Compliance Updates
Anger in the Industry After the Swedish Gambling Authority’s Acquittal of Infiniza
Last Friday, Di wrote about how the Swedish Gambling Authority closed an investigation into the Malta-based casino operator Infiniza, whose online casino, according to the authority’s assessment, is not aimed at Swedes. This is after the company changed the payment operator, i.e. who manages the transfer of gambling money from bank accounts to the casino, and the criteria that determine whether someone directs gambling at Swedes are not considered fulfilled.
Actions Did The Trick For Infiniza
“In light of the measures Infiniza Limited has taken regarding the company’s marketing as well as the payment options and/or payment service providers that were the subject of the current supervisory case, the Swedish Gambling Inspectorate assesses that the company, based on what emerged in the case, ceased to provide gambling aimed at the Swedish market without necessary license”
From the Gambling Authority’s decision that Infiniza review ceases, 21/2 2024.
Gustaf Hoffstedt, general secretary of the licensed gambling operators’ association The Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (Bos), is upset.
“It is offensive, and endangers the entire safety and security of the Swedish gambling license system,” he told Di about the Spelinspektionen’s decision, which he read about “with dismay” in Di.
According to Gustaf Hoffstedt, who refers to web traffic statistics that Di has taken part in, Infiniza is one of Sweden’s largest players in online casinos.
“They are estimated to have a significant operation in Sweden, in fact a large part of it is intended to receive Swedish consumers. It is of course extremely profitable, as they do not pay any Swedish gambling tax.”
The Swedish Gambling Authority’s decision has been made after Infiniza’s casinos changed their payment provider to one based in Lithuania. In the past, the Swedish-registered payment services Finshark and Zimpler reviewed by Di have been used.
“That’s exactly how it goes: if someone shines a spotlight on the fact that payment intermediaries ‘blue’ are not okay, payment intermediaries become ‘red’, then ‘green’, then ‘purple’ – and it goes on forever.”
Gustaf Hoffstedt calls for stricter legislation similar to that in the Netherlands, where it is forbidden to even accept domestic players – whereby more people play with the licensed players.
“The basic problem is the scope of the Swedish law, that is to say that unlicensed gambling companies are not explicitly prohibited from passively accepting Swedish players, provided that the company does not target them,” he says.
For several years, BOS has addressed the problem to both governments, investigators and the Gambling Authority and called for the Netherlands’ example to be followed, with the criminalization of passively accepting and enabling Swedish players.
However, the organization has cut stone in stone, and has not received a hearing for its proposal.
“The government does not want this. It claims that the channelization (the percentage of licensed gamblers, Di’s note) is good in Sweden, which unfortunately is not true, that the gambling market is stable, which is also not true, and that this is not a path that Sweden should follow.”
Marcus Aronsson, investigator at Spelinspektionen, told Di that the decision from last Friday only concerns Infiniza’s use of Zimpler, and that the just concluded case was already started in 2021.
He cannot comment on whether the payment company or companies used thereon means that Infiniza can be considered to target Swedes, nor whether a new review of the operator has been initiated after the Zimpler case.
In the decision, however, it is explicitly mentioned that the Swedish Gambling Authority can initiate a new supervisory case if Infiniza can again be considered to target the Swedish market without the necessary license.
Bagley-Keene Act
California Gambling Control Commission Issues Critical Guidance on Stakeholder Communications and Ex Parte Rules
The California Gambling Control Commission (CGCC) has released a comprehensive new guide for stakeholders, outlining essential best practices for contacting the Commission and strictly warning against the legal pitfalls of “ex parte” communications.
As part of its ongoing commitment to transparency and its 2026 Strategic Plan, the Commission aims to streamline interactions while ensuring that all regulatory decisions are made on a complete, fair, and public record.
Navigating the Commission: Who to Contact
To ensure inquiries are handled efficiently, the Commission has identified key points of contact for various industry matters:
-
Licensing & Approvals: For general licensing matters, stakeholders should contact Brian Gilleland, Deputy Director of the Licensing Division, at
[email protected]. -
Regulations & Legislation: Inquiries regarding laws or pending regulations should be directed to Nicole Learned, Deputy Director of Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, at
[email protected]. -
Evidentiary Hearings: For GCA hearing matters, contact the Presiding Officer noted in your hearing notice, or Administrative Hearings Coordinator Pam Mathauser at
[email protected]. -
Executive Leadership: All other high-level matters should be sent to Executive Director Lisa Wardall at
[email protected].
The Danger of “Ex Parte” Communications
A central focus of the new guidance is the strict prohibition of ex parte communications—any communication regarding the merits of a pending application or request made without proper notice to all involved parties.
To comply with state rules, stakeholders must include Commission staff, Bureau staff, and the Applicant (or their designated agent) on all correspondence.
Crucial Warning: Stakeholders are strictly forbidden from sending communications of any kind directly to Commissioners regarding applications or pending decisions.
Why Compliance is Mandatory
The Commission warns that ex parte violations are not merely procedural errors; they pose a direct threat to the integrity of the gambling industry’s governance. Decisions made on incomplete or “private” information can lead to:
-
Application Denial: The Commissioners have the authority to deny an application or approval solely based on a prohibited communication.
-
Legal Reversals: Violations may breach the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, potentially allowing opposing parties to overturn a decision that was previously taken in your favor.
-
Governance Risk: Transparency ensures that all parties—including the Bureau of Gambling Control—have access to the same record of information before a vote is cast.
“Transparency is a core tenet of good governance,” the Commission stated in the guidance. “Ex parte rules guarantee that all matters taken up by the Commission are conducted in a fair and transparent manner.”
The post California Gambling Control Commission Issues Critical Guidance on Stakeholder Communications and Ex Parte Rules appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Compliance Updates
BGC Response to Government Plans to Stop Premier League Clubs Accepting Sponsorship from Gambling Operators Not Holding a UK Licence
The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) strongly supports government plans to ban Premier League clubs from accepting sponsorships from gambling operators lacking a UK licence.
A Betting and Gaming Council Spokesperson said: “The Betting and Gaming Council welcomes the Government’s plan to act to stop Premier League clubs accepting sponsorship from gambling operators that do not hold a UK licence.
“Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy is right that gambling companies without a UK licence should be banned from sponsoring Premier League clubs and should go further to prevent these harmful illegal companies from sponsoring any sport in the UK.
“At a time when the regulated sector is facing significantly higher taxation and ever tighter regulation while reducing advertising spend, it is more important than ever that firm action is taken against the growing harmful black market.
“Licensed members of the Betting and Gaming Council are regulated in Britain and follow strict rules on consumer protection, safer gambling and robust financial safeguards. Whereas, the illegal, harmful black market operators do not. They undermine player protections, avoid taxes, ignore safer gambling standards and put consumers at serious risk.
“We support action that protects fans, upholds standards and keeps customers safe within the regulated market.”
The post BGC Response to Government Plans to Stop Premier League Clubs Accepting Sponsorship from Gambling Operators Not Holding a UK Licence appeared first on Eastern European Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
Australia
Tabcorp Pays $158,400 Penalty for Taking Illegal In-Play Sports Bets
Tabcorp Holdings Limited (Tabcorp) has paid a $158,400 penalty for taking online in-play sports bets, which is illegal in Australia.
An Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) investigation found Tabcorp accepted 426 in-play bets across 32 tennis matches between February 2024 and June 2025.
Online in-play betting, wagers made on a sporting event after it has commenced, is prohibited in Australia under the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (IGA).
The online in-play sports bets that were accepted in breach of the IGA were voided by Tabcorp and the bets were refunded.
The ACMA accepted the evidence from Tabcorp that the breaches occurred due to systems and communication issues with its third-party provider.
ACMA member Carolyn Lidgerwood said this is the third time since 2021 that Tabcorp has breached the in-play betting rules.
“The law is clear and wagering services must have processes in place to prevent illegal in-play bets from being accepted,” Ms Lidgerwood said.
“While we understand that most wagering operators rely on third-party providers to close betting on sporting events, they cannot outsource their legal responsibilities.
“The length of time it took Tabcorp to identify and then fix the problem was concerning and we expect Tabcorp to do better in the future,” Ms Lidgerwood said.
In addition to the financial penalty, Tabcorp has entered into a comprehensive enforceable undertaking requiring the company to undertake a review of its systems and processes relating to the closing of betting on tennis matches and to report regularly to the ACMA.
The post Tabcorp Pays $158,400 Penalty for Taking Illegal In-Play Sports Bets appeared first on Eastern European Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
-
Blueprint Gaming6 days agoBlueprint Gaming unleashes Frankenstein’s Fortune blending dynamic modifiers with multi-path bonus offering
-
Compliance Updates6 days agoMGA Publishes Results of Thematic Review on Self-exclusion Practices in Online Gaming Sector
-
Latest News5 days agoGGBET UA hosts Media Game – an open FC Dynamo Kyiv training session with journalists from sports publications
-
Amusnet6 days agoAmusnet Unveils Casino Engineering and Technology Milestones Achieved in 2025
-
Dan Brown6 days agoGames Global and Foxium return to the Colosseum in Rome Fight for Gold the Tiger’s Rage™
-
Bragg Gaming Group6 days agoBragg Gaming Group Partners with StarGames
-
Asia5 days agoBooks on Wheels: DigiPlus Foundation Brings Mobile Library to Boost Literacy Among Aurora’s Young Learners
-
3 Oaks Gaming6 days ago3 Oaks Gaming unleashes the power of the wild with 4 Wolf Drums: Hold and Win



