Editorial Team Behind This Review

What we do

No income or capital gains tax applies to prizes from casinos, sports betting, bingo, or online gambling, a rule in place since 2001 when taxation shifted to operators. This change aligns online slot limits with those of land-based casinos, with £5 matching B1 machines and £2 for younger adults, due to their higher vulnerability and lower income. Otherwise, payment processing per se is not licensable under British gambling law and the main restrictions are that land-based bingo and casinos may not offer credit for wagers and remote gambling operators may not accept credit card payments (including through money services providers). As well as an operating licence, an operator wishing to make gambling facilities available in a land-based environment (e.g., casino, betting shop, bingo hall or arcade centre) will also need to apply for a premises licence authorising that activity from the relevant local authority.

Conversely, a number of think tanks and campaigners have proposed far more expansive SCV solutions, involving the pooling of every customer’s online and potentially offline play data for analysis by an independent public body which flags concerns and directs operator interventions. As part of the trial, codes of practice are being developed to ensure operators respond appropriately when they are notified of customers in this situation. While supportive in principle, industry initially had concerns regarding potential data protection and privacy implications. For example, a person showing signs or disclosing that their gambling is out of control could have their account closed by one operator doing the right thing to prevent harm, but within minutes they could have a new account with a different operator and a ‘blank slate’.

Further information about premises licence fees are outlined in Chapter 5. Therefore, we are consulting on how best to allow casinos to move onto the new regime. If your casino already offers sports betting, what is the GGY from this activity? If this proportion was representative across all casinos, then total casino sector GGY could increase by approximately £1.3 million. The policy could also encourage casinos to invest in broadcasting sport, both in broadcast rights and venue enhancement, which will have additional costs. In practice, venues which include sportsbooks as part of their product offering do not utilise a maximum of 40 — the largest casino by gambling area currently sites 12 terminals.

The Information Commissioner’s Office is the supervisory authority for data protection legislation, and maintains a full explanation of these rights on their website DCMS will ensure that we uphold your rights when processing your personal data. You have rights over your personal data under the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. Your data will not be transferred outside the UK. We will not use your data for any automated decision making. Your personal data will be kept for one year in line with DCMS retention policy. Information provided in response to this consultation (not including personal information) may be shared with other government departments and arm’s length bodies, such as the Department for Health and Social Care and the Gambling Commission.

However, we are aware of the possibility that some operators may attempt to maximise their number of Category B cabinets above and beyond that intended by the 50/50 proposal by siting tablets which are not genuinely accessible or in-fill machines in their venues. We anticipate that our proposal to allow operators to increase their number of Category B machines to 50 percent will enable operators to better meet customer demand, and in turn minimise the likelihood of ‘available for use’ guidance being subverted. The Gambling Commission has expressed concern that operators currently seek to maximise Category B machine numbers by providing Category C and D games on inaccessible small tablets or via in-fill machines. 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. While the intensiveness of energy expenditure will vary by machine device type and energy efficiency, the costs to industry of maintaining these machines can be significant. Gaming machines account for a significant proportion of energy costs, a substantial number of which are sited by operators purely to meet the 80/20 rule.

You will need to apply to the licensing authority the premises is located, to get a premises licence. You will need a premises licence to provide casino games to players in a non-remote setting. An operating licence allows you to provide gambling activities to customers in Great Britain. We issue operating licences and personal licences; premises licences are issued by local licensing authorities.

In the same period, the average number of gambling ads seen by under 16s more than halved from around 4.5 to just 2.2 per week, and the ads were predominantly for bingo and lotteries. The Gambling Commission’s social responsibility codes specify that operators should still apply the principles of the UK Advertising Codes to any content or media that falls outside of the remit of the codes. While ‘content marketing’ posts which do not directly advertise a product or service may fall outside of the ASA’s remit, they are a popular marketing strategy with which operators can drive brand engagement and loyalty. We want operators to make use of available technology to extend commitments to de-targeting children and vulnerable people and age-gating social media. In Gambling Commission’s Young People and Gambling report 2022, 44% of 11 to 16-year-olds had heard or seen adverts or promotions relating to gambling on social media, and 13% reported following a gambling account on social media.

Replacing industry ownership, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department of Health and Social Care will work together with the Gambling Commission, drawing on public health and social marketing expertise, to establish the most effective messaging and how it should be used. The Online Advertising Programme will explore further mechanisms to reduce harm from advertising across all sectors. Certain types of competitions and prize draws which offer significant prizes such as a luxury home or car now operate online in ways which could not have been foreseen in 2005.

Editorial Team Behind This Review

This is viewed as a more proportionate table gaming area compared to other floor space requirements, and will ensure parity with 1968 Act casinos. Small 2005 Act casinos will also experience a reduction in their required minimum table gaming area, from 500sqm to 250sqm. This will ensure that only distinct and sizeable table gaming areas can count towards the total, giving customers a genuine mix of products that are easily accessible and identifiable in a casino. Despite respondents indicating a preference for venues to be made to reduce their gambling area, we think this is a fair exemption for the small number of casinos that it will apply to.

A particular issue which has been highlighted is affiliates’ failure to comply with the requirements to cease direct marketing to self-excluded customers. This means that any breach of licence conditions by a third party contracted to promote an operator’s business will be treated as a breach by the operator. As the measures outlined elsewhere in this chapter are intended to tackle advertising practices which have been identified as particularly of concern, in our view a further tightening on broadcast gambling adverts is not proportionate at this time. Some responses called for restrictions on the volume of gambling adverts allowed to air, but there would be considerable difficulties in implementing such a policy. A common suggestion for further restrictions on broadcast advertising was for the 9pm voluntary watershed that currently applies to most gambling products to be extended to all gambling products and made statutory.

• Casino Club Port Talbot in Wales is believed to have been the first legal casino in the UK.
• The review found mostly cross-sectional studies linking gambling to harm, with more longitudinal research needed to isolate the causative role of gambling in the harms people experience in order to estimate a more accurate cost.
• Industry and racing stakeholders have raised particular concerns that should checks require documents such as payslips or bank statements to be provided to operators, then most people would refuse and instead gamble elsewhere, including with unlicensed operators.
• Expect enhanced due diligence on any player who deposits heavily, uses unusual payment routes, or trips a risk indicator.

Additionally, an objective of this measure is to reduce average session duration, which is linked to gambling harm. On the other hand, in 62% of all sessions from April to September 2019, the player either won money on the machines or lost an amount up to £20. However, these rates are lower than the majority of other gambling products, although remain above the at-risk and problem gambling rates for ‘any gambling activity’. Please explain your answer, including an alternative solution for how to calculate non-gambling areas where applicable. • Any non-gambling area may consist of one or more areas within the premisesDo you agree that this should remain the same under the new regime? It is for the Scottish Ministers to consider whether they want to amend the Mandatory and Default Conditions that apply to casinos located in Scotland.

This includes both online and physical places you can gamble, like a betting shop or casino. Next up, online casinos can no longer allow people to play multiple games simultaneously. Some of the biggest changes to the way games are played at online casinos will involve the way the games are designed. If you live in the UK, when January rolls around, expect online casinos to ask you to opt-in to marketing from them. From this point onwards, any direct marketing needs to be opt-in, so players must choose to receive advertising from online casinos.

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.

This prize pot would be available only to those playing the linked machines and prizes would not exceed the maximum prize ordinarily available for that category of linked machine. The review will include an assessment of the role of session limits across Category B and C machines and the role of safer gambling tools. We have reviewed these proposals alongside evidence of harms of machine game play, evidence from campaign groups and advice from the Gambling Commission. It has taken steps to increase existing protections on machines as well as exploring ways to build friction and safer gambling measures into cashless payments. Initial data from operators indicates that relatively few transactions take place through app-based payments. The Gambling Commission welcomes cashless payment technology, such as app-based digital payments, that can be used to improve safer gambling measures and reduce money laundering risks.

The tables below outline current and proposed space requirements for 2005 Act casinos, and 1968 Act casinos which seek to increase their gaming machine entitlement above 20 (including at least one Category B machine). As gaming machine allowances and machine to table ratios for 1968 Act casinos and Small 2005 Act casinos converge, more consistent size requirements should apply across the two types of licence to ensure a degree of fairness and consistency. It was also noted from the call for evidence that where other jurisdictions apply a machine to table ratio, all currently permit a greater proportion of gaming machines in comparison to Great Britain. 1968 Act casinos that are smaller than the configurations of a 2005 Act Small casino but have a gambling area equal to or greater than 280sqm will be able to increase their gaming machine allocations on a pro rata basis commensurate with gambling area. 1968 Act casinos that have a gambling area of at least 500sqm will be eligible for the same number of machines as permitted in a Small 2005 Act casino.

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.

Figure 20: Gaming machine types including stakes, prizes, location and speed of play

Some submissions highlighted that gambling blocks on debit cards could make it easier to prevent harmful gambling and track customer spend. However, evidence from these groups was typically directed towards other areas of the Review such as online player protection, children and young people, and advertising. We received evidence from a range of stakeholders in response to whether new types of casino created by the 2005 Act meet the Act’s objectives for the sector. We also received submissions from campaign groups and academic research highlighting the risks of cashless gambling and possible mitigations. Some submissions also made the case that the triennial review process (a formal feature of gambling regulation before the 2005 Act) allowed a regular review of the rules applied to machine games and therefore enabled a process for stake and prize limits to be amended to reflect inflation or wider changes.

Key 2026 Changes

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 accept there is merit in bringing the regime for gambling in line with alcohol and will legislate to introduce CIAs when Parliamentary time allows. We also recognise that licensing authorities, as well as the LGA and the Gambling Commission, have requested that CIAs are introduced.

They collect fees for applications and annual renewals to cover the costs of gambling licensing and enforcement (and the fees can only be used for such costs). We do not propose that these machines should be required to be moved to an age-restricted area. We propose to move the voluntary commitment into legislation, introducing a legal age limit of 18 on Category D ‘cash-out’ slot-style machines. To achieve this, we are consulting on options for amending the 80/20 rule to a new requirement that 50 percent of machines must be Category C or D. This included a number of measures to adjust outdated regulatory restrictions applying to the land-based gambling sector.

All operators must monitor player behaviour and use the wealth of data they have available to identify those who may be at risk and take action to protect them, in line with the Commission’s detailed guidance. While most gambling management tools are provided to help customers gamble safely, all operators must also offer self-exclusion facilities to help those who wish to stop gambling altogether. Online gambling is a fully regulated sector, and the rules governing it are largely set out in licence conditions or technical standards on remote operators rather than in statute. Our vision for remote gambling is that the risks are mitigated, and that we maximise the use of technology and data to protect people in a targeted way at all stages of the customer journey.

Affiliate marketing is a form of marketing whereby a third party receives a commission for promoting a company’s products or services, typically paid per customer referred or with a share of revenue generated by referred customers. It might also risk unintended consequences such as reducing the ability of consumers to distinguish licensed from unlicensed operators. While it is likely that this would reduce the limited level of children’s exposure to gambling adverts, there would be a negative impact on the ability of lotteries to fundraise for good causes, and a risk of adverse consequences from increasing the volume of late-night gambling adverts. It is also clear that children’s exposure to broadcast advertising has declined over the past decade, in all sectors including gambling.

A financial risk model must help protect those vulnerable cohorts for whom even relatively modest gambling losses could be in itself harmful, for example by limiting income available for necessities. The Gambling Commission published a consultation and call for evidence on issues around customer interaction, including preventing harmful or unaffordable losses, in December 2020. The obligations on remote operators to monitor account activity and intervene where individuals display signs of potential harm are a cornerstone of the current package of protections online. While there are real complexities that make it difficult to pinpoint a precise casinos not on gamestop figure, the weight of the evidence suggests that those being harmed by gambling are overrepresented among those with high gambling spend. In responses to our call for evidence, estimates of the Gross Gambling Yield derived from harmful gambling varied significantly, as they have in previous evidence such as that reviewed by the knowledge exchange GREO in 2019, which found estimates range between 15% and 50%. Some submissions pointed out that a reliance on a high spending minority is not unusual in other sectors (such as air travel) and that higher than average spending on gambling is not in itself evidence of harm as discretionary income varies significantly across individuals.

The maximum number of gaming machines that may be made available for use on the premises remains unchanged at 80. For every gaming table used in the casino, the effect of the amendment is to increase from two to five the number of gaming machines that may also be made available for use. As well as a fixed numerical maximum, the number of gaming machines must not exceed a specified multiple of the number of gaming tables used in that casino. Thanks to recent legislative changes, the UKGC would have the power to regulate and tax not only online casinos physically based in the United Kingdom, but any gambling sites that serves UK players.

If you are leaving the British gambling market, the Gambling Commission has expectations of licensees in these situations. If you no longer need your licence, you can surrender it, partially or in full. This is a condition of your licence under LCCP Condition 8 – Display of licensed status. When you are issued a licence, we will display the details of your licence on the register. We provide details of all businesses and individuals we licence on our Public Register service.

We would also like machines that use the BGC’s Anonymous Player Awareness System (APAS) to implement these limits and for APAS not to act as a substitute for these thresholds. Furthermore, the average stake size on B1 machines is similar to the stake size on B3 machines and therefore we do not think that the mandatory limits should be different between the different categories. In line with their responses to other questions, the pub sector did not want these limits to apply to Category D crane grab machines.

Cash-only gambling was assumed to give players more control by providing natural interruptions in play to obtain more cash, helping players play within budget limits. Please outline any other proposals relating to machine allowances in arcades and bingo halls that you think that we should consider. We welcome further evidence on this in the consultation response.