He is leaving to pursue a new professional opportunity in another sector and the IBJR has already begun the process of selecting his successor.

In the interim, current director and advisor André Gelfi will take on the role of executive president. Gelfi is one of the IBJR’s founders and also holds the position of managing partner of Betsson Group in Brazil.

In an IBJR statement on Friday, Vieira said it had been an “honour” to lead the IBJR during such a monumental time for the Brazilian betting sector, which launched its online market on 1 January.

“It was an honour to lead the IBJR at this historic regulatory milestone,” Vieira said.

“I am proud of the role we played in protecting consumers and strengthening the industry’s credibility. I remain confident that the entity will continue to advance this mission.”

Vieira and the IBJR’s fight against illegal gambling

Much of Vieira’s work during his time with the IBJR centred on the illegal market, which is proving to be perhaps the biggest concern for licensed operators in Brazil.

The IBJR expressed its gratitude for Vieira’s achievements in the fight against the illegal market, describing him as a “key figure” in the battle.

Vieira was a key opponent of the Brazil government’s approval of a provisional measure increasing the tax rate on operators’ GGR from 12% to 18%.

The IBJR estimated this could lead to the illegal market’s share of the total sector increasing from 50% to 60%.

In June, Vieira told iGB: “The only way operators will be sustainable in Brazil is to increase the channelisation level and, for that, the fight against the illicit market becomes even more important.”

Last month, the IBJR launched a campaign consisting of ads on radio and TV, as well as social media and airport billboards, which it hopes will push bettors towards licensed offerings.

It has also launched the BetAlert website, which allows players to input the URL of any betting site to find out whether it’s licensed or not.

In the IBJR’s statement announcing his departure, Vieira said the body’s work against the illegal market had “yielded important achievements”.

The 2025 Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill criminalises online play for money and the promotion and advertising of the same. It bars banks and payment providers from processing transactions for cash games. Penalties include fines and up to five years in jail.

Proponents of the ban cited the risks associated with gambling, including financial losses. India Technology Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said iGaming providers “exploit users with false promises of profit”. The bill protects the public “and avoids a big evil that is creeping into society”, he said.

Critics counter that the law will simply send punters to unregulated offshore sites, a view echoed by those players interviewed by Agence France Presse (AFP). “We have done this before and will do it again,” said one player, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We will go back to our old ways of making money.”

Fantasy sports fan Adarsh Sharma predicted offshore will “see a sudden boom” as Indian bettors migrate to illegal sites, using virtual private networks and proxy credit cards to make transactions.

“A habit once formed cannot be broken easily,” Sharma told AFP. “It is an addiction, and people will find ways to gamble.”

Constitutional challenges ahead

The addictive quality of real-money games is just what concerns Vaishnaw.

“The middle class loses all their earnings,” he said in a 21 August interview with ABP News. “One after another, incidents are coming up where a family member ends life by suicide.”

Vaishnaw pointed out that the law also calls for the promotion and development of non-gambling games, including esports and online social games.

Meanwhile, Indian gaming company A23 has challenged the law, slamming it as state-run paternalism. More litigation could follow, said Meghna Bal, director of New Delhi think tank Esya Centre. Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian constitution guarantees the right “to practise any profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business”.

The law “fails the test of proportionality”, Bal told TechCrunch. “Instead of safeguarding consumers, it dismantles compliant onshore companies while opening the door wider for illegal offshore betting platforms that are the real source of financial harm.”

Rohit Kumar, founding partner of public policy firm Quantum Hub, objected that the bill was pushed through virtually without debate. “Regulation is necessary, but abrupt moves like this undermine India’s reputation as a stable, predictable investment destination,” he said. “If concerns existed, the government should have signalled them clearly from the outset.”

Derailing a multibillion-dollar industry

Meanwhile, the economic consequences of the ban on fantasy sports are undeniable. Dream11, India’s leading fantasy sports platform with 260 million users, has pulled out of a $43 million sponsorship deal with the Board of Control for Cricket in India. And while no layoffs are in the works, CEO Harsh Jain said the firm is bracing for a 95% drop in revenue.

“The entire industry was caught off guard,” Jain said of the sudden legislation. “We first heard about the bill in the news on a Tuesday. By Wednesday, it was tabled in Lok Sabha, Thursday in Rajya Sabha, and by Friday the president had signed it into law. It was a complete shock.”

He added that the firm does not plan to mount a legal challenge to the new law but lamented that, in hindsight, the industry failed to strongly self-regulate.

“Multiple self-regulatory bodies were proposed, but we never united under one,” Jain told Storyboard18. “A few of us signed a code of ethics six months ago. But we should have done much more earlier to protect consumers and keep bad operators out.”

He agreed that the ban is likely to increase patronage of illegal sites. “Whenever something is banned, the black market usually grows. We’re already seeing offshore betting firms offering aggressive discounts to Indian users. The government has said they’ll crack down on such operators, and I hope they succeed. But on the internet, it’s much harder to control.”

This week, Robinhood filed a lawsuit against the Massachusetts Attorney General and Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) in the US District Court in Boston. Robinhood’s move is a response to the Massachusetts attorney general filing a suit in Suffolk Superior Court against prediction market platform Kalshi last week. Robinhood began offering Kalshi’s football prediction markets this season.

Robinhood is looking to preempt any potential MGC gambling enforcement against sports prediction markets. It argues gambling laws do not apply because the markets it offers come from Kalshi, which is federally regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). It argues intervention from the state would violate the Commodity Exchange Act.

Massachusetts prediction markets lawsuit against Kalshi

State Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s suit alleges Kalshi is promoting and accepting online sports betting through its platform without conforming to the commonwealth’s laws. In the suit, the AG requested a court order for Kalshi to cease offering sports betting while the lawsuit is pending.

“Sports wagering comes with significant risk of addiction and financial loss and must be strictly regulated to mitigate public health consequences,” Campbell said in a release. “This lawsuit will ensure that if Kalshi wants to be in the sports gaming business in Massachusetts, they must obtain a licence and follow our laws. I am grateful for the ongoing partnership with the Gaming Commission.” 

Both Robinhood and Kalshi are already in lawsuits across the country over the issue of whether prediction markets are sports betting. That includes legal cases in Maryland, New Jersey and California.

Kalshi previously secured initial injunctions to prevent state regulatory enforcement in New Jersey and Nevada. An outgoing CFTC commissioner also recently warned of weak oversight in the prediction market expansion.

Robinhood looks to protect business

It is not the first battle between Robinhood and Massachusetts. In January 2024, Robinhood paid a $7.5 million fine and agreed to change its practices after Massachusetts securities regulators claimed the company encouraged investors to place risky trades.

This March, Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin sent a subpoena to the trading platform after it launched a prediction markets hub, which included markets on the NCAA Tournament.

Robinhood said in its filing this week that it is a CFTC-registered futures commission merchant, which accepts customer money on orders. However, designated contract markets like Kalshi set and operate the markets.

“This means that while Robinhood customers are placing orders for event contract trades in their Robinhood accounts, the trades themselves are taking place on Kalshi’s CFTC-designated exchange,” the filing said.

Robinhood said that it believed because of its relationship with Kalshi and the prediction markets, the state might potentially file a similar complaint against it. The trading platform said such legal action and potential penalties could cause irreparable harm to the company, so it filed the suit to protect itself.

Dynasty leader Thaksin Shinawatra, jailed for twelve months on 9 September, tried to introduce casinos during his 2001-2006 tenure as prime minister. That tenure ended with a military coup. In August 2023, after his return from 15 years of self-imposed exile, Thaksin became a principal cheerleader for the IR drive under the new prime minister – his daughter Paetongtarn Shinawatra. 

Paetongtarn was suspended as prime minister in July and removed by the Constitutional Court in late August over a fawning phone call with former Cambodian leader Hun Sen amid military conflict between the two nations. Meanwhile, Thaksin’s sister Yingluck Shinawatra, prime minister from 2011-2014, remains in exile. 

Fresh beginning … in a coma 

“This is a fresh beginning for Thailand,” Bangkok-based hospitality advisor James Kaplan says. “It will be looking at integrated resorts with a fresh perspective, hopefully a balanced and more constructive perspective.” 

New Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul has declared his opposition to casinos. The leader of the Bhumjaithai Party, Anutin promises parliamentary elections by early next year, although they are not legally required until June 2027. 

“Gaming legislation is not dead, but it’s in a coma. It could reawaken after the election,” says Kaplan, a board advisor to Bangkok Land, which owns Impact Convention and Exhibition Center, a potential IR site. 

“Some observers suggest the [casino legalisation] agenda might reemerge under revised regulations to protect existing arrangements or create new bargaining space, although it is equally possible that shifting political priorities will push it aside,” Maverick Consulting Group partner Ben Kiatkwankul says. “Either way, the debate around [integrated resorts] is likely to remain a tool of political and economic manoeuvring in the months ahead.” 

Too hard to rock 

The political maelstrom has cost Thailand at least one top tier global casino operator. In an exclusive interview, Hard Rock International Chairman James Allen told iGB his company has “zero interest” in a Thailand IR at this point due to “instability”. (More from that interview will be provided in upcoming coverage.) Hard Rock had considered options in Thailand including a convention-based IR in Phuket. 

With falling tourism numbers, a rising currency and mounting debt, the case for entertainment complexes – Thailand’s chosen term for integrated resorts – has never been more compelling. The challenge amid political polarisation and distrust is to rebuild the consensus that produced near unanimous parliamentary support for casino legalisation in March last year. 

In some ways, that proposal became victim of its own success. Citing the Thai proverb “ten fires don’t compare to the harm of a single act of gambling”, Kiatkwankul says, “The near unanimous parliamentary approval in March – we saw some of conservative parties raising hands for the bill – only fuelled speculation about behind the scenes political manoeuvring.” 

Family affair 

When Paetongtarn Shinawatra replaced Srettha Thavisin as prime minister in August last year, she elevated IRs to a cornerstone policy of her Pheu Thai Party government, even though it had not featured prominently in its election platform. IRs came to be viewed as a Shinawatra family initiative. 

“I have found that no matter how the media spun it, 50% of the politicians and 50% of the populace supported the Shinawatras. It’s a shame because this means that the remaining 50% did not,” Checkmate Mitigation senior advisor David Leppo says. “How can there be any political congruency with a landscape like that?” 

Public distrust deepened with Paetongtarn’s political troubles and Bhumjaithai’s subsequent withdrawal from the ruling coalition. “Their immediate distancing from the bill only reinforced perceptions of political instability and potential hidden agendas,” Kiatkwankul says. 

The new government without Shinawatras up front resets the IR issue. “Thaksin is fatally damaged as is his party, and he was the main [IR] promoter,” longtime Bangkok corporate communications consultant Julian Spindler says. “There’s little the foreign players can do to change this political situation, but they should use this downtime to educate the Thai public as to the required regulatory environment à la Singapore.” 

Pokies in every pot 

“They’re hearing this idea that Thailand is going to have a pokie machine in every lavatory and every 7-11, à la some other countries – my own Australia being an example,” Silq Law founding partner Paul Crosio says. 

Leppo, a longtime sports book operator in North America and Asia, sampled public attitudes at anti-casino demonstrations in Bangkok. “About 70%-75% of the people I spoke to felt that the industry would attract an undesirable demographic, laying the foundation for organised crime to thrive, when in fact, in jurisdictions like Singapore, casinos have had the exact opposite effect. 

“These same people also had the misguided opinion that casinos would lead to problem gambling, when in fact, just like Singapore has proven and delivered, programmes like Gamblers Anonymous are funded by Singapore’s casinos, which could be mirrored here in Thailand.” 

Striking a balance 

“Problem gaming is not a solely Thai phenomenon,” Kaplan says. “Governments such as Singapore recognise the need to strike a balance between tourism relevance, job creation and tax revenue while mitigating the challenge of problem gaming. Just because Thailand delays implementation of the gaming bill doesn’t mean people won’t gamble. They still will, and they’re taking the money outside country.” 

A recent study estimates Thailand’s underground gaming economy at more than US$30 billion annually, including domestic underground casinos, border casinos in Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar plus online gambling. 

How much of that money legalised Thai gaming would capture depends on the regulatory scheme. Under the Pheu Thai government, cabinet ministers proposed an entry requirement for Thai nationals of 50 million Thai baht (US$1.6 million) in bank deposits alongside a THB5,000 entry tax. The mooted THB50 million entry requirement highlights conflicts in Thailand’s casino legalisation objectives and an under-informed approach to gaming regulation.   

Only a handful of Thailand’s 70 million citizens would qualify for casino entry under the THB50 million rule. That scenario would satisfy underground gaming interests currently catering to Thai gamblers, while placating groups that don’t want more Thais (openly) gambling. However, making Thailand a virtual foreigner-only casino market would limit international operator interest and IR investment, paradoxically making any IRs less tempting for tourists, decreasing potential tax revenue and employment. 

Regulatory irregularity 

The draft regulatory scheme placing the prime minister and cabinet members at top of the pyramid ignores international best practices and lacks social safeguards. Thai officials reportedly did not consult with other jurisdictions or international experts when drafting gaming regulations. 

“The regulations need to be sound and transparent. They need controlled and trusted supervision of a gaming board,” Global Chain Ltd managing partner Harmen Brenninkmeijer says. “There are enough examples around the world of what makes IRs work. Investors know the potential, but the regulatory and judicial climate need to support their investments, and they need to feel protected. If not via the judiciary, the gaming board can take that role solely.” 

“They need to establish a regulatory committee of gaming professionals and gaming legal scholars to outline and deliver a legal mantra that will ensure groups like Sands, Wynn, Genting, MGM, Galaxy, et al feel comfortable investing here in Thailand,” Leppo says. 

Simultaneously, Thailand needs to placate current stakeholders in its underground and cross-border gaming sector, as well as ease public concerns over problem gambling and other social impacts. 

Lonely in the middle 

This challenging agenda amid political turmoil has convinced many that Thailand will abandon casino legalisation. However, the conditions that led the kingdom to consider and, at least briefly, embrace IRs have become more acute. 

On the tourism front, Thailand now sees itself occupying uncomfortable middle ground between cheaper alternatives such as Cambodia and Indonesia – particularly as the baht rises to post-Covid highs – and upmarket destinations like Singapore, South Korea and Japan. 

As of 7 September, foreign visitor arrivals had fallen 7.1% from a year earlier to 22.3 million, 25% below 2019 figures. Visitor expenditure has fallen more sharply with the drop in high-spending Chinese tourists; Chinese arrivals this year are nearly 1.5 million below last year’s level. 

Thai tourism ‘sliding downhill’ 

“The Thai tourism industry is going in reverse, sliding downhill with increasing speed, which should worry policymakers, especially as this industry makes up roughly 18% of direct GDP,” Kaplan says. “The knock-on effect to the broader already weak economy is a serious concern. The situation is expected to become worse during the high season due to the irrationally strong baht, regional instability with Thailand’s neighbours and call centre scams putting people off visiting the country.” 

Thailand’s economy is projected to grow 2% this year. That is half the rate of fellow ASEAN members Philippines and Indonesia. Ahead of Anutin forming his government, Thailand’s main stock market index was Asia’s worst performer this year, down 10% versus a 17% rise in the regional benchmark. 

Gaming taxes would provide the Thai treasury with much-needed revenue amid ambitious economic stimulus plans following Covid relief spending. Thailand’s tax revenue is estimated at 15% of GDP, three percentage points below the ASEAN average. 

Human face of debt 

Thailand’s public debt, 67.9% of GDP, has drawn a warning from the International Monetary Fund.  The spending plan approved by parliament early this month projects a THB860 billion budget deficit, 4.3% of GDP. 

“Integrated resorts are part of a broader solution needed to stimulate the Thai economy with significant direct foreign investment, employment and tax revenue,” Kaplan says. “If you look at the big picture, household debt and public debt are totally out of control. Car loan defaults are at new records, shops are vacant and businesses are closing down at increasing levels. It’s bad. You can see it on people’s faces. 

“I am not saying legalised and regulated gaming is the solution to this economic malaise, but instead IRs should be viewed as part of the solution in the context of rejuvenating, stimulating and, most importantly, sustaining the critical tourism industry in a competitive world.” 

Polishing the gem 

An IR “is something that Phuket needs to stay the gem in the crown of Thai tourism,” says Crosio, who splits time between Bangkok and Phuket. “The client base in Phuket is much more upscale than it would be in other locations. So it’s ideal here.” 

Crucially, leading Thai business groups remain enthusiastic about investing in IRs. “I firmly believe that Thailand can be compared with Mexico and what I believe will be eventually Brazil: the casinos and ownership – surely the majority – is to be in the hands of locals to keep the money within the country,” says Brenninkmeijer, a senior advisor on SkyH’s IR proposal near Bangkok’s gateway Suvarnabhumi Airport. 

He describes SkyH as “an entertainment complex designed to attract local investment, with every aspect of its design and planning tailored to meet Thai expectations. The complex will feature a central, unified theme that blends luxury with a wide array of entertainment options. It is poised to become a major attraction for tourists, driving increased visitor numbers.” 

Electoral elephant 

Whether IRs get beyond the drawing board soon awaits the outcome of the next election. Casino legalisation will likely be the elephant in the ballot box, with no party making IRs a major plank in its platform. 

In 2023 lower house elections, the progressive Move Forward Party won the most seats but was thwarted by conservative forces in its attempt to form a government. Move Forward was subsequently ordered to disband and its leader barred from politics, leading to public outcry and reduced faith in the political process. The upcoming election, with Move Forward reconstituted as the People’s Party, could yield similar results with comparable controversy. 

It’s worth noting that despite the discord surrounding the 2023 vote, lawmakers across party lines did join hands to embrace IRs, at least momentarily. The same thing could happen again. After all, every major Thai political party was for integrated resorts before it was against them. 

Full disclosure: Author Muhammad Cohen has signed client referral agreements with Maverick Consulting Group and Checkmate Mitigation.

Muhammad Cohen is a former US diplomat and current iGB Asia editor at large. He has covered the casino business in Asia since 2006, most recently for Forbes, and wrote Hong Kong On Air, a novel set during the 1997 handover about TV news, love, betrayal, high finance and cheap lingerie.

The Missouri Gaming Commission reported that 10 sportsbooks had applied for sports betting operator licences by last Friday’s deadline. That could grow as the MGC said it would accept applications with a postmark date of 12 September. The commission received 734 applications in total for operators and suppliers as of the deadline day.

The MGC expects to issue temporary licences on 22 October.

Operators of the online sportsbooks can then begin customer signups and deposits on 17 November. After completing requirements for internal controls and house rules, operators can begin live wagering at midnight on 1 December. It will be the first new US market since North Carolina’s online sportsbooks went live in March of 2024.

Sportsbooks ready for the Show-Me State

The application period opened on 15 May, with the September deadline used for operators hoping to be ready for the 1 December go-live date.

DraftKings and Circa have already secured untethered licences after winning a competitive bid process last month. FanDuel applied unsuccessfully for an untethered licence. Despite FanDuel’s demonstrated market-leading capabilities in US sports betting, the commission liked the “different types of bettors” Circa might attract.

The operators are:

• Bet365
• BetMGM
• Caesars
• Circa
• DraftKings
• ESPN Bet
• Fanatics
• FanDuel
• Kambi
• Underdog

While the application deadline has passed, there are still multiple steps left for the hopeful operators. The commission will hold meetings on 23-24 September to hear from applicants. Applicants must turn in house rules and internal control details by 26 September.

The state will tax sports betting revenue at 10%.

Missouri sports betting partnerships

After missing out on an untethered licence, FanDuel announced it has partnered with Major League Soccer team St Louis City SC.

Bet365 partnered with Major League Baseball’s St Louis Cardinals, the team that helped steer the ballot initiative in 2024 to legalise sports betting. The Cardinals and other professional sports teams in Missouri launched the initiative after multiple years of legislative deadlock on the issue. Sports betting was narrowly approved by just over 50% of voters in November 2024.

BetMGM announced it has partnered with Century Casinos, while Fanatics paired up with Boyd Gaming, which has two Ameristar Casino locations in Missouri.

Penn Sports Interactive applied for a licence for ESPN Bet through its Hollywood Casino and River City Casino locations in the state. Likewise, Caesars applied for a licence through its Harrah’s Kansas City and Horseshoe St Louis casinos. Casinos can open in-person sportsbooks.

Underdog and Kambi have not announced market access partners.

Director Rebuck was a pioneer in gaming expansion, overseeing the launch of both online gaming and sports betting in New Jersey. But are prediction markets and sweepstakes gaming highlighting the clash between innovation and regulation, or are the operators simply driven by greed?

Listen to the World Series of Politics on Apple Podcasts

Sweeps and predictions facing a crackdown

On the issue of sweepstakes, the former regulator believes states need to follow New Jersey in simply banning the product, arguing tribal efforts in California are key to this process. The companies behind these products could have secured licences in the Garden State, he recalls, only they didn’t. In his eyes they’re getting what they deserve.

Predictions, however, could be a longer battle, according to Director Rebuck, and it could end up in the Supreme Court.

The gloves are off in this episode of the World Series of Politics!

The Champions League gets underway on Tuesday, with the tournament the second most bet-on in Germany following the Bundesliga.

According to a DSWV press release on Monday, the volume of betting has “skyrocketed” around the start of the Champions League, with players needing to be particularly vigilant to ensure they bet with licensed operators.

The DSWV claims there are at least 382 illegal German-language websites offering sports betting, compared to just 34 legal betting sites.

DSWV President Mathias Dahms says this 11:1 ratio “puts players at risk”, warning of the impacts from illegal betting.

“In the legal sports betting market, players benefit from guaranteed player protection, reliable payouts and tax revenue for the common good,” Dahms said.

“Illegal providers in the black market, on the other hand, do not adhere to any rules, offer no security and have a higher risk of gambling addiction.”

The DSWV stressed players are also at risk of criminal proceedings, with a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment or a fine applicable to those found participating in illegal sports betting.

Advertising crucial for identifying licensed operators

In the view of Dahms and the DSWV, advertising is crucial to make it easier for sports bettors to differentiate between licensed and unlicensed operators.

Dahms noted the importance to licensed companies of being visibile during Champions League matches, particularly on advertising hoardings around stadiums and through TV ads.

In the Champions League and the Bundesliga, only licensed operators are allowed to advertise in the arena and on TV.

The DSWV also highlighted the white list of licensed operators, which is available on the website of the regulator, Gemeinsamen Glücksspielbehörde der Länder (GGL).

Additionally, legal providers display a clearly visible GGL logo on their sites, while only licensed operators offer comprehensive player protection measures.

Dahms concluded: “It is in the common interest of regulators, providers and players to strengthen the legal market and push back the black market.

“This is the only way to ensure player protection, integrity and tax revenues.”

Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Fahmi said “the majority of content taken down on Facebook consists of online gambling ads and gambling-related posts”. But Facebook has consistently failed to block the use of credit cards used to pay for such ads, he added.

“If a gambling ad is paid for using a credit card and Facebook knows this content is illegal in Malaysia, they should block the account,” Fahmi said. “But Facebook has refused to do so.”

Fahmi suggested the meeting will be of a “constructive” nature. “We are opting for dialogue rather than punitive measures. We do not intend to ban or shut down Facebook. Many people benefit from these platforms socially and economically. But we cannot allow criminals to misuse them for profit or to commit online crimes.”

Easy access, digital natives drive iGaming

About 65% of Malaysians are Muslim, belonging to a religion that prohibits gambling. According to the US-based National Institute for Biotechnology Information, Malaysians of Chinese and Indian descent are more likely to gamble and spend more on gambling.

Legal options include lotteries, bets on horse racing and betting at the country’s sole licensed casino, Resorts World Genting in Kuala Lumpur. Even so, there seems to be a preference for illegal gaming, which operates without government regulation or oversight. For instance, in 2018 illegal lotteries generated about 60% more revenue than the six legal operators combined, NIBI reports.

And so it goes with iGaming. Online gambling, while illegal, is highly accessible, and offshore providers are happy to process transactions in ringgits, the Malaysian currency. According to Complete Sports, Malaysian iGaming is surging “at an unprecedented rate” thanks to “smartphone penetration, fast internet and a young population of sports enthusiasts”. Malaysians are avid sports fans and love betting on badminton as well as the English Premier League.

Meta not responsible for compliance

In July, Meta proclaimed it would tighten its rules around online gambling ads on Facebook and Instagram. Its online gambling policy says advertisers “authorised for a single jurisdiction and gambling type” may target “any jurisdiction where they are licensed or lawfully permitted, with the exception of unsupported markets” including Malaysia.

However, Meta adds that it “is not responsible for how authorised ad accounts comply with local gambling laws and regulations”. Meanwhile, Malaysia’s Commercial Gambling Management Commission is working independently to crack down on online gambling ads and promotions.

According to the Malay Mail, the fight to curb illegal iGaming is part of a larger government effort to promote online safety. “We have the ability to make the internet safer, especially for children and families,” Fahmi said.

Malaysia’s Safe Internet Campaign, established in January, has visited more than 2,600 schools nationwide so far this year. It has set a target of reaching 10,000 schools by 2026.

Groupe Partouche benefits from new casino launches

The third quarter results showed Groupe Partouche benefiting from a bigger casino portfolio, with a new venue in Cannes and one further afield in Benin contributing to a 5.3% year-on-year rise in revenue. 

That prompts the question: Can French operators leverage shared language to expand into Francophone Africa? There is evidence of it happening with Spanish businesses in Latin America, so why not French companies in Africa?

And talk of France means talk of iCasino is never far away. Groupe Partouche, with operations in Belgium and Switzerland, could be building up its capabilities. Depending on whether there is any regulatory progress and if it can leverage its land-based database, could it carve out share in France’s future online gaming market?

Right to the Source is on Apple Podcasts

The Georgian gambling market

We’re talking the country not the state, but interestingly gambling in Georgia accounts for 3.5% of GDP. That’s the highest level of any country H2 Gambling Capital tracks, Ed points out. 

And while attractions such as “Black Sea Vegas” Batumi are designed to bring in the players, online is the real story in Georgia, making up the vast majority of revenue. 

Georgian gambling is also dominated by major industry players, with Crystalbet (Entain) and Adjarabet (Flutter) battling for supremacy. However it’s local operator Crocobet that’s growing rapidly. 

All this and the usual diversions into the sublime and the ridiculous in the latest Right to the Source!

While online gambling regulation was launched on 1 January this year, land-based betting remains illegal.

This is despite Brazil’s Justice and Citizenship Committee approving PL 2,234/2022, which includes land-based casinos, bingo, jogo do bicho and betting on horse racing.

The Senate vote has been postponed on numerous occasions, most recently in July, but Irajá hopes legalisation of land-based gambling arrives sooner rather than later in order to reap the financial rewards.

“Without a doubt, this discussion is about an economic and social agenda, not just entertainment for the country,” Irajá told Brazilian news outlet ND Mais. “We will create a new business environment in Brazil, which will generate more than a million new jobs for the Brazilian people.

“In taxes alone, there is a prospect of collecting at least BRL20 billion and these resources will be used to benefit the population, divided between the states, Brazilian municipalities, health, education, public safety.”

Could tourism double with land-based casino legalisation?

Beyond taxes and job creation, Irajá also cited enhancing Brazil’s underperforming tourism sector as a reason to legalise land-based gambling.

In 2023, Brazil welcomed around six million tourists. The Dominican Republic, on the other hand, received over 10 million tourists, despite its land mass fitting into Brazil’s around 175 times.

“We’re facing a topic that will boost Brazilian tourism, which is what’s happened worldwide,” Irajá continued.

“Countries that have legalised responsible gambling have doubled their tourist flow in just five years. Meanwhile, Brazil watches all these tourists from Europe, Asia and the United States, visiting Argentina, Chile and Uruguay, but not coming to Brazil to generate wealth, circulate resources within our country and generate foreign currency.”

Irajá also stated that land-based gambling, despite not yet being legal, is already widespread in Brazil.

“The big truth is that bingo, casinos and jogo do bicho, which are activities of Brazilian culture, already operate outside the law, operating in almost all cities in Brazil, in the capitals, in short, on street corners,” Irajá explained.

“And the government does not collect, the Brazilian people do not collect a single cent in taxes, the government does not monitor and we are unable to protect citizens from this game that I call gambling.”

Attorney General Andrea Campbell filed the suit in Suffolk County Superior Court, alleging Kalshi is operating as an illegal sports betting platform. The suit said Kalshi took more than $1 billion in sports wagers in the first half of 2025 without appropriate licensing. The complaint notes more than 75% of Kalshi’s volume is on sports event markets.

“The figures suggest that Kalshi makes a larger percentage of its money from sports than DraftKings or FanDuel – businesses that are synonymous with sports betting in the US,” the suit reads.

The suit details how it claims Kalshi mirrors “a digital gambling experience” and “employs behavioural design mechanisms drawn from gambling psychology”. It also notes the platform recently began offering a parlay product and advertises itself as sports betting.

In March, the Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth announced it was investigating Robinhood offering sports event contracts.

Kalshi faces strengthening headwinds

Kalshi began offering sports event contracts earlier this year. It has since seen growing scrutiny and legal action from regulators across the country.

Multiple states sent the platform cease-and-desist letters in the spring, including:

• Arizona
• Illinois
• Maryland
• Montana
• Nevada
• New Jersey
• Ohio

The Michigan Gaming Control Board opened investigations into sports prediction markets in April. The Tennessee Sports Wagering Council asked the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates trading contracts, to shut down sports prediction markets.

While the CFTC has allowed sports prediction markets this year, an outgoing commissioner recently warned of weak oversight during a farewell address.

As sports betting platforms like FanDuel begin forays into prediction markets, the Ohio Casino Control Commission has warned that if operators offer event markets, it could put their licences in jeopardy.

Prediction market lawsuit list grows

Kalshi has filed lawsuits against the regulatory bodies in Maryland, Nevada and New Jersey. The platform remains live in the states as the cases are in process.

In Nevada and New Jersey, the judges granted preliminary injunctions to Kalshi, with the states appealing the decisions. In Maryland, the judge sided with the state, but Maryland agreed to withhold enforcement with Kalshi appealing the decision.

Campbell was one of 34 state attorneys general who filed a brief in support of New Jersey in the appeals court.

In July, three California tribes filed a lawsuit against Kalshi, alleging the platform infringes on tribal rights under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Last month, the Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin sued the platform.

In October 2024, Kalshi won a suit in the US Court of Appeals against the CFTC, which allowed it to offer election event contracts ahead of the November ballot.

The California Assembly passed AB831, 63-0, Friday afternoon, the last day of the legislative session. Assemblymember Avelino Valencia’s bill makes it a misdemeanour to operate or knowingly support dual-currency sweepstakes sites that mimic casino or sports betting products. Multiple other state legislatures passed similar legislation this year, including those in Connecticut, Montana and New Jersey.

Valencia’s bill initially addressed a separate tribal gaming issue when it was introduced this session. Once in the Senate this summer, lawmakers amended it to ban sweepstakes casinos. It advanced through multiple committees and the Senate floor with unanimous support.

The California Nations Indian Gaming Association and many of the state’s tribes supported the legislation. Still, there were four tribes that spoke out against the bill.

Opponents of the bill cited the “gut-and-amend” process as a shady and rushed tactic to ban sweepstakes casinos. They also argued it would negatively affect other industries that run sweepstakes, such as McDonald’s and Starbucks. An amendment before its final Senate reading explicitly excluded state lottery games and traditional sweepstakes promotions.

“AB831 is a flawed and rushed bill that lacks broad tribal consensus. As Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation, the Sherwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians, the Mechoopda Indian Tribe of Chico Rancheria and Big Lagoon Rancheria have made clear, this bill would limit economic options available to tribes and worsen already fragile economic conditions,” Jeff Duncan, executive director of the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance, said in a statement prior to its passage.

“What California lawmakers should focus on instead is creating proper regulation that supports online social games, creates new revenue sources for the state and protects economic opportunities for all tribes.”

Sweepstakes casino crackdowns across the country

Lawmakers and regulators across the US have increased scrutiny of the sweepstakes casino industry this year, arguing operators are exploiting loopholes to offer gambling products. The operators use a dual-currency model, offering non-monetary “gold coins” and another currency known as “sweeps coins” that can be exchanged for real-money prizes.

While six other state legislatures have passed similar bans, not all have become law. New York Governor Kathy Hochul has not signed S5935, despite its passing the Senate and Assembly in June. Prior to the bill’s passage, Attorney General Letitia James sent 26 cease-and-desist orders to sweepstakes operators.

Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry vetoed his state’s bill, explaining the legislation was not necessary for the state gaming regulator to enforce its rules. The Louisiana Gaming Control Board then sent 40 cease-and-desist letters to unregulated operators, including sweepstakes sites.

Multiple other states, including Arizona and Michigan, sent cease-and-desist letters to sweepstakes operators.

Eilers & Krejcik Gaming revised its 2025 revenue estimates for the US sweepstakes market this week, bringing it down to $4 billion from an original $4.7 billion, attributed to the growing legislative and regulatory headwinds. The revenue would still be a 16% year-over-year increase. However, Eilers & Krejcik predicts a 10% decline in 2026.

The group was formed by four prominent operators in the market – Betway, BetPawa, 888Africa and Sportybet – but Kesitilwe said it is actively recruiting more operators. 

Kesitilwe brings over nine years of experience at the Botswana Gambling Authority, where he acted as CEO for the last almost two years.  

Speaking to iGB on Tuesday, Kesitilwe’s core message is the African iGaming Alliance is not looking to compete with gambling regulators or independent operators across the continent.  

“We’re not competitors, the intention is to collaborate, complement and work together as a pan-African trade alliance,” Kesitilwe says.  

“We shouldn’t see ourselves as competitors when we’re complementing them. That’s why we are saying let’s harmonise issues of taxes, issues of responsible gambling through our alliance. Let’s speak with one voice.” 

Tackling problem gambling using a sector-wide approach is also a top priority for the African iGaming Alliance.

“At the forefront of what the alliance intends to do is to promote responsible gambling frameworks across Africa,” he adds.  

“This is quite important because the policymakers and governments of these markets would rather increase taxes if we have more problem gamblers.” 

Sector must encourage ‘set gambling tax rate’  

On taxation, Kesitilwe says the sector must be firm in pushing for “set tax [rates]” to avoid pressure from policymakers to contribute more to government coffers. 

“We will be the bridge between operators and regulators to achieve this,” he says.  

Africa is experiencing a huge influx of player activity across gaming, as smartphone usage increases rapidly and countries gain better internet connectivity. 

But being such a huge continent, made up of markets at varying maturity levels, Kesitilwe foresees regulatory fragmentation across Africa being a huge pain point for the growing sector.  

He is calling for a centralised body to standarise regulations between neighbouring markets. 

Standardisation needed across market-by-market regulations

“There is regulatory fragmentation in Africa where you find one operator will be applying for a licence in Nigeria, while also applying for one in Ghana [but] the regulations are quite different,” he notes.  

“We have what we call the Gambling Regulator Africa Forum (GRAF) which could help a lot with standardisation of licensing frameworks and cross-border coordination.”  

The influx of illegal and unregulated operators, which Kesitilwe says makes up to two-thirds of the industry in Africa, is seriously undermining consumer protection and responsible gambling standards, he believes.  

From a consumer perspective, he says it is difficult for players to differentiate between legal and illegal sites, but regulators must be careful which operators they tarnish with the black-market brush.  

“If we operate properly, governments won’t be losing up to $2 billion-$5 billion yearly in unpaid taxes due to the black market,” Kesitilwe adds. 

High banking costs hindering the sector 

Elsewhere, operators are grappling with extremely high costs in relation to banking and payments services.  

In August, Betway parent Super Group reported it was considering adopting crypto payments in Africa to help offset high banking costs and attract new players. 

“In the African side of our business, we have a banking issue there,” Super Group CEO Neal Menashe said at the time.  

“I think crypto and coins can make a huge difference there because banking is a really big cost in Africa, especially for us onboarding our customers and then payments across the continent.” 

Kesitilwe agrees that monopoly payments aggregators and high fees are hindering the sector’s progression in Africa.  

“There still remain some inconsistencies, and in some regions it is very expensive due to issues of monopolies around payment aggregators. Through dialogues and research, we seek to address these,” Kesitilwe tells iGB.  

Benefit of a regulatory background 

Kesitilwe is ultimately optimistic his technical know-how will benefit the African iGaming Alliance.

“I was at the helm of the gambling authority of Botswana so bring with me a wealth of regulatory experience and background,” he says of securing his position at the helm of the AIA.

“I would say I bring firsthand regulatory insight into how governments view compliance, issues of AML/CFT and responsible gambling. 

“Also I’m experienced in forming legislation, modernising regulatory frameworks, issues of credibility with regulators across Africa, so my role allows me to bridge the gap between the industry and the regulators.”

In late August, the SPA released extensive data which revealed the licensed betting market’s GGR reached BRL17.4 billion ($3.2 billion) during H1 2025.  

The data also reported 17.7 million Brazilians wagered with licensed operators during the period, equating to around 8.3% of the total population and, crucially, 10.6% of adults in Brazil. 

This figure has cast doubt on the argument being championed by some politicians that regulation, despite its nascent status, is driving high levels of gambling addiction in Brazil. 

Ed Birkin, managing director of H2 Gambling Capital, believes the data shows player activity is in line with what you’d expect from a regulated online market.  

Birkin says the data “opposes the rhetoric of mass gambling addiction” in Brazil. 

“In the Netherlands, we estimate that ~5.4% of the adult population have accounts with legal operators,” Birkin tells iGB. “By contrast, in the UK ~20% of the adult population has an online betting or gaming account.  

“So really, this puts Brazil around the level that you’d expect for a ’normal’ amount of online gambling. How much of that is problem gambling is a different question, but it certainly flies against the view of a pandemic of gambling across the nation.” 

SPA pushing for data-based regulation 

The narrative that regulated online gambling is causing an addiction pandemic in Brazil has led to a number of movements and Senate bills seeking to restrict the licensed sector. 

The industry is awaiting a vote on whether the government will make a gambling tax rise permanent. Meanwhile, additional ad restrictions are also under discussion.  

The sector has urged politicians to take a data-based approach to regulation and, in the SPA’s H1 data release, its chief, Regis Dudena, echoed those thoughts. 

“From here on the debate on the fixed-odds betting market in Brazil can be conducted with even more solid elements, enabling us to advance evidence-based regulation,” Dudena said. 

Udo Seckelmann, head of gambling & crypto at Bichara e Motta Advogados, describes this as a “positive development” for the sector. 

“For any regulated industry policymaking should be based on evidence and not solely on perception,” says Seckelmann.  

“By making market data publicly available and emphasising its use to support regulatory evolution, the SPA signals it is willing to pursue a more technical and transparent dialogue with stakeholders.  

“This strengthens regulatory credibility and reduces the risk of measures that could unintentionally harm the sector’s competitiveness.” 

The illegal market 

Birkin largely agrees with Seckelmann, noting many lawmakers set regulations based on “idealistic views or prejudices” rather than data-led analysis. 

However, he warns it’s also important to ascertain just how big the illegal market is. 

Estimates on the size of Brazil’s black market vary. H2 Gambling Capital believes it makes up around 30% of the total betting sector, while the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming estimates it is between 40% and 60%. 

“For me, having a base line of a generally accepted illegal market size is key,” Birkin continues. “The number one aim of regulation should be to bring as many players onshore to gamble in a protected and regulated environment.  

“To measure the effectiveness of this, and the impact of existing and proposed regulatory change, you need to be measuring the size of the illegal market and how that’s growing or declining. So releasing legal market data is only part of the job.” 

Data release encouraging for Brazil’s nascent sector 

While some raised questions over why it took the SPA nearly eight months of regulation to release initial market data, both Seckelmann and Birkin believe this is natural and the data shows Brazil is growing as forecasted.  

“The H1 figures published by the SPA are encouraging, as they demonstrate that the regulated market is already consolidating in Brazil,” Seckelmann says.  

“The numbers broadly align with the sector’s expectations regarding both volume of bets and tax collection.  

“What is most important is that these figures confirm the relevance of the regulated market as a driver of economic activity, job creation and responsible entertainment.” 

This transparency, Seckelmann concludes, will strengthen bettors’ trust in the regulated market, perhaps diminishing the appeal of unlicensed offerings. 

“When bettors see that the regulated market is generating significant tax revenues, being closely monitored and contributing positively to society, they are more likely to choose legal platforms,” Seckelmann adds.  

“The publication of data reinforces the legitimacy of licensed operators, while simultaneously highlighting the risks of offshore platforms that operate outside of Brazilian law.  

“In this sense, the SPA’s initiative supports not only public confidence but also the long-term sustainability of the regulated market.” 

On 5 August, Ecuador President Daniel Noboa laid out seven questions to be included in the upcoming referendum. The final one focused on whether citizens would support the reopening of land-based casinos.

Ecuador is somewhat unusual in that the country holds referenda relatively frequently. Questions can focus on a wide array of topics.

The referenda give the public a chance to be involved in key decisions on topics including defence, finance and criminal law.

Casinos were banned in a 2011 referendum, but Noboa’s questions proposed the reopening of land-based casinos based within five-star hotels, taxed at a rate of 25%. This would go towards the financing of programmes to fund school meals and combat chronic child malnutrition.

However, last week the constitutional court ruled the question didn’t meet its parameters for two reasons.

The first was that the preamble to the referendum question wasn’t clear enough to readers and would create confusion among voters as they lacked the required information to be able to answer properly.

The second reason for the exclusion of the question was that it touched on three topics, which were the reopening of land-based casinos, the creation of a new gambling tax and the specific allocation of tax proceeds.

With the three topics included in just one question, voters would have had limited freedom to disagree on certain aspects of the proposed law.

The constitutional court rejected the question in its current form, although the proposal could yet be amended to ensure it falls in line with Ecuador’s constitutional limits.

“With these decisions, this body ensures that proposals for amendments to the constitutional text and those for referendums respect constitutional limits and are formulated with clarity and loyalty to the voters,” the court said.

Another blow to land-based casinos prospects in Ecuador

This isn’t the first time Noboa has floated the idea of reopening casinos in Ecuador.

Last January, he scrapped a question for a 2024 referendum that again enquired about the possibility of reopening casinos.

According to Noboa, the president felt it was inappropriate to include the question due to the rising levels of civil unrest in Ecuador, with other questions on topics such as fighting organised crime remaining on the referendum.

However, Ecuador did make changes to its online sector during 2024, with 65 companies registering in H1 to pay the new 15% gross revenue tax, which came in on 1 July last year.

Under Executive Decree No 313, player winnings are now also subject to a 15% withholding tax.

He believes a permanent committee is required for the government to oversee the transfer of sports betting tax revenue to the appropriate sports entities, especially with the social and economic problems that can be caused by gambling.

Rocco made the proposal on Wednesday at a hearing between the ministries of sport and finance, as well as the chamber of deputies’ subcommittee on sports betting regulation.

At the hearing, representatives and organisations in the sports sector called for greater transparency in the collection and distribution of sports funds.

Rocco highlighted the Brazil government’s failure to collect tax revenue from sports betting in the lead up to the launch of the regulated market on 1 January this year.

“The allocation of resources is a major concern for the ministry of sports,” Rocco told the hearing.

“Betting companies owe a social debt to Brazilian sports, as they have used sports to enter people’s lives and homes. Therefore, this compensation must be appropriate so that we can address the problems arising from betting as a whole.”

What tax revenue does the sports sector currently receive?

At present, 36% of betting tax revenues are allocated to the sports sector, with the ministry of sports receiving the largest share. The distribution breakdown is as follows:

Antônio Hora, president of the Brazilian School Sports Confederation, raised concerns over the accuracy of the resources being allocated.

“We private entities are able to receive the resources, but we have no guarantee that those amounts are correct, due to the lack of transparency mentioned here,” Hora explained.

The Secretariat of Prizes and Bets has looked to address such concerns, launching a public consultation back in June, with the objective of making the allocation of fixed-odds betting revenue “more effective and efficient”.

Football sector’s reliance on betting

Rocco also noted the reliance of football in Brazil on the betting sector, with 18 of the 20 top-flight football clubs having a betting partner this season.

Last month, Betano announced a deal with Flamengo to become the club’s master sponsor. The agreement, the biggest in Brazilian football history, is worth a reported BRL250 million ($45.9 million) a year.

In May, the Brazil sports commission greenlighted a proposal to restrict gambling ads, with the Senate’s subsequent approval meaning it’s now up to the Chamber of Deputies to review the bill.

Advertising during live sporting broadcasts would be banned, as well as the use of athletes in ads, except for those whose career had ended at least five years previously.

With such a reliance on the gambling sector, Rocco believes the debate on betting advertising in football must be a responsible one, to ensure the sport is not harmed.

“Initially, due to a lack of oversight and control, betting houses took all the investment in Brazilian football,” Rocco added.

“Today, football is entirely dependent on betting house resources, which have inflated at least fivefold.”

However, the opinion deemed the court had been provided with sufficient information to assess the compatibility of German law with EU law. 

It also ruled that courts of EU member states are allowed to review the compatibility of the law of another member state with EU law. 

The opinion relates to a case brought before the ECJ in April by a civil court in Malta (C‑440/23). Opinions are typically delivered by an advocate general during the final part of the oral stage of proceedings. Although it is not a formal ruling on a case, it analyses the legal aspects and provides answers to questions posed by a case.  

In this instance, the opinion concluded that a number of questions brought by the Maltese court were valid, including whether it was reasonable for locally regulated markets (like Germany) to prohibit online casinos licensed only in Malta. 

Another question raised was “whether European courts had jurisdiction to review the compatibility of the law of another member state with EU law”. 

Players can bring losses cases against Malta-licensed operators  

However, the opinion did rule that a player bringing a civil claim against an operator without a local licence to operate does not constitute an abuse of EU law.  

This point clearly addressed the core question of whether EU law supports player losses claims made against Malta-licensed operators by players in Germany and Austria.  

In this case the advocate general agreed with the claimant that the contract between a player and operator in this case was deemed void under contract law.  

This point could have huge implications for the hundreds of similar player losses cases being addressed in regional courts across Germany and Austria. 

These were put on hold when four prominent litigations, including case C‑440/23 were progressed to the ECJ, as regional courts were unable to resolve complex questions around German gambling law and the sector’s interpretation of European laws. 

Sector looks to Tipico case for clarity on Germany’s gambling laws

However, Claus Hambach, managing partner at German law firm Hambach & Hambach, tells iGB that cases will remain on hold until the ECJ addresses the core question of whether Germany’s previous State Treaty, which placed a total ban on internet games of chance, was compatible with EU law. 

“Such as anticipated from the hearing, the advocate general mainly dealt with procedural questions. This was an explicit request by the ECJ. The advocate general did not address the key question of whether the internet ban in Germany is compatible with EU law,” Hambach says. 

He says the sector will now look to the next player losses case to be heard by the ECJ on 24 September, for clarity on whether German gambling laws are in line with the EU’s Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).  

Case 530/24 involves prominent German betting operator Tipico and was referred to the ECJ in May by the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (BGH). 

“The focus now shifts to the Tipico case. The first in-depth legal examination of the German Interstate Treaty Gambling (ITG) by the ECJ will now concern a sports betting case and not betting on lotteries and casino,” says Hambach. 

Belgian gambling market shrugs off restrictions

In episode 18 Robin Harrison and Ed Birkin start off by discussing why gambling revenue in Belgium continues to grow. Revenue in 2024 rose despite the regulator and politicians constantly tightening controls on the industry. 

Right to the Source on Apple Podcasts

Considering it has been an early mover with deposit limits, advertising bans and deposit limits Belgian gaming growth may embolden other markets to get strict on their licensees. If the market continues to grow, what’s the harm? But Belgian gaming benefits from a unique quirk, and it’s quite a surprising factor that may contribute to that continued growth. 

Zeal for change

Next up discussion turns to Zeal Network, Germany’s lottery brokerage business that could prove a blueprint for companies looking to transition to more sustainable business models. Having successfully executed a pivot from lottery betting to brokerage, the addition of online slots may be building a formidable business. 

And even in one of the more structured episodes of Right to the Source to date there’s still time for wild diversions into Sesame Street, transfer deadline day and French icasino. 

Kristin Johnson said in a farewell address on Wednesday that the CFTC has “too few guardrails and too little visibility into the prediction market landscape”. Johnson is the fourth CFTC commissioner to step down this summer.

Caroline Pham is the acting chair and lone remaining commissioner. Pham said she would step down when President Donald Trump’s nominee to become chairman, Brian Quintenz, receives congressional approval. A Senate vote on Quintenz was delayed without explanation in July.

Johnson’s critiques hit the lack of rulemaking on election contracts, which Kalshi offered for the November 2024 election after the company prevailed in federal court against the CFTC.

“Because the target audience for these contracts is retail customers and some market participants seem to be marching down a path to offer leveraged, margined prediction market contracts to retail investors, there is an urgent need for the Commission to express in a clear voice our expectations related to these contracts,” she said. “The stakes are high. And, if I only have one piece of wisdom to share, it would be the following – get it right. Measure twice, cut once.

“Deciding the course for financial markets and financial markets regulation simply requires remembering why we regulate and the catastrophic consequences that may follow if we fail to regulate well.”

State opposition exists

The CFTC regulates event trading nationwide and has taken a largely hands-off approach as operators like Kalshi continue to launch more products involving sports. State gambling regulators, such as those in Nevada and Ohio, have issued cease-and-desist letters to operators. There are multiple federal and state lawsuits challenging whether or not sports prediction markets should be classified as sports betting.

Recently, FanDuel announced its planned launch of a predictions market product. That was followed by the Ohio Casino Control Commission warning sportsbook licensees that offering prediction markets could jeopardise their licences.

The growing rift between federal oversight by the CFTC and state gambling regulators is emerging as a key test for how prediction markets will ultimately be classified. Analysts estimate US prediction markets could reach several billion dollars in annual handle if they gain regulatory clarity, making them one of the fastest-growing segments of the wagering industry.

Johnson also noted the rise in entities seeking licences.

“In a number of instances, these businesses approach the Commission seeking licences to offer traditional products, only to quickly shift once a licence is in hand and seek to self-certify prediction market contracts. In other contexts, firms that have received a licence quickly auction their newly minted licence to others,” she said.

Polymarket returns to US prediction markets

The CFTC gave Polymarket the “green light” this week to operate in the US, according to a social media post from company CEO Shayne Coplan. There was no indication of when it might launch.

Officially, the CFTC announced it took a “no action” position on Polymarket’s $112 million acquisition of QCEX, a CFTC-regulated exchange.

Polymarket left the US market after a 2022 settlement with the CFTC for operating an unregistered prediction market. The US Department of Justice and CFTC closed investigations into Polymarket, which included an FBI search of Coplan’s apartment, in July.

More operators launching sports markets

FanDuel is not alone among major US sportsbooks in considering prediction markets. DraftKings CEO Jason Robins discussed the opportunity in a recent earnings call.

This week, Underdog announced it was launching prediction markets within its existing fantasy and sports betting app through a partnership with Crypto.com.

Also this week, Webull announced it would offer Kalshi football markets. Financial app Robinhood has already partnered with Kalshi to offer the markets.

In April, Swedish operator ATG announced it had formed a 50/50 JV with local Finnish racing association Suomen Hippos, with the new Hippos ATG to be powered by ATG’s in-house gaming platform.

On Thursday, the JV announced it would operate in Finland with the ATG brand, operating its site as ATG.fi and utilising the ATG gaming app for mobile phones, as well as featuring ATG’s existing style and design.

The move is described as a “cost-effective solution”, leveraging ATG’s existing communication assets, messaging and design.

Mikael Bäcke, CEO of the Hippos ATG JV, believes the use of such a well-known legacy brand in ATG will provide a strong platform in terms of brand awareness.

“ATG is a strong, trusted, quality brand in Sweden and already familiar to many Finnish gamblers,” Bäcke said. “That is something we want to build on as we enter the new Finnish gambling market in 2027.”

The launch of ATG Talent

Bäcke also explained up to 60% of the JV’s surplus will go directly back to supporting the horse racing sector in Finland.

Alongside its financial support for the racing sector in Finland, Hippos ATG launched a development programme aimed at individuals expected to have a bright future in the sport.

ATG Talent participants will meet a number of experts who will provide “knowledge, inspiration and support” in areas such as team-building, leadership and sports psychology.

The participants will be selected in collaboration with Suomen Hippos during the final quarter of 2025, with the first round of the development programme to be carried out over 2026.

Monopolies’ marginalisation of horse racing

Finland is preparing to open its gambling market by 2027, bringing an end to Veikkaus’ monopoly.

Until now, the state-owned operator has held exclusive rights to iGaming and online sports betting in the market but, from 2027, private operators, including Hippos ATG, will be able to compete in a liberalised market.

In August, Bäcke told iGB that Hippos ATG expects to compete as a leading brand for horse racing betting in the newly liberalised market.

He said the JV would aim to recapture the “marginalised” horse racing betting vertical in Finland.

“Today there’s a vacuum in Finnish market and it’s a great opportunity for both ATG and Suomen Hippos,” Bäcke said.

“The [JV] is based on both parties providing the most valuable assets they have to make this company competitive. That means the strong anchoring in the local market that Suomen Hippos has and the very close relationship they have with the 200,000 horse racing customers,” he added.

Hippos ATG will go live on day one of the licensed online market in Finland.

The ATG Finland JV board of directors is made up of ATG CEO Hans Lord Skarplöth and members of both ATG and the Suomen Hippos association.

Attendees and speakers pushed back against her speech, insisting the sector’s growth directly conflicted with efforts to reduce gambling harms. Peers for Gambling Reform hosted the event with Lord Foster of Bath chairing.

Reform campaigners and charities, gambling harm researchers and people with lived experience made up most of the audience.

In her speech, which opened the conference on Wednesday, Twycross said her biggest challenge when making policy decisions was striking “the right balance between” opposing views on gambling reform and ensuring the UK sector is supported. 

“It is a big responsibility, but I do want to continue with reforms that will improve consumer protection while supporting the sector that makes an important economic societal contribution,” she said.  

“I know most of you don’t think this is possible, but I am going to be open with you about the approach we are taking as a government,” she continued.  

Statutory levy governance to ensure ‘smooth transition’ to new system 

Speaking on the statutory levy, Twycross thanked many of those in attendance for their role in the levy’s implementation. “I think it is going to make a considerable difference,” she said.  

“The three responsible commissioners in England will naturally take time to set up structures to allow funding to flow effectively.  

“Although the relevant commissioners are leading the decision making, where appropriate we want to make sure that we maintain expertise and provision of service for those who need it most, ensuring a smooth transition to the new system and avoiding a cliff-edge improvision,” she added. 

An independent body will oversee the levy’s implementation and ensure appropriate distribution of funding. Twycross said the “clear governance structure will look objectively at how the levy is working and hold the commissioners to account”.  

The Baroness told the audience an independent and impartial process will decide where to spend the funding. This is a top priority for DCMS, she said.  

Levy board will identify and stamp out conflicts of interest in research funding 

Researchers raised concerns at an April parliamentary health committee hearing about GambleAware funding industry-influenced research.

Speaking during the committee session, Sam Chamberlain, professor of psychiatry at the University of Southampton, said: “There’s been a lack of funding from our trusted funding bodies. In pragmatic terms, the industry has been giving cash to one massive charity that then has been handing out that money to various organisations. [But] I’m not saying that all of that work is invalid.” 

On this, Twycross told the audience: “Independence is as important to me as it is to you.  

“When I took on this role it was made really clear to me one of the greatest challenges you face in using research, was concerns over whether research was funded by organisations with clear vested interests and those couldn’t be trusted. 

“So I have been assured that robust processes will be in place to identify and manage any conflicts of interest, including ensuring there is no influence rising as a result of the previous funding arrangements [under the voluntary levy].” 

In April the government implemented the statutory levy and the Gambling Commission released a breakdown of rates based on an operator’s licence. Operators could face licence revocation if they do not adhere to levy requirements.

The study, which was compiled by Social Finance and Sherbert Research, was released by GambleAware on Tuesday. Research was recorded from two surveys.

One recorded data from 634 youngsters across a number of schools based in the South West, South East and West Midlands. The second survey recorded results from 2,100 11-17 year olds. GambleAware said this report “was nationally representative of this demographic across GB”.

A quarter of the children included in the second survey said they had been tempted to spend money on gambling after viewing such advertising, while 36% of boys aged between 16 and 17 recalled they had already gambled after observing a celebrity either promoting or taking part in gambling.

Over half of the second survey’s respondents said they felt they had no control over the amount of gambling content they viewed online, while 78% of children agreed “nobody under the age of 18 should be exposed to content and advertising about gambling”.

Meanwhile the initial research found 87% of children and young people surveyed had been exposed to gambling content online, with 16% viewing gambling advertising from content creators on platforms such as Twitch, TikTok and YouTube.

Majority of children want celebrity gambling ads banned

Around 67% of respondents to the larger survey agreed famous individuals, celebrities and influencers should be banned from promoting gambling.

Some 16% had observed content creators sharing links and sign-up codes for gambling, while 14% reported seeing creators sharing tips on how to gamble.

GambleAware believes the government should look to further restrict gambling advertising and online content in the short term, while wider regulations are put in place.

“Digital technology has transformed how children and young people consume content, with mobile phone ownership widespread and many spending hours daily on social media,” GambleAware CEO Zoe Osmond added.

“Social media platforms and influencers now play a pivotal role in shaping attitudes and behaviours and this research shows that some are playing a part in encouraging young people to gamble.”

GambleAware appoints transition CEO to oversee closure

In response to the survey’s findings, GambleAware called upon regulators, the government and the Advertising Standards Authority to take urgent action and “catch up with the digital age”.

“It is unacceptable that children’s environments continue to be flooded with age-restricted content,” Osmond said.

“Consistent exposure to influencer-driven gambling content contributes to the normalisation of gambling among school-aged children and we know that early exposure to gambling at a younger age can lead young people to have a higher risk of experiencing gambling harm later in life.”

Osmond is in her final month as GambleAware CEO, with the charity last week announcing the appointment of Anna Hargrave from 30 September as transition CEO to oversee its closure.

In July, GambleAware confirmed it will wind down operations and transfer its responsibilities to the British government by March 2026. The move comes after the introduction of a new statutory levy earlier this year.

From that point, all services previously overseen by the charity will be taken on by the government and newly appointed commissioners in England, Scotland and Wales, reflecting the UK’s renewed strategy for addressing gambling harm.

The report, published on Monday, found the channelisation rate for the competitive market in Sweden fell to 85% in 2024, 1% lower than the 86% rate reported in 2023.

The study utilised a different methodology from previous years, after Spelinspektionen tasked itself with developing a new method for calculating the channelisation rate.

H2 Gambling Capital’s figures have been disregarded this year, although the company recently adjusted its channelisation estimate for Sweden from 91% to 72%.

Spelinspektionen’s new methodology utilises player surveys and internet traffic analysis, with 5,767 respondents to the study and 2,032 unlicensed websites identified.

Online casino was found to be a particular pain point in terms of the illegal market, with online casino’s channelisation rate estimated to be between 72% and 82%.

In comparison, betting is estimated to have a channelisation rate of between 92% and 96%.

The total proportion of players who played in the licensed competitive market during 2024 is estimated to be 96%.

The player survey found the main reasons for playing on unlicensed offerings is a better opportunity for winning on websites without a Swedish licence.

Reflecting on the update, Gustaf Hoffstedt, secretary general of the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS), said it was important to compare the estimated channelisation rate of 85% to Spelinspektionen’s long-term target of 90%.

Prevalence of illegal online casino a key concern

In Hoffstedt’s view, it’s “unacceptable” that approximately a quarter of online casino is being played on unlicensed offerings.

He believes that more needs to be done by politicians to improve the rate, adding: “It is equally unacceptable that this has been accepted by political decision-makers for half a decade, since the channelisation has also been low in previous assessments, without effective regulatory measures being taken.”

Later this month, investigator Marcus Isgren will present a proposal to alter the scope of Sweden’s Gambling Act.

Isgren is expected to consider measures that will make it tougher for illegal sites to operate in Sweden.

Hoffstedt welcomed these changes, although he also warns overregulation of the legal market must be addressed to ease the restrictions on licensed operators.

“Anyone who understands the gambling market knows that the elephant in the room is that the licensed market is so tightly regulated that it does not appear attractive enough in the eyes of the consumer,” Hoffstedt concludes.

“Without a review of, for example, the total ban on bonuses and other loyalty programmes, next year’s channelisation assessment from the SGA will also be a disappointment.”

By comparison, Netherlands regulator KSA reported in July that the market’s channelisation rate had dropped from 95% to 93%.

However, KSA also admitted there is a chance that some players are gambling large amounts with illegal providers.

Since the Brazil online market regulated on 1 January, many industry stakeholders have shared concerns over the prevalence of the illegal market.

Just this week, Genius Sports’ head of integrity for Latin America, Tiago Barbosa, told a government committee that 70%-80% of bets placed in Brazil are illegal.

Birkin believes the size of the illegal market in Brazil is “hugely overblown”, with H2 estimating it’s more likely to be around 30% of the total market.

He warns that overstating the size of Brazil’s illegal gambling market could mislead policymakers into viewing the sector as overly harmful, which may result in stricter regulations on the legal industry.

In his view, operators are looking to deflect from their own shortfalls.

“I think actually, the narrative is being led by a number of operators who are underperforming and it makes it easier to say that the illegal market is bigger rather than they’re just not competing as well in the legal market,” Birkin tells iGB.

Birkin explains the first concerns of the illegal market share standing at 60%-70% were raised in January, when licensed companies were still struggling with onboarding players due to the new KYC restrictions.

According to H2 estimates, the Brazilian market’s January revenue was BRL2.2 billion. By April, the market almost doubled, generating BRL4 billion in monthly revenue.

However, with some still perpetuating the narrative of illegal operators accounting for 60%-70% of the market, Birkin says this doesn’t make sense.

“People are still talking about 60%-70% being illegal,” Birkin declares. “You’ve doubled the size of the legal market, so the illegal market has therefore doubled since January as well?

“It’s just not true or possible. And that would put the total market size at $20 billion, which again is just not true.”

The threat of new restrictions in Brazil

Less than eight months have passed since regulation started, yet already the sector is facing additional regulatory pressure.

A preliminary tax rise on operators’ GGR from 12% to 18% is awaiting a Congressional vote on whether it will be made permanent. Meanwhile new ad restrictions such as watersheds are also seemingly on the way.

While some in the industry have fought those new measures by arguing they will only serve to boost the illegal market, Birkin believes that this point is falling on deaf ears with the government.

“In Brazil, the government doesn’t really care about the legal or illegal market or the split, they just see gambling as a huge social problem,” Birkin explains. “They just sit and go, ‘People are spending too much, we need to crack down on it’.

“Someone told me when the data came out the legal market had hit BRL3 billion in a month, there was a lot of people saying in the news, ‘Wow, that’s a big number that’s just got out of control’.

“It then goes to BRL4 billion in April, and then at that point you say 60% of the market’s illegal. Guess what? You’re saying that’s a BRL10 billion market size in April.

“Now you think the right narrative to protect you and not have them clamp down on your advertising and what people can play is to claim that it’s BRL10 billion? That is just stupid, especially when there is zero evidence.”

Cautionary tale in the Netherlands 

Birkin argues the exaggeration of the illegal gambling market in Brazil could backfire, misleading policymakers into thinking the overall sector is far larger than it is and therefore more harmful to the Brazilian population.

This ultimately could lead to more, rather than fewer, restrictions being imposed on the regulated industry.

Birkin observed a similar situation in the Netherlands, where heavy advertising after the legal online market launched in October 2021 quickly grew the market, but also concerns over gambling harms.

In response to those rising fears, the Netherlands has taken a hardline stance, curbing advertising and introducing higher taxes and deposit limits for players.

H2 now estimates illegal operators account for around 50% of the Dutch market.

“The same thing happened in the Netherlands,” Birkin adds. “There’s a new market, everyone just advertised too much, the market grew, people thought it was too much advertising and they shut it down and put spend limits in. And yeah, the market’s screwed.  

“I think the same thing is going to happen in Brazil, and it’s not as if this story hasn’t happened over and over again elsewhere.”  

Birkin: Brazil licensed industry must take responsibility

Birkin concludes by claiming if the new regulatory measures are implemented in Brazil, licensed operators will be partly at fault.

The top-heavy nature of the Brazil market means if you take the top 19 brands out of the equation, H2 estimates the remaining sites hold an average market share of approximately 0.1% each.

“I think people need to stop blaming the illegal market when it’s because they’re not performing themselves in the legal market,” Birkin says. “They’re not seeing the revenues that they were wanting.

“As an industry, if you get behind this falsehood talk of the illegal market is bigger than the legal market, then it’s just going to lead to more restrictions on the legal market.

“And actually, I think the industry, they won’t like it, but they will have to take some responsibility for that.”