High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age

As per the name of the act, a UKGC licence grants the operator advertising access to UK consumers. British gambling laws, or “law” in this case, echo the standard set by multiple other countries in that there is one presiding statute. The GA 2005 also established the frameworks for licensing and regulation. The Gambling Act 2005 – The Gambling Act 2005 is the standard benchmark for legal gambling in the United Kingdom. You will find coverage on the multiple laws and their effect on the market, the regulatory agencies working behind the scenes, a history of legal gambling in the UK, specifically England.

“stake” means to pay or risk an amount in connection with an online slots game. (3) Where this condition is attached to a remote casino operating licence which was issued before this regulation comes into force, the condition has effect from the date on which this regulation comes into force. As the response and the SI set out, the stake limits are for online slots only and do not apply to other casino games, such as roulette or blackjack. The SI has the effect of adding a new condition to all remote casino operating licences. We are responsible for issuing personal gambling licences for individuals and gambling operating licences for businesses operating in Great Britain.

This indicates that unless customers actively plan to bring cash to a pub for use on a gaming machine, they are unlikely to be able to use one. Anecdotal industry evidence suggests that payment methods are a factor in this decline in machine usage, as pub goers now pay for food and drink by card but might have previously played a machine using spare change. There has also been a decline in gaming machine usage in alcohol licensed premises. Land-based gambling has a significantly larger workforce than online gambling. Some licensed betting offices also use a cross-channel digital wallet that can be topped up at cash desks as well as on the operator’s website and used on machines.

The Commission also highlighted that in spite of the increases since 2017, it has continued to find operators breaching their licence conditions, particularly the social responsibility codes. Since April 2016, the Commission has also revoked 14 operator licences and 66 personal licences, often due to operators failing to adhere to social responsibility and anti-money laundering rules. The Commission’s approach to enforcement changed significantly in 2017 when it unveiled a new strategy to tackle operators which breach their licence conditions and relevant codes of practice. Our call for evidence posed a series of questions relating to the Gambling Commission’s powers and resources and received responses from industry, campaign groups and members of the public. The Commission has taken action following the independent review of Football Index to implement those recommendations, including enhancing its licensing approach to novel products and agreeing a memorandum of understanding with the Financial Conduct Authority.

We will also consult on slot-specific measures to give greater protections for 18 to 24-year-olds who the evidence suggests may be a particularly vulnerable cohort. The Review launched with a call for evidence which ran from December 2020 to March 2021 and received 16,000 submissions. The package of measures outlined in this white paper will significantly increase protections with the aim of preventing harm.

1968 Act casinos will move to the new regime once they elect to increase their enhanced entitlement to gaming machines, becoming subject to the mandatory premises licence conditions and fee scales of a 2005 Act casino. Depending on the type of casino licence an operator holds, they are able to site a different number of gaming machines, and may be bound by other restrictions including a maximum machine-to-table ratio and limitations on their size and non-gambling area. Subsections (3) to (5) of section 172 of the Act make provision as to the number of gaming machines which may be made available for use in a casino by the holders of different types of casino premises licences issued under the Act.

The increase in Category B machines will enable bingo halls to better meet customer demand and will likely result in greater GGY. This would result in an overall decrease of over 900 cabinet machines across these venues, predominantly consisting of legacy Category C cabinets. Also, Category C and D gaming machine device types made available for use must be of similar size and scale to Category B. For example, some options may place further emphasis on achieving commercial flexibility than achieving customer choice of higher and lower staking machines, and vice versa. Gambling Commission data, from April to September 2019, indicates that across all land-based sectors, 1.8% of Category B sessions result in a loss of £200 or more.

This opposition was primarily from industry stakeholders, who argued that the other space requirements and the imposition of a machine to table ratio would ensure a balance between table gaming, machines and non-gambling space. For example, safer gambling functionality is now available and widely used on many gaming machines. This consultation relates to land-based gambling provided to customers in Great Britain, by operators who are consequently required to hold the appropriate licence from the Gambling Commission. The five types of licences included within this are casino premises licences, bingo premises licences, adult gaming centre premises licences, family entertainment centre premises licences, and betting premises licences. The GGY impact of this measure will depend on the take up of cashless gaming machines by operators, but also on the player protections.

Our reviews and rankings remain 100% unbiased and based on real player experience. Each casino review also includes a bonus calculator so you can see exactly what you need to wager before you can withdraw — no more guessing at the small print. We encourage all those with views or evidence on the options above to make submissions via the survey link below by that point. The purpose of this consultation is to ensure that the government is able to consider a range of views and evidence on this range of proposals before finalising the details of each policy. The Gambling Act review white paper published in April 2023 set out the government’s plans for modernising the regulation of gambling in Great Britain. However, we also received evidence form a small number of additional respondents.

The machines may be of categories B3A, B4, C or D, but by agreement, only one machine can be of sub-category B3A. The code relates to the provision of facilities for gaming machine gambling and includes requirements around the protection of children and other vulnerable people. To take advantage of this entitlement, the holder of the on-premises alcohol licence must give notice to the licensing authority and pay the prescribed fee. They are divided into categories depending on the maximum stake and prize available, the nature of the prizes and the nature of gambling for which the machine may be used, as well as the premises where it may be used. Licensed bingo premises include a range of establishments such as retail bingo clubs, high street arcades (which have a smaller bingo offer via bingo machines), and bingo venues in holiday parks.

Check our Top UK Casino List for expert recommendations.What payment methods are available at UK online casinos? Popular titles include Starburst, Gates of Olympus, and Megaways slots from providers like Big Time Gaming and Pragmatic Play.Who regulates online casinos in the UK? All the casinos we recommend hold a licence from the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC).

Box 6: Recent regulation in gambling advertising and marketing

For example, wagering requirements, sometimes called ‘re-wagering’ requirements, are a common feature of bonus offers in the gambling sector, whereby customers have to stake bonus funds a number of times (potentially adding some of their own money) before being permitted to withdraw any winnings. However, we encourage land-based operators to consider any use they make of targeted monetary or free bet bonuses and their purpose and we will continue to monitor whether there is a case for any further restrictions. Loyalty schemes in land-based venues are also a way of encouraging account-based play, meaning that a ban on them could have the unintended consequence of reducing the amount of available data on player behaviour. They emphasise that land-based play allows for close oversight of customers to ensure that bonuses are issued responsibly. In the majority of casinos, targeted offers are often through loyalty programmes that are open to everyone, with higher tier memberships offering higher value rewards. The schemes are intrinsic to high-end casinos’ business models, and the benefits tend to emphasise building a luxury experience rather than monetary rewards and free bets designed to be staked.

Compared with other regulated sectors, such as the financial, legal services and utilities sectors, gambling has a larger number of approved ADR bodies. Responses also highlighted that in order to prevent harm, new redress arrangements should be seen as upholding regulatory standards and supporting people presenting with legitimate complaints. Evidence from one treatment provider set out how clinical staff have noted that the manner and timing of a settlement can have an impact on therapy, and the need for appropriate support and protections to avoid even a modest lump sum increasing the risk of relapse. Responses from treatment and recovery support stakeholders also highlighted the need to consider the potential impact of different forms of financial redress on a person with gambling disorder. These included the complexity of determining at what point a consumer’s gambling can be deemed so excessive or unaffordable that it becomes an operator’s responsibility to intervene.

There are various license types, including remote casino, remote betting, and land-based licenses. The Gambling Commission’s Notice essentially makes clear that those B2B operators have a role in assisting the Gambling Commission in tackling unlicensed gambling in the British market and that such B2Bs place their own licence at risk by not taking sufficient steps to ensure that its content is only made available to British consumers via licensed B2C websites. Similarly, a centrally co-ordinated self-exclusion database (“GAMSTOP”) also allows customers to self-exclude from remote gambling offered by operators licensed by the Gambling Commission. In contrast with some jurisdictions, only casinos form part of the “regulated sector” for AML purposes, though all operators are required to conduct detailed risk assessments and implement AML policies, procedures and controls.

Changes to legislation:

The UK casino regulations represent the most significant overhaul of British gambling law in over two decades. Membership of GAMSTOP is mandatory for all licensed online operators. Operators pay gambling duties instead, including the 40% Remote Gaming Duty introduced in April 2026. Every casino in our UK casino rankings is licence-checked as part of our review process, so the list is a safe starting point.

• It might also risk unintended consequences such as reducing the ability of consumers to distinguish licensed from unlicensed operators.
• UKGC-licensed casinos can no longer offer autoplay functionality or turbo-spin (accelerated spin) features on online slots.
• Regulatory action is published openly, and repeat offenders face escalating consequences up to licence loss.
• The primary legislation governing gambling in Great Britain is the Gambling Act 2005 (opens in new tab).
• As set out above, on 8 December 2020, the UK Government announced a long-awaited review of British gambling laws.

PHE’s evidence review highlights higher levels of problem gambling amongst young adults when compared to older ages. Children and young people aside, concerns have been raised about people who are old enough to take part legally in the full range of commercial gambling activities but may still be particularly susceptible to harm for a variety of reasons. According to the 2022 data, the problem gambling rate of 11 to 16-year-olds (using the DSM-IV-MR-J screen which is specially adapted for children) was 0.9%, equal to about 35,000 children aged 11 to 16 in mainstream secondary schools. Once this new methodology is formally in place, it will provide more insight into harms experienced by young adults who are gambling legally, but who may additionally be vulnerable to gambling harm due to their age (see section 3.5. In particular, the 2022 Young People and Gambling Survey of 11 to 16-year-olds set out a range of questions on harms experienced as a result of gambling (both the participants’ own gambling and someone else’s gambling).

Your licence

Where the Commission agrees a payment in lieu of a fine (a regulatory settlement), this is typically used for socially responsible purposes connected with gambling, in line with the Commission’s Statement of Principles for Determining Financial Penalties and most usually to address gambling-related harm. For gambling specifically, the Commission must approve all providers and has set specific supplementary standards for ADR in its guidance, including a further definition of what counts as a dispute and heightened expectations regarding independence, transparency, customer service and reporting requirements. Non-payment of winnings, account closures and misleading promotions and adverts were the main areas of complaint shown across ADR, Resolver, the online dispute resolution platform, and the Commission’s Contact Centre data. Data from the Gambling Commission’s quarterly online survey (June 2021) showed that 8% of respondents said they had ever complained directly to a gambling operator. Subject to industry delivering a credible scheme, where the government and the Gambling Commission are satisfied with its scope and independence, we will explore how best to require that all licensees ensure their customers have effective access to sites not on gamstop the ombudsman for social responsibility complaints.

Where an authority retains an interest, we will look to learn more about its current position and the barriers to making progress within a reasonable time, with a view to evaluating whether an unused licence should be reallocated. Where an authority has no intention of progressing a licence, we will act promptly to offer up unused licences for reallocation so that other areas are able to benefit. We propose to write to local authorities with unused licences to ask them to confirm whether there is an intention to develop the licence. Local leaders of some areas without 2005 Act licences have expressed interest in a licence as a driver of regeneration. Under existing legislation, government could create more new 2005 Act licences or alternatively seek to offer up as yet undeveloped 2005 Act licences for reallocation. This sliding scale would still maintain a requirement for a balance between non-gambling space and overall size but would allow a proportionate increase.

However, overall almost half of respondents from the arcade and bingo sector acknowledged that Option 3 posed a risk of increasing gambling-related harm. The only responses which challenged the risk of gambling-related harm under Option 3 came from respondents within the arcade and bingo sector. There was a general consensus across respondents that Option 3 presented the greatest risk of increasing rates of gambling-related harm. In arcade premises, 2.3% of Category B gaming machine sessions result in losses of £200 or more, compared to 2% of combined Category C, Category D and mixed sessions. In bingo premises, 1.6% of Category B gaming machine sessions result in losses of £200 or more, compared to 0.7% of combined Category C, Category D and mixed sessions.

This should ensure that consumers, particularly those who are vulnerable, are better protected from illegal operators which are unlikely to offer the same safeguards that exist on legal sites. As outlined in the consultation which preceded the uplift, some of the increase in income has been devoted to more staff that are able to both identify the scale of the black market and take action to tackle illegal operators. The Commission will need to specify to the court the operator that it would like to disrupt, evidence that it is acting illegally and explain the requirements that it would like to be imposed on the ancillary service (for example, for a payment provider to remove their payment services). These are helpful and positive steps which should make it more difficult for people to access these types of harmful websites. Google has now removed paid-for Google Ads promoting ‘Not on GAMSTOP’ affiliate sites which pose a risk to vulnerable consumers. Similarly, operators licensed in Britain could face action by the Commission if they were found to have operated illegally in the jurisdiction of one of the Commission’s international partners.

Equally, evidence suggests that young people and young adults are particularly prone to benchmark their own gambling against that of their peers, but often overestimate peer gambling participation. Evidence and proposals regarding age and identity verification to access and make deposits into online gambling accounts are covered in our proposals for online gambling in Chapter 1. As outlined above, the evidence we received suggests that online age verification is currently effective as long as the details of an adult are not being used fraudulently or with that adult’s permission.

Following evaluation later this year, the intention is to expand the system to consider customers who are showing other indicators of harm with one operator which might necessitate coordinated action with other operators. The live trial which started this month is based on operators sharing information on individuals who have had their accounts closed because of disclosures about suffering serious harm. An industry-led trial with GAMSTOP as the delivery partner is now proceeding, having been supported by the ICO’s sandbox process, and focusing on high risk customers. We are pleased progress has been made on these after the Information Commissioner’s Office confirmed that, subject to certain controls, operators can share customer data for harm prevention purposes in compliance with existing data protection requirements. Their concern is that not only are those being harmed by gambling unlikely to be helped by such a measure, but also that many of those who were not being harmed would nonetheless be driven away from licensed operators. The precise impact of these changes will depend on the details which the Gambling Commission will consult on shortly, including how operators are required to conduct the checks and how they respond to certain findings on customers’ financial circumstances.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that for some individuals the option of attending physical bingo premises delivers substantial social benefits which would be lost if the sector is not supported. We will use the responses to this consultation as well as wider engagement with the sector to gather data to estimate the likely change in machine configuration in bingo and arcade venues. Another key benefit is the increased GGY from Category B machines in bingo and arcade venues. The proposed measure will allow venues to remove unused Category C and D machines and save on the costs of maintaining and powering them.

While the government is sympathetic in principle to the idea of a bespoke machine for high-end casinos, there would be substantial practical difficulties with ensuring it was only available in casinos or areas of casinos where such a high-staking machine would not substantially increase the risk of harm. Operators of high-end casinos have proposed a new sub-category of gaming machine with a stake limit of £50 and a prize limit of £100,000. High-end casinos have told us that these machines are not relevant to their high net worth clientele, who can afford and are accustomed to gambling with much higher stakes. Conversely, we did not receive evidence that permitting betting in 2005 Act casinos resulted in increased harm. Industry submitted evidence that 88% of casino customers at a major casino chain also bet on sports online at least once a month, including on mobile devices while in the casino, and that international customers expect to see a sportsbook area as part of the casino offer. According to submissions to our call for evidence, 90% of revenue in a small group of high-end casinos comes from customers based overseas, and before COVID-19 60% of overall business was conducted through cheques.

Some contended the models can now even identify and prevent harm before it occurs, but this is hard to verify. One major operator’s evidence reported a threefold increase in the number of customer interactions compared to two years ago and increased positive impact from their interventions (according to their own evaluation). These individuals may not have been spending more than they could afford, but many respondents felt operators should have been doing more to check.

Players in the UK pay no gambling tax on winnings, one of the few places in the world where that is still true. UK gambling laws include strict measures to protect players and encourage responsible gambling. Separate licences cover software suppliers and the key individuals who run the business.

Tenobet earns the sports-and-casino crown by actually committing to both. The bonus £40 sat in the casino wallet, and a separate £10 free bet token landed for the sportsbook. Tenobet is the casino for the bettor who also wants a flutter on Saturday football. UKGC licence is current and visible in the footer. Kaasino is the go-to if you love a proper fruit machine and want your deposit to stretch.