All around the world #3; a gambling news round-up
This month’s gambling headlines feel less like routine updates and more like a collection of plot twists and U-turns. Policies are being rewritten mid-stride, long-promised reforms are being quietly shelved, and regulators seem to be scrambling to plug the holes that could’ve been addressed months ago. It makes for exciting reading – but slightly white knuckle policy making!
Australia: Shock retreat from nationwide gambling ad ban
It may seem like only a couple of weeks ago that we were talking about Australia’s upcoming ban on gambling ads – and that’s because it was. In an unprecedented U-turn, Australia’s Labor government is preparing to soften its previously promised nationwide ban. Perhaps it was Nine Entertainment’s threatened lawsuit, perhaps the worry of the push to the black market, but whatever it was, this move sees them break Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s 2022 pledge.
In place of an outright ban, the government is expected to shift focus to under-16 social media restrictions instead of carrying out the core recommendation of the 2023 Murphy Report (a full three-year phase-out of gambling ads). Many are speculating Communications Minister Anika Wells’ revised framework will take the form of a whistle-to-whistle restriction during live events.
France: Overhauled in-person self-exclusion for a fully digital system
France’s self-exclusion system was created back in 2007 and used to involve heading to your local police station and registering in person – something we can all agree was going to put a lot of people off.
Now, the ANJ (France’s National Gambling Authority) has rolled out a fully digital version of the self exclusion register, meaning no need to visit the station at all. Instead, it uses digital ID verification and selfies. Already registrations have doubled since 2021 (to around 85,000 people), showing just how necessary the shift was.
UK: Huge tax spike for remote gambling in UK budget
The Labour Government’s autumn budget landed in late November and has dealt a devastating blow to online casino operators. Remote gaming duty is set to almost double from 21% to 40% in April 2026. General betting duty will also rise to 25% (up from 15%) a year later.
The increases push the UK above heavily scrutinised European markets such as the Netherlands and in line with Austria’s 40% iGaming rate. Many industry bodies cite 40% as the tipping point, where regulated markets begin to shrink and black markets begin to grow.
The reason for the rise for the online gaming sector specifically lies in the increased potential for harm that the UKGC claim - as well as an additional £1.1bn a year in tax. Though, it is interesting that bingo has had its tax slashed to zero…
Africa & Asia: William Hill exits 13 markets
It’s not all that unusual for a global company to exit a market or two, but 13 in one go is massive! William Hill withdrew from 13 markets including Kenya, Nigeria, Vietnam, and Angola on 2 December.
While customers have until 5 January to login and withdraw funds, this really is a quick exit. Parent company Evoke said the decision follows a routine global review and couldn’t stress enough that its 888Africa brand will continue unaffected.
The move comes after multiple earlier exits from India, Jamaica and Botswana, and happens to fall in line with an overhaul on gambling tax structures in several African countries. In the UK as well, William Hill also faces uncertainty. After the domestic tax hikes were announced, the employer suggested it could force the closure of up to 200 betting shops, threatenening 1,500 jobs in the process.
The Netherlands: Consumer groups demand compensation
Dutch consumer groups are turning up the heat! Consumentenbond and the Consumers’ Competition Claims Foundation have formally accused big-name operators (think Bet365, Unibet, Jacks, Holland Casino and Toto) of nudging players into excessive gambling before the 2021 regulation switch. Their argument is simple; that operators used murky information and confusing bonus setups to players’ detriment.
Running alongside this is a separate €75m lawsuit against Unibet. This centres on claims of targeting Dutch consumers before it was legally allowed to. If this case succeeds then it could have an enormous impact, potentially sparking a Europe-wide domino effect for retroactive compensation.
The Nordics: Major joint gambling study launched
In a more heartening story, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden have decided that if you want proper data, then working as a team is the best way to get it. Between them, they’ve launched a huge joint study into gambling behaviour across the region. The survey should reach around 30,000 adults per country, with results due next spring.
It’s one of surprisingly few times Europe has seen a cross-border approach to understanding gambling habits. A study of this scope should make the findings genuinely useful rather than five slightly different versions of the same story – often none of them big enough on their own to draw proper conclusions from.
While the study is undoubtedly positive news, it lands at an awkward moment for Sweden. Spelinspektionen (the Swedish Gambling Authority) has been criticised by the Ombudsman for the slow manual processing of self-exclusion from people without electronic ID, after one player waited more than a month to be excluded. While the fix is now being rolled out, studies like this one are only of value if regulators listen to the outcomes and act on them.
Final thoughts
If there’s a single thread that ties these stories together, for me, it’s trust. Trust of the variety that keeps players inside the regulated system rather than slipping through the cracks into the black market.
When taxes jump overnight, when promised reforms evaporate, when operators leave whole regions, or when consumers feel misled before regulation even existed, it creates a vacuum of trust. This allows the black market to seep in, a market with appealing promises, but no safeguards, no oversight, and no accountability.
That’s what makes the months ahead so pivotal. Regulators want to protect people, operators want clear and stable rules, and consumers want to feel they’re not being pushed somewhere less safe (or just getting a rubbish deal). Whether governments can strike that balance is likely to be the real story to watch as we make our way into 2026.