Gambling regulation and the General Data Protection Regulation GDPR
To support our consideration of this issue, the Gambling Commission issued a data request to industry in April 2021 to understand real world play with online slots. Where industry respondents recognised that stake limits could help reduce harm, some argued these should be a tailored intervention, based on an individual’s circumstances, while others reported having already implemented universal limits. One operator pointed out that 41% of its customers that were flagged by its algorithm as at higher risk of suffering harm had an average slots stake of less than £0.25. Given this evidence of particular risk, there was significant discussion in responses to our call for evidence on the case for a stake limit on online slots.
To enforce this requirement, each entrance to a casino must be staffed by a door supervisor. Because one of the main objectives of the Gambling Act 2005 is to protect children from gambling, the Commission has implemented a range of measures to prevent underage play. The Commission has published the rules for the most popular titles, including roulette, three-card poker, blackjack, punto banco, and dice games. Among these, operating licenses are the most important for the casino sector. Casino games are described as “games of chance“, which are distinct from equal chance gaming.
Several operators submitted information on their current approaches to preventing unaffordable gambling, which often already involved some form of financial vulnerability (FV) and enhanced checks (albeit triggered at different thresholds). Also, while PoP research is based on a large sample (around 139,000 accounts), the fact that it comes from 7 ‘high impact’ operators means that it will not perfectly represent the sector as a whole. We build on this research to model volumes of different types of gambling at different levels and then multiply these to reflect the entire size of the Great Britain online gambling market. While key details will be determined through a forthcoming Gambling Commission consultation, our proposal for financial risk checks (Section 1.2 above) is likely to have a significant impact on online GGY. Impacts and costs are baselined in 2022, as this is the most recent available full year gambling GGY dataset. The estimated range depends on factors such as compliance with and findings from financial risk checks, as well as behavioural responses to various reforms where we currently have limited data available.
Generally, gambling licences are either “remote” or “non-remote”. From 31 October 2025 all gambling businesses must prompt their customers to set a financial limit before they make their first deposit and make it easy to review and alter this limit at any point after. New rules will give consumers more effective ways to manage their gambling by making it easier to set and maintain deposit limits on their online accounts, in ways that work best for them. The licences come with certain conditions designed to protect gamblers including clearly displaying the odds and return to player percentage (RTP) of each game. AGCs and FECs require gambling licences from the Gambling Commission while UFECs only require a local permit. There are also rules around where bricks and mortar casinos can be located and what kinds of casino games they’re allowed to offer.
As the Commission has set out, experience has shown that such applicants are normally unable to provide complete and satisfactory evidence to answer the questions used to determine applications, including those to assess whether criminal activity has been a source of funds. Similar issues have been raised by the Commission in relation to operating licence applicants seeking to use cryptoassets as evidence of source of funds. The volatility of cryptoasset prices may also impede safer gambling measures, including setting financial limits and identifying unaffordable gambling, and can effectively create a double unknown where the theoretical value of the stake fluctuates alongside the actual bet. Operators must declare to the Commission any changes to the payment options (including cryptoassets) through which they accept deposits and provide assurance this would not pose any risks to compliance. This will include further reinforcement on the due diligence checks necessary to mitigate risks to the licensing objectives. To ensure all licensees fully understand their responsibilities when entering into such arrangements, the Gambling Commission will consolidate existing information and good practice for operators on contracting with third parties, including white labels.
Call for evidence respondents provided a number of proposals for how the uptake of these tools could be increased in Great Britain. This has been supported by research by the Australian government Behavioural Economics team which found proactive sharing of activity statements, presented in a user-friendly format, could help customers spend less. A study of Norwegian gamblers found 34% accessed an activity statement when notified it was available, while another study found as few as 10% of Australian gamblers had done so (although they are not consistently available on Australian gambling platforms). Similarly, when presented with a free text box which encouraged reflection, the average deposit limit set by customers fell by 46%. For example, financial limits are the most widely used tool but can be set at levels which are clearly far beyond the means of most gamblers and therefore unlikely to mitigate harm. We have conducted our own estimate, and project that a universal limit set at £8.50 (as the midpoint in our consultation) would reduce online slots GGY by between £135 million and £185 million.
Visitors of SuperCasinoSites should keep in mind gambling can be highly addictive and as such, should always be approached responsibly and with due measure. According to UKGC research, roughly 22% of online gamblers who use credit cards can be classified as problem gamblers. They cannot promise guaranteed winnings or suggest that gambling can solve financial or personal problems. For example, gambling ads may not target children or young people under 18. It is a self-regulatory body, meaning its operations are funded not by the government but by a voluntary industry levy.
- Once published, CIAs place some of the ongoing analytical burden on the applicant, as the operator has the option to demonstrate that its proposals will not increase harm in a particular area.
- We have taken into account that these machines currently account for approximately two thirds of Category D slot style machines.
- Responses from some campaign groups, Parliamentarians and academics strongly disagreed and said that the industry was exaggerating the size of the illegal market in order to deter the government from imposing tighter restrictions on the licensed gambling sector.
- We want all licensed operators to provide access to the ombudsman to ensure all customers are protected equally.
- The 59 licensed racecourses in Great Britain require a Track Betting Premises Licence from their licensing authority, with the four racecourses which offer their own betting operation also requiring an operating licence.
This is outlined in Gambling Commission licence conditions, and the broader requirements under the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) and UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) — both enforced by the ICO. To reduce the potential risks of bonus offers, the Gambling Commission will consult further on appropriate action, considering issues such as maximum caps on wagering requirements and minimum time limits before offers expire. However, re-wagering requirements are still often set at high thresholds — for example, a bonus of £10 with a 50x wagering requirement requires the customer to bet £500, and the funds, including any winnings, can often expire after a given time limit — often as brief as seven days. Operators told us such schemes in land-based venues are important because they improve the customer experience which is inherent to their business model. These are typically low value, using loyalty schemes with no personalised account management; for instance, ‘Best Odds Guaranteed’, ‘Acca Boost’ or ‘Fail to Finish’ promotions which allow customers to get money back if a horse fails to finish. In bingo and adult gaming centres, promotions generally consist of small scale incentives/ rewards such as introductory offers for new products, free teas and coffees, or free games.
However, even when accounting for device type (i.e. cabinet, in-fill or tablet), the responses suggest that Category C and D gaming machines generate less GGY than Category B machines. For example, one large arcade operator projected a 20% increase in the number of Category B gaming machines under Option 1, which corresponded to a projected medium increase in GGY. Industry responses suggested that the projected uplift in GGY under Options 1 and 3, and conversely, the decrease or no impact in GGY under Option 2, corresponds directly with the ability to site Category B gaming machines.
Original consultation
We will work with the relevant trade bodies and operators to understand the feasibility of this proposal and the frequency of any reporting to DCMS. We also propose that industry fund, conduct, and, crucially, report on the outcomes of voluntary test purchasing to DCMS. In addition, operating costs have risen significantly over this period, especially as a result of rising energy costs, which have increased by over 225% for some operators. This is in addition to improvements in monitoring and staff supervision of customers. The characteristics of land-based products have substantially improved since the introduction of the Gambling Act 2005.
The Gambling Commission’s survey also found that 2% of 11 to 16-year-olds spent their own money betting on eSports, 1% on National Lottery online instant win games, betting on a website or apps, or casino games online and less than 1% spending money on online bingo. A refined set of questions on harms have been piloted as part of the Gambling Commission’s work to develop a new approach for collecting data on gambling participation and the prevalence of problem gambling. The Gambling Commission continues to work to ensure there is strong research and evidence around the vulnerability of children and young adults in respect to gambling-related harm. We challenge on-course bookmakers and alcohol licensed premises, which both have low test purchasing pass rates for underage gambling, to urgently improve age verification measures, including by obtaining commercial verification of increased pass rates. We will challenge those operators who still allow 16 and 17-year-olds to access their products to follow suit so that there is no online or widely and easily accessible scratchcard gambling for under 18s.
In updating this ratio, we intend to amend the definition of “gaming table” for the purposes of section 172(3) to (5) of the Gambling Act 2005 so that only tables where the apparatus is controlled or operated by casino staff count for the purposes of the ratio. These respondents would prefer to see table games as the most common activity under a casino licence, highlighting that table games are more likely to lead to breaks in play. We will give further consideration to these casinos having the option of reverting back to the existing (current) regime, as this will be a decision unavailable to 2005 Act Small casinos. In making this proposal we acknowledge some concerns from industry stakeholders about the necessity of a table gaming area requirement.
Figure 6: Discretionary income per calendar month, across different age groups
Without greater control for consumers, the negative impacts range from nuisance to casual players to exacerbating harm for those struggling with their gambling, who feel ‘bombarded’ by calls to action from operators. Considering the inherent risks of gambling, we believe there is a case to ensure that operators present bonuses in the most transparent language possible. Responses to our call for evidence which called for restrictions on bonuses were chiefly concerned by the risks posed by online casinos not on gamestop bonusing and schemes. For high-end casinos, rewards can take the form of personal concierge services, including dinners, hospitality and events. To prevent individuals showing strong indicators of harm from being encouraged to gamble, the Gambling Commission recently published new requirements on customer interaction which require operators to prevent these customers from receiving any direct marketing or taking up new bonus offers. Measures to drive future research, including greater use of industry data, are outlined at Section 3.5.
Having worked closely with the Gambling Commission, we consider it necessary to put new obligations on operators to conduct checks to understand if a customer’s gambling is likely to be unaffordable and harmful. Operators are already required to identify customers at risk of harm and take action, but there have been too many cases of interventions coming too late, or in some cases not at all. We will also develop independent messaging that raises awareness of the risks of gambling harm while helping to remove the fear of stigma that stops people coming forward for help. At the heart of the new regime are tougher affordability checks, a mandatory 1 per cent levy on operators to bankroll harm research and treatment, and sharper design limits for online slot games. In January 2020, the Gambling Commission approved several organisations for these compulsory funding contributions, ensuring that operators direct their financial support to recognised entities working to mitigate gambling harms. The UK Gambling Commission requires operators to contribute financially to organisations focused on research, prevention, and treatment of gambling-related harm.
It requires remote gambling operators selling into the British market, whether based here or abroad, to hold a Commission licence to enable them to transact with British consumers. All online casinos must also display the net spend, essentially the profit/loss for the player, and the time they’ve spent gambling. In gambling circles, it has been predicted that 2025 will be a ‘heavy enforcement’ year for online casinos, so they need to be on their best behaviour. We have been provided with a number of scenarios in respect of which industry has expressed concern that GDPR will prevent them from processing personal data needed to comply with licence conditions and further the licensing objectives. In fact, the UKGC now analyses and assesses everything from random number generators, to the way online casinos hold player funds, to ensure that players won’t ever fall foul of rogue operators. These limits apply to all online slots at UKGC-licensed casinos and are designed to reduce the risk of significant losses from high-speed games.
Its goal is to reduce the prevalence of problem gambling, particularly among those who play online. GAMSTOP is a free service for all residents of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, allowing them to register online and exclude themselves from all UK gambling sites for at least six months. The remote gambling software license is mandatory for all companies that manufacture, supply, adapt, or install gaming software on the websites of UKGC licensees.
The Commission’s ambitious change to its enforcement approach, coupled with amendments to its investigatory powers, will ensure that it is in a strong position to be able to monitor the industry and take action against operators who fail to meet the required standards. There are currently no products which are regulated both by the Commission and FCA but two operators are separately regulated by both organisations because they offer both spread betting and fixed odds betting products. Due to a range of factors, including the impact of COVID-19 and the suspension of football in March 2020, Football Index collapsed in March 2021 and its licence was suspended.
There is ongoing work in the sector to develop ways to ensure cashless gambling has safer gambling controls, which we explore further below. The legislation also requires ATMs to be positioned so that any customer who wishes to use them must stop gambling in order to do so. Cash-only gambling was assumed to give players more control over their play by providing natural interruptions in play to obtain more cash, helping players play within budget limits. We would need to do further work to ensure that robust player protections were in place to mitigate any harms, particularly taking into account the issues raised by the Gambling Commission about appropriate legislative safeguards on stake and prize levels, game speeds and the ability to set technical standards. Operators would like to be able to adapt their existing terminals to offer a wider variety of electronic casino games, using RNG technology. Casinos may use electronic terminals to offer games which are based on real events but only games based on the spin of a roulette wheel are currently available.
We will also permit a smaller increase in machines for venues that do not meet the size requirements, proportionate to their overall size and non-gambling area. The land-based gambling sector, unlike the online gambling sector, has faced significant challenges in recent years as a result of business inactivity during periods of COVID-19 restrictions. However, we recognise that a minority of customers do experience gambling-related harm and that it is necessary to have safeguards in place to protect customers.
The industry argued this would prevent a scenario in which two casino venues of different sizes, located close to each other, could have vastly different gaming machines allowances. The ratio of machines to tables in 2005 Act Small casinos has forced operators to provide redundant tables which, alongside the locations to which the licences were allocated in 2007, has contributed to making them commercially unattractive for development. We received a cross-industry submission from the Cashless Group, made up of casino, adult gaming centre and bingo sector operators and trade bodies, in response to Question 40 on harms and benefits of cashless gambling. A central premise of the Gambling Act 2005 was to regulate gambling and manage gambling-related risks through controls which included restricting the number and location of gambling products, in particular gaming machines.
UK Gambling Laws 2026: The Complete Player Guide
In the meantime, we welcome steps by some online platforms to empower individuals to ‘opt out’ of gambling advertising. The Commission will continue to closely monitor practices around online VIP schemes to make sure they are not used to exploit at-risk gamblers. There is good evidence that it can have a disproportionate impact on those who are already experiencing problems with their gambling. Where prize draws are not subject to regulation, we have limited information on the size of the market and the scale of possible gambling-related harm. Government is clear that cryptoassets must not become a vehicle for lower standards in the licensed gambling sector, either in terms of harm prevention or regulatory compliance.
However, all non-slot casino games are now subject to a mandatory 5-second minimum game cycle to prevent high-intensity, rapid-fire wagering. The statutory per-spin stake limits currently apply only to online slots. The £150 net deposit threshold (within a 30-day period) is the industry standard for “light-touch” checks. Most licensed sites will update your account limit automatically based on your verified date of birth.
