Compliance Updates
Our UKGC consultation response: Failing to protect the vulnerable should not be the White Paper’s legacy
The dust has settled and the process is complete. The consultation on the proposed changes outlined in the UK Gambling White Paper is closed so now we just have to wait and see. Whilst we do so, we thought that in the spirit of transparency, we would share our own thoughts, more or less as they were communicated in our consultation response to the UK Gambling Commision.
Offering a real-time customer risk profiling tool, ClearStake’s focus was obviously on affordability checks. But then, much of the industry’s attention has been on this topic over the last few months. This is, to our mind, the single most important challenge facing the sector. Addressing it in the right way, a way that protects both punters and operators, will be the key to a sustainable, profitable future.
And with that goal uppermost in our mind, here is what we said:
1. Affordability checks must use real financial data
Certainly at the levels of spend proposed as meriting more thorough checks (£1,000 in a day or £2,000 over the space of three months), we don’t believe there is any real substitute for real financial data, by which we mean bank data. There is simply no other way of establishing whether a player can afford to lose this amount of money or not. Everything else – including data from credit reference agencies – is guesswork. We believe that the single greatest mistake that could be made during this process is not solving the problem of financial harm caused by gambling. That won’t be an issue if the government requires decisions to be made by operators in possession of a proper financial picture of their customers.
2. We can solve two problems at once
The consultation focused on affordability checks, but it would be almost perverse to ignore the wider reality at play here. Operators also have to perform anti money-laundering and source-of-funds (SOF) checks on their customers, and they do so by looking at bank statements. Given this is the case, it makes a lot of sense to us to effectively combine both these requirements within a single check.
3. At higher spend levels, it makes sense to keep customers connected
There has been a lot of talk about how frequently checks should take place, or to put that another way, whether it should be necessary to go back to a customer within six months or a year if they have already passed a check. To us, this rather misses the opportunity presented by Open Banking in particular. After the first check, assuming the player allows it, any checks in future can be entirely frictionless. The connection can remain in place and used when necessary (and only when necessary!) in order to make the ongoing compliance relationship as smooth as possible. We don’t expect ongoing connection to be mandated, but it should certainly be held up as best practice for all concerned.
4. Some of the proposed data points make little sense
When a solution that takes guesswork out of the equation is available, does it really make sense to suggest that postcodes and job titles are meaningful ways to determine an individual’s financial situation? We don’t think so. We believe that continuing to ‘lean in’ to data like this gives a misleading impression that it is good enough. It isn’t. Even as part of a broader decision-making process, it is very difficult to see where some of these data points fit in. You could say the same, of course, about missed loan repayments from three years ago.
5. The solution exists – why cobble together a new one?
Hovering behind the entire consultation process appears to be a not-quite-defined ‘solution’ to the affordability challenge. This is apparent in the various hints towards the use of CATO data (let’s just say it, even if the Commission aren’t willing to) and a hodge-podge of random data points in order to make affordability decisions, as part of a system that would have to be piloted in order to ensure a) it works and b) it doesn’t create data security issues.
Leaving aside the absurdity of asking us to judge the merits of an approach that hasn’t actually been defined, we would simply point out that in Open Banking, a solution to this challenge already exists. One that is already used by over 7 million people in the UK, by most UK operators to handle payments, and already used to handle affordability and SOF checks by forward-thinking operators. Why on earth are we re-inventing the wheel?
So there you have it. That’s what we told the consultation, albeit in language a little less colourful. I hope they listen.
Compliance Updates
Labour MP Raises Questions Over Impact of UK Gambling Tax Hike on Gibraltar Economy
The House of Commons was reminded last week that the decisions it took could have “a huge impact” on Gibraltar, as a Labour MP warned that a planned increase to UK gaming taxes could “leave a huge hole” in the Rock’s economy.
Gareth Snell used a Commons debate on the Finance Bill to warn that changes to the UK’s remote gaming and remote betting duty could have a significant impact on Gibraltar’s public finances, and that higher costs in the regulated sector risked driving more gamblers into the black market.
Mr Snell tabled an amendment to the Bill requiring the UK Government to conduct an impact assessment on Gibraltar, whose economy he said was heavily reliant on the gaming and gambling sector.
Citing his discussions with Nigel Feetham, Gibraltar’s Minister for Trade, Industry and Justice, Mr Snell said the gaming accounts for 30% of Gibraltar’s GDP, employs 3500 people and generates one third of Gibraltar’s tax receipts.
He said companies with a footprint in Gibraltar pay Gibraltar corporation tax as well as levies in the UK and argued that changes to the UK duty structure could have an immediate effect on Gibraltar’s revenues because of the way the tax is applied.
“The minister will be acutely aware that the gaming and gambling sector in Gibraltar is a huge part of their economy,” he said, addressing Labour MP Dan Tomlinson, the Exchequer Secretary at the Treasury.
“So…anything that we do in this place that has an impact on the sector in Gibraltar will leave a huge hole in the Gibraltar economy which will have to be filled.”
Mr Snell also linked the issue to Gibraltar’s wider importance to the UK, saying tax decisions taken in Westminster could affect its ability to fund public services.
He said Gibraltar needed stability and called on the minister to set out what contact the Treasury had had with Gibraltar on the issue.
“Gibraltar is of strategic importance to us,” he said.
“It is part of the family of nations that make up who we are.”
“And decisions that we take in this Finance Bill are having a huge impact on their economy and on their ability to fund their public services and fund their defence.”
Alongside his comments on Gibraltar, Mr Snell devoted substantial attention to what he said were the risks of pushing consumers towards unregulated operators.
He tabled a separate amendment calling for an independent assessment of the impact of the duty changes on the black market, arguing that any effective response to gambling harm depended on keeping consumers inside the regulated sector.
He said the black market offered none of the protections available through licensed operators and warned that those using unregulated sites would be more exposed to harm.
“The more people we push into the black market, where there is no support, there is no gam care, there is no lockout system,” Mr Snell said.
“It means people are more at risk of harmful activity and being preyed upon by predatory organisations.”
“And companies that are outside of the UK do not pay taxes here and are simply not worried about the participants.”
He cited an independent study by Ernst and Young for the Betting and Gaming Council, which he said estimated that £6 billion worth of stakes could be diverted to the black market as a result of the changes.
He told the Commons this would amount to a 140% increase in stakes moving into unregulated channels.
“Now, the independent study done by Ernst and Young for the Betting and Gaming Council did come up that there is a potential for £6 billion worth of stakes to be diverted to black market as a result of this change,” Mr Snell said.
“That’s six billion pounds of stakes that were going to be made somewhere but will go into the black market.”
Mr Snell also said illicit operators were easily accessible and that money staked through those sites could be linked to criminal activity overseas.
“Every single one of us is no more than two clicks away from an unregulated gaming or gambling site, where, again, that money often goes into questionable activities overseas,” he said.
“Some of it is funding organised crime.”
Mr Snell said the Treasury had earmarked £26 million for the UK Gambling Commission as part of broader regulatory changes, but argued that the UK Government had not yet assessed whether that would be sufficient to address the scale of any shift to the black market.
He also said the Treasury had not given him an answer on when a post-implementation review might take place.
“To be honest, we just simply don’t know how big the impact is going to be,” he said.
“The assessment simply hasn’t been done by government to determine whether that £26 million is enough.”
In the debate, Mr Snell said his concern was not to revisit the principle of the tax changes themselves, but to secure an assessment of their unintended consequences for both Gibraltar and the black market.
Alex Ballinger, another Labour MP, took a different stance on the issues raised by Mr Snell, saying any impact on Gibraltar should be weighed against how operators fared in other jurisdictions with higher taxes than the UK.
“I think if the tax changes are going to be as economically damaging as claimed for Gibraltar, we do need to consider how it works in other jurisdictions, because there are often the same gambling organisations operating in other countries with much higher tax rates than the UK and they manage to survive profitably in those sectors,” he said.
“So I think we should take that into consideration when we’re looking at the impact on Gibraltar as well.”
As for concerns about pushing people to black market sites, he said the threat was “overblown” and other sectors such as the tobacco industry had employed a similar narrative in the past that later proved unfounded.
“And again, when we introduced the [gaming sector] point of consumption tax in 2014, again, there was no surge in unregulated or the black market gambling at that point either,” he added.
A study by the UK Gambling Commission in 2021 found only “a very small proportion” of UK gamblers ever used unlicensed sites, “and these were mostly by accident”.
Mr Ballinger welcomed investment to tackle harmful gambling.
“But I think we should not buy into the narrative that risks from the black market should stop us making changes that keep people safe from the most harmful forms of gambling,” he said.
Responding, Mr Tomlinson said he had met twice with Mr Feetham to discuss the impact of the changes on Gibraltar’s economy.
“I do understand there are significant impacts on the economy in Gibraltar and that is something that I hope to keep engaging on and discussing,” he said.
Mr Tomlinson was pressed by Mr Snell who asked whether he would give an assurance that there would be “no future surprises and no significant tax changes” that could impact Gibraltar negatively.
Mr Tomlinson declined “to write future budgets”, adding: “We have made a significant change when it comes to gambling taxation and rather than make further changes the Government will of course monitor to see the impact of that change.”
The Bill passed its third reading and the amendment on Gibraltar was not adopted.
The post Labour MP Raises Questions Over Impact of UK Gambling Tax Hike on Gibraltar Economy appeared first on Eastern European Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
Compliance Updates
Malta Gaming Authority Publishes its Supervisory Engagement Efforts for 2026
The Malta Gaming Authority has published its Supervisory Engagement Efforts for 2026, outlining the areas that will shape its regulatory oversight of the online gaming sector in the year ahead.
Building on the supervisory framework refined in 2025, the Authority will continue to apply a risk‑based, evidence‑led and outcomes‑focused approach. This enables the Authority to identify and assess regulatory risks more effectively, direct supervisory resources where they are most needed, and maintain a proactive and responsive regulatory environment.
For 2026, supervisory efforts are structured around three core regulatory themes: compliance, player protection and sports betting integrity. Within these pillars, the Authority has identified a number of targeted focus areas that reflect its ongoing risk assessment, supervisory observations and engagement with Authorised Persons.
Key supervisory priorities for 2026 include:
• a thematic review of internal control frameworks around the use of cash and cash equivalents within the online gaming industry;
• a thematic review of internal control frameworks around the use of crypto assets;
• focused integrity reviews relating to athletes betting on their own sport and integrity risks linked to esports markets; and
• enhanced oversight of player protection measures, including the quality and consistency of operator monthly ADR reporting.
Through these focused supervisory engagements, the Authority aims to strengthen regulatory standards, safeguard player interests and reinforce the long‑term resilience and integrity of the online gaming sector.
The post Malta Gaming Authority Publishes its Supervisory Engagement Efforts for 2026 appeared first on Eastern European Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
American online gambling
New Analysis Shows Majority of Online Gambling Operators Targeting U.S. Players are Unlicensed
According to Blask’s latest analysis of the U.S. iGaming landscape, 290 out of 362 operators active in the American online gambling ecosystem (approximately 80%) are offshore platforms operating outside domestic regulatory frameworks. The data highlights a structural reality of the U.S. market: while regulation has expanded significantly over the past decade, offshore operators still dominate the competitive landscape in terms of brand presence.
This dominance is not limited to the number of operators. It also translates into a substantial share of total market value. Blask estimates that the total U.S. online gambling market reached approximately $79.8B in Competitive Earning Baseline (CEB) in 2025. Of that total, only around $25.2B was captured by licensed domestic operators, while the majority flowed to offshore platforms.
In other words, roughly three quarters of the U.S. market value remains outside the regulated ecosystem, despite more than a decade of state-by-state legalization.
The persistence of offshore dominance is closely tied to the fragmented structure of U.S. gambling regulation. Several of the country’s largest markets still operate without any online gambling legalization, while many regulated states allow sports betting but not online casinos — creating structural gaps that offshore platforms continue to fill.
States that offer full online gambling regulation, including both sports betting and casino, show significantly lower offshore penetration. Markets such as New Jersey and Michigan capture roughly three quarters of their online gambling value domestically, demonstrating that comprehensive regulation can meaningfully increase channelization. However, no U.S. jurisdiction has fully eliminated offshore activity.
The post New Analysis Shows Majority of Online Gambling Operators Targeting U.S. Players are Unlicensed appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
-
Australia7 days agoRegulating the Game Global Awards: First-Ever Winners Announced
-
AGCO5 days agoCanada’s Ontario iGaming Market in 2026: Advertising Rules, Self-Exclusion and the Next Phase of Regulation
-
Asia7 days agoPG Soft revealed as Title Sponsor for Global Game Connect 2026
-
Asia5 days agoNODWIN Gaming joins forces with ICONiQ White to headline NH7 Weekender 2026 as Title Sponsor; to be ‘Powered By’ Mastercard
-
Eric Castro Head of Games Content Casino & Games at Paf Group6 days agoOctoplay Advances Global Expansion Strategy in Partnership with Paf
-
Bonus Cards6 days agoCasinoCanada.com introduces redesigned Bonus Cards
-
Belatra6 days agoBelatra celebrates 33rd anniversary at SiGMA South America
-
Arizona6 days agoBETER secures supplier licence in Arizona



