The Casinos Gaming Machines and Mandatory Conditions Regulations 2025: impact assessments RPC opinion green-rated
You should consider whether you understand how spread bets and CFDs work, and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money. Spread bets and CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. Some respondents pointed out how this voluntary albeit multifaceted arrangement varies from the finance sector, where the FCA publishes guidance on how financial promotions must present information about risk (an example is in Box 10 below). However, the limitations of such tools are documented in research, and further research is needed to understand the risk of unintended consequences such as distorting player perceptions of risk (explored further in the previous chapter’s section on safer products).
Player-centric tools
- We recognise these proposals have significant implications for collection and handling of sensitive consumer data, raising important questions around privacy, data protection, proportionality, data accuracy, and reciprocal data sharing.
- Regulation 4 reduces the minimum size of the table gaming area in small casinos from 500.
- Most major consumer banks offer opt-in gambling blocking tools which prevent card payments to gambling firms based on their merchant category code.
- The 2023 White Paper proposed maximum online slot stakes of £2 per spin for 18–24-year-olds and £5 per spin for players 25 and over.
Currently, both types of slot-style machines can legally be played by under-18s. ‘Cash-out’ slot-style machines have a maximum stake of 10p and a maximum prize of £5, while ‘ticket-out’ slot-style machines have a maximum stake of 30p and an equivalent of a prize worth up to £8. There are two types of Category D slot-style machines, one that pays out a small amount of cash, and one that pays out tickets which can be exchanged for a small prize, toy or sweet. Category D machines are typically played by families and children and are usually found in seaside arcades, family entertainment centres (FECs) and unlicensed FECs.
Most people will probably find this impacts their slot machine play a lot since so many people use autoplay to avoid the tedious clicking. In addition, all autoplay features will need to be removed from casino games. We think that many of these changes will help combat problem gambling, so we wouldn’t be surprised if they ended up being used in multiple gambling jurisdictions anyway. We expect a lot of these changes to roll out around the world, especially in games produced by British casino game developers.
UK Casino Regulation: Future Changes Entrepreneurs Must Know
It suggests that many smaller operators already undertake test purchasing voluntarily or through membership of a trade body, and while there is a financial cost to each test purchase, this is normally low (under £50). The Gambling Commission’s ordinary code says that all land-based licensees should require their staff to check the age of any customer who appears to them to be under the age of 21, also known as ‘Think 21’. While low test purchasing rates demonstrate serious failures of process at venues, this does not necessarily mean that significant numbers of children are illegally accessing gambling. For instance, the Gambling Commission’s Young People and Gambling Survey (2019) found a higher proportion of children than adults reported having visited a casino in the last 7 days. Increasing the age limit to play Category D cash payout slots to 18 years — moving it from a voluntary to a legal footing to include all operators — will break the link between cash payouts and slot-style adult play for children.
We will not accept licensees simply stating that GDPR means that they are unable to comply with an aspect of gambling regulation, or otherwise take certain steps to protect the public interest. Thorough consideration of transparency requirements will also assist data subjects, and assist data controllers to demonstrate compliance with obligations relating to accountability. We do not anticipate that the need for such measures will cause a significant barrier to complying with gambling regulation.
Option 2 would likely remove any incentive for operators to not abide by ‘available for use’ guidance. For example, a Category B tablet could only be made available for use if there is one other Category C or D tablet that customers can play on in the venue. This proposal outlined in Option 2 would require any such premises to have one Category C or D cabinet for each Category B cabinet it sites.
In conclusion, the evolution of casino regulations in the UK reflects the changing dynamics of society, technology, and the economy. Through diligent enforcement of regulations, the government aimed to safeguard the interests of both players and the broader community, setting a precedent for responsible gambling practices. Moreover, the enactment of measures to prevent crime and uphold the fairness of games contributed to enhancing the reputation and credibility of the UK gambling sector. This tension has led to ongoing debates and revisions in regulatory frameworks, with policies evolving to address issues such as problem gambling, money laundering, and underage access to gambling establishments. We publish registers of licensed businesses, individuals, regulatory actions and premises. If you or someone you know struggles with gambling addiction, we recommend you contact the free gambling helplines like those operated by organizations like
The responses received from the third sector also raised concerns about the potential for increased gambling-related harm to occur alongside greater numbers of Category B machines being made available. One operator, under both options, stated that it would increase the number of Category B cabinets machines by 2 to 3 per venue, while removing the vast number of smaller in-fill gaming machines. Evidence provided for Option 1 suggests that increases in Category B cabinet gaming machines would be moderate in the short-term. The arcade sector similarly reported that Option 1 and Option 3 would result in the removal of underused Category C and D machines, whilst Option 2 would have no impact or result in increased numbers of Category C and D gaming machines. This relates primarily to underused Category C and D gaming machines.
Further details on how this will be progressed are outlined below and we also outline a number of initiatives to stimulate interest in gambling research, including with research council funding, and to help build the evidence base. Our aim is to improve the provision of high-quality research on gambling and align treatment services commissioned by the NHS and third sector, ensuring those experiencing gambling-related harms are able to access the treatment and support they need when they need it. As the main commissioner of treatment services, GambleAware continues to provide support and treatment covering a wide spectrum of need outside of severe cases of gambling-related harm and addiction seen through the specialist NHS clinics. The Scottish Government is working with Public Health Scotland to develop an understanding of the scale of harmful gambling in communities by reviewing and developing Scotland-level data. Where operators have breached licence conditions which are designed to protect customers, the Gambling Commission already uses its significant powers to order substantial fines and financial settlements.
In particular, such requests are unlikely to be valid if retention of the data is still necessary in relation to a lawful purpose. Licensees should already have assessed how long to retain data for, bearing in mind the legitimate purposes for which it was gathered and has been retained. GDPR does not substantially alter the principles behind the development of policies for data retention.
However, the intended objective is to allow customers to pay by the means they prefer and preserve the viability of the gaming machine sector which is at risk of being eroded by the move to a “cashless” society. This standard applies to feasible B3 gaming machines and provides players with a 30 second cooling-off period once voluntary limits are hit. In order to slow the speed of direct cashless transactions and provide a break in play, the government proposes that there should be a minimum transaction time for players making direct cashless payment transactions on gaming machines. What should the maximum transaction value be for direct cashless payments on gaming machines?
This means, for example, that operators will be able to site 2 Category B cabinet gaming machines to a minimum of one Category C or D gaming machine. The government intends to amend the current gaming machine ratio to allow operators to make 2 Category B gaming machines available to a minimum of one Category C and D gaming machine. This chapter outlines the evidence received in relation to the white paper proposal to amend the ratio of Category C and D to Category B gaming machines in arcade and bingo venues.
One operator-led submission to our call for evidence suggested that 25% of people reduced their gambling expenditure after setting a deposit limit, compared to 6% who increased their gambling. As outlined in section 1.1 above, online gamblers already have access to a range of tools to help them control their time and money spent gambling and there are rules governing their use (for instance deposit limit increases must take at least 24 hours to come into effect). Morgan Stanley and NERA Economic Consulting have respectively estimated a £2 fixed limit on online slots would reduce online slot GGY by 22% and 23%, but some of this could be displaced to other online gaming products.
This chapter of the consultation received 40 responses, primarily from licensing authorities and gambling operators. We received detailed evidence through the consultation process outlining the impacts which increased fees would have on both the ability of licensing authorities to undertake their duties, and the commercial pressures placed on operators. A central component of allowing the land-based gambling sector to develop sustainably is to ensure that it is well regulated and that customers are protected. Many of the measures proposed within this consultation are modernising measures which are intended to support the land-based gambling industry to thrive sustainably. While some of the other proposals put forward to ensure no under-18s play these types of machines non gamstop sites were sensible, we do not think it is proportionate to mandate any of these measures due to the lower risk nature of this product.
In the current predominantly cash-based landscape, ATMs must be positioned to require a player to take a break in play in order to access additional funds. If No is selected What do you think the maximum committed payment limit should be for the following machine categories (£)? Shown if No is selected What do you think the maximum deposit limit should be for the following machine categories (£)? In order to bring direct cashless payment methods in line with the cash-based landscape, their maximum transaction value must be considered alongside the existing Gaming Machine (Circumstances of Use) Regulations 2007.
Most forms of licensed gambling are currently illegal for under 18s and there are requirements to make sure children cannot access them either in person or online. However, if we see evidence that this non-statutory arrangement is not delivering the protections for customers as we expect, then we will legislate to create a statutory ombudsman for the sector. The scheme should ensure customers have timely access to the independent ombudsman to deal with social responsibility complaints where the gambling operator has not been able to satisfactorily resolve the complaint. To introduce further protections for customers and deal with the gap in redress quickly, we will look at how industry can set up an ombudsman that is fully operationally independent and is credible with customers, working with all stakeholders in the sector. More broadly, this could enhance data collection and drive improvements across the industry as a whole as the ombudsman could feed back trends in the disputes it investigates to the Gambling Commission. One operator told us they tackle this risk by making any voluntary payments related to social responsibility complaints conditional on the complainant registering with GAMSTOP, the online self-exclusion scheme.
While we know the majority of people who use these tools do not have a problematic relationship with gambling, we have heard repeated evidence of the enormous benefits they offer to those who rely on them as part of their toolkit for stopping gambling altogether. The Commission will consult on requiring operators to improve these tools, such as by making deposit limit setting mandatory for all customers on account creation and pre-populating the limit with a reasonable default. A recent study by the Behavioural Insights Team suggested this model may support greater and more meaningful usage of financial limit setting tools, but further research including in a ‘real world’ gambling environment is likely to be beneficial. Gambling operators in Australia must now provide such activity statements to customers on a monthly basis and there is guidance setting out how information should be presented. Academic evidence has shown that online gamblers can struggle to keep an accurate track of their spend, suggesting many could benefit from objective activity statements and previously set financial limits rather than purely internal budgeting during and between sessions.
The regulator has indicated that it may be less inclined to “settle” regulatory enforcement actions, particularly where operators have been made the subject of prior regulatory enforcement action, leaning towards the imposition of sanctions and penalties or, in more serious cases, suspensions and revocations of licences. An “economic crime levy” is payable by entities that are regulated for anti-money laundering purposes (currently only casinos in the UK) and which generate more than £10.2 million in UK revenue. 15% of the commission charges charged by betting exchanges to users who are UK citizens Eligibility for a British gambling licence depends upon the Gambling Commission’s assessment of a variety of factors, primarily the integrity and probity of the applicant and the applicant’s ability to conduct gambling in a solvent and responsible manner in compliance with law and regulation.
The liberalisation of gambling advertising was one of the major changes introduced by the Gambling Act 2005. The Premier League has announced that it will remove gambling sponsors from the fronts of players’ shirts, aimed at reducing children’s exposure to gambling brands in a way which might appeal to them, in line with new advertising rules. We expect all sports to take a responsible approach to gambling sponsorship and support the sector’s efforts to implement minimum standards for social responsibility through a cross-sport Code of Conduct. Replacing industry ownership, this will consider information at the point of purchase and messages within advertising, and identify what messaging works for different contexts and audiences. Numbers of customers on these schemes have already significantly declined following strengthened Commission protections in October 2020. The consultation also will consider measures such as a cap on re-wagering requirements and an appropriate minimum time frame for customers to claim bonuses.
This mainly extended to random number-generated casino games, but a few submissions argued that betting should also be included. However, a case has been made that the unlimited stakes on online slots play are particularly problematic due to the nature of slots play and its increasing popularity as seen in the monthly operator data collected by the Gambling Commission since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to the structural characteristics discussed above, stake size can be a key determinant of losses and gambling-related harm. However, the new rules will strive to make games intrinsically safer across the sector, while leaving space for operators to continue innovating and developing games which customers want to play. Longer-term, Gambling Commission changes to the prevalence and participation methodology will provide a more detailed assessment of problem gambling trends across the online slot player cohort to support evaluation.
