A 2026 Casino Legislation Guide For UK Players
You may also contact them to seek independent advice about data protection, privacy and data sharing. If you believe that your personal data has been misused or mishandled, you may make a complaint to the Information Commissioner, who is an independent regulator. If you’re unhappy with the way we have handled your personal data and want to make a complaint, please write to the department’s Data Protection Officer using the details above.
Although millions of people gamble safely every single day, the evidence shows that there is a significantly higher problem gambling rate for online slot games. The evidence also points to a stronger link between gambling related harm and suicide among young adults. To counter the increased risk of significant harm and life-changing losses from online slot games, the Government will introduce a £5 stake limit for adults aged 25 and over.
For bingo halls, based on a sample of approximately 60 percent of the market, it is estimated that the number of Category C and D cabinets in these venues will decrease by over 1,800. We received projections on the impacts of 50/50 for industry under the proposal outlined in Option 1. If it appears evident that the ‘available for use’ guidance is not working as intended following changes to the current regulatory framework, we will consider bringing forward secondary legislation to more directly deliver the intended machine mix. For example, numbers provided by the Bingo Association show that the number of bingo premises that offer mainstage bingo declined from 335 at the end of 2018 to 272 in March 2023. Challenges caused by rising energy costs are in addition to the longer-term commercial challenges faced by industry, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ipsos MORI’s research on the impact of gambling marketing on children (aged 11 to 17) and young adults (aged 18 to 24) found that sport was one of the major channels through which children are likely to be exposed to such marketing. Children’s exposure to gambling marketing through sport sponsorship is identified as a particular area of concern in other research. Seeing sponsorships (15%) was less influential than having or hearing about a big win (28% and 27% respectively), or seeing advertising or direct marketing (both 19%) and similar to hearing about other people’s negative experiences with gambling (14%). The Gambling Commission’s consumer journey research calculated percentage impact scores (prevalence x encouragement) for different factors that affect gambling. Inclusion in the IGRG Code will help ensure all operators abide by the commitment as it has ordinary code status and compliance can be considered in regulatory action by the Gambling Commission.
Domestic licensed versus offshore operators
Common ADR providers used by UK casinos include eCOGRA, IBAS (Independent Betting Adjudication Service), and the Gambling Commission’s own ADR scheme. All games offered by UKGC-licensed casinos must be independently tested to ensure fairness. We recommend choosing casinos that offer medium or high protection.
Gaming machines
It Is the only form of sports betting not regulated by the UKGC. The Financial Conduct Authority is tasked with regulating spread betting. It is also possible for smaller lotteries to be held without a licence, but these still require registration with the local authority in place. The National Lottery is regulated by the UK Gambling Commission, but there are different legislative components applicable to licensing.
The legal age for lottery is different than other gambling forms. No one under the age of 18 is allowed entry into a brick-and-mortar casino. Casinos – There are multiple brick-and-mortar casino establishments in the United Kingdom offering varied games like baccarat, blackjack, poker and more. While bingo is considered more of a game of leisure and chance, it is still popular amongst online gamblers.
Opposition tended to come from those who are opposed to any increase in supply of gambling opportunities in land-based premises, while the industry was expectedly supportive. An identical proportion of respondents thought sports betting should be permitted as shouldn’t be permitted in land-based casinos, with a small number selecting ‘I don’t know’. As referenced in our response to the ‘Gaming machine allowance for 1968 Act casinos’ section, we acknowledge concerns from stakeholders about the necessity of a table gaming area requirement given the sliding scale includes a specified number of tables. These products do not count as gaming machines, but neither do they provide any of the benefits of a multiplayer table in contributing to a balanced mix or affording opportunities for social interaction.
- To ensure a proportionate and evidence-based balance is satisfied, we are seeking views from a range of interested stakeholders to inform the strengths and risks of each option.
- In a market where the largest companies account for a large proportion of gambling, the Commission will also explore options for an enhanced account-based compliance approach that will include dedicated team members assigned to the largest operators on a permanent basis.
- Industry submissions put forward a range of proposals for changes to the rules that could allow the sector to develop and thus support the Review’s objective of ensuring the regulatory landscape for land-based gambling reflected changes since 2005.
- While the history of the voluntary funding system and the existence of the levy power mean research, education and treatment for gambling are often considered together, the issues are in fact often distinct.
- We also consider that allowing a smaller increase in machines where this is proportionate to overall size and non-gambling space (a sliding scale) would also be appropriate, and allow a proportionate increase for smaller casinos whilst maintaining a balanced offer of gaming products.
The impact of online financial risk checks (to be implemented by the Gambling Commission) are explored in detail in Annex A to this white paper. The researchers conclude that young people and young adults experiencing problem gambling should be considered at risk for suicidality. Evidence from people with personal experience of gambling harm highlighted that this may make individuals more susceptible to developing a gambling disorder.
Evidence from the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that young adults can be particularly vulnerable to gambling related harm, with under 25s having the highest average problem gambling score of any age group. We also know that young adults can be more vulnerable when it comes to gambling related harms, which is why we committed to addressing both of these issues in our white paper. This age group has the highest average problem gambling score of any group, as well as lower disposable income, ongoing neurological development impacting risk perception and common life stage factors like managing money for the first time. The same survey revealed 31% of British punters had placed bets on unregulated betting platforms, including prediction markets platforms like Polymarket. To fully comply with this provision, operators are required to refrain from placing ads that promote betting on websites that target children. The industry recruits staff to target VIPs and get them to spend more, to contact VIPs who have not gambled for some time and get them to restart gambling, to identify less serious gamblers who could become VIPs and get them to gamble more.
The Gambling Commission has clear rules for operators relating to marketing activities, including the promotion of sponsorship arrangements, which it will continue to enforce. Operators to cover costs of education for sportspeople and staff on gambling-related harm from an independent provider. In particular, we envisage that separate measures will apply to horse racing and greyhound racing due to the specific and long-established nature of the sectors’ relationships with gambling operators. As shown in Figure 12 below, gambling sponsors contribute around £45 million per year across the EFL’s three leagues (including Sky Bet’s title sponsorship).
As the premier gambling law, it dictates the protocols for casinos, poker, sports betting, pools, lottery betting, etc. We have also considered a broad range of academic and other literature on gambling harm and gambling harm prevention, including material produced in other jurisdictions, and publications since the call for evidence period. In addition to the direct impact on the levy of a reduction in betting industry GGY, we have also assumed that there may be an impact on racing’s income from gambling sponsorship and media rights, as operators’ income is reduced. The horserace betting levy is paid by bookmakers based on 10% of GGY from customers in Great Britain, betting on races in Great Britain, whether online or in betting shops. A number of submissions to our call for evidence highlighted the relationship between horse racing and gambling, including the importance of the horserace betting levy for maintaining the sport.
This suggests that, had the operator assessed the customer’s financial circumstances earlier and more effectively, they could have acted to reduce the extent of financial harm suffered. In a similar compliance case study identified by the Commission, a customer lost approximately £33,000 in three months without the operator carrying out any financial risk assessment. As such, the rate and level of spending would have been unaffordable for the vast majority of UK households, and likely to indicate harm. In a case which recently led to compliance activity by the Gambling Commission, a customer lost £36,000 in four days without appropriate financial risk assessment being carried out.
Some respondents also made the case that operator advertising might mitigate harm overall, by helping consumers distinguish between licensed and black market operators. Overall, the call for evidence submissions showed a lack of conclusive evidence on the relationship between advertising and harm. Many responses focused on the impact of advertising on children and young adults and those who have experienced gambling harm. There were also specific concerns around the links between sports and gambling, and the use of ‘loyalty’ rewards in a sector with a known addiction risk.
The government’s position is to proceed with the introduction of an age limit on ‘cash-out’ Category D slot-style machines. The vast majority of respondents (96%) stated that the government should introduce an age limit on ‘cash-out’ Category D slot-style machines of 18 and over. This chapter of the consultation received 46 responses, mainly from licensing authorities and industry. The consultation asked the following questions on ‘cash-out’ Category D slot-style machines.
Such measures balance sector growth with social responsibility, ensuring a sustainable industry future. He advocates modernizing operations by integrating sports betting and expanding electronic payments. Industry leaders and regulators have laid a roadmap for the UK casino sector’s future, emphasizing pivotal changes.
Should there be a minimum transaction time for customers making a cashless transaction on a gaming machine? As part of the process of allowing players to make debit card transactions by turning away from the gaming table at casinos, the sector committed to an approach of 30 seconds of visual separation in ensuring a break in play before accessing additional funds. Moreover, the current framework does not solve the issue that unless customers actively plan to bring cash to a pub for use on a gaming machine, then they are unlikely to use one. Bacta highlighted that pubs no longer give cashback and ATMs have all but disappeared from pubs, making it more difficult for customers to access cash to use on machines.
In the Netherlands, gambling legislation requires that all online operators pay an annual levy (which was increased in October 2021), a fixed percentage of which supports the Addiction Prevention Fund. Beside the main funding given to GambleAware, some other industry contributions under this licence condition go directly to other bodies which the Gambling Commission recognises as suitable recipients for the purposes of this licence requirement on operators. The report recommended that a review of the current fee model be carried out, including looking at the way that licence fees could be used to create financial incentives on operators to raise standards.
In order to limit the facility to offer credit to overseas customers, we propose to remove the prohibition only in respect of customers not resident in the UK. However, in one casino it accounts for around 48% of overall money exchanged for chips within the venue in a typical year. No workable alternatives have been identified despite government and operators having been in discussion on this issue since the withdrawal of cheques was first mooted by the banking sector in 2017.
The Gambling Act 2005 provides for a range of licences to be granted to both non-remote (i.e., land-based) as well as remote businesses. On 8 December 2020, the UK Government announced a long-awaited review of British gambling laws and a call for evidence to inform the potential extent of changes required to the Gambling Act 2005 in order to make the non gamestop casino legislative framework “fit for the ‘digital age’”. Gambling operators are subject to the advertising regulations of the UK Advertising Standards Authority and the industry of the British “Industry Group for Responsible Gambling”.
If this approach does not deliver as we expect or shortcomings emerge regarding the ombudsman’s remit, powers or relationship with industry, we will legislate to create a statutory ombudsman. The Gambling Commission can and does take account of trends in complaints and the intelligence they provide when deciding where to target regulatory work, but even if an investigation into an operator finds social responsibility failings, the Commission cannot require it to refund money to customers. Increased access to operator data for detailed and diverse analyses will be an important part of efforts to develop nuanced understandings of the sector as a whole, operator practices and consumer behaviour.
Respondents in favour of sports betting pointed to evidence of casino customers placing sports bets via mobile devices while in casinos, with casinos being an environment in which people habitually watch sport. Very few responses were received by operators who hold more than one premises licence at the same location, but the majority of these indicated that they would not look to take up the maximum entitlement of 80 machines per licence were it to be an option. When asked about the likely impact of the proposed changes, if a new regime were to take effect with the proposed new maximum of 80 gaming machines, the majority of operators (88%) stated they would look to move onto this regime. These respondents also suggested that increasing the availability of gaming machines will not make customers more likely to take breaks, due to the prospect of other customers taking over their machine and claiming their ‘perceived winnings’.
Comments are closed