A 2026 Casino Legislation Guide For UK Players
If you are a local authority/ licensing board, how many premises licence applications did you receive in the 22/23 financial year? We expect that wider benefits will arise from the increase in oversight and enforcement activity by licensing authorities of gambling premises in their area and are seeking further information to better understand these benefits. The primary cost of this measure is the additional costs incurred by gambling operators resulting from the increased licensing fees. Note that the different fees currently charged for large and small casinos may be subject to review and harmonisation following the consultation outlined in Chapter 1. The Gambling (Premises Licence Fees) (England and Wales) Regulations 2007 established the maximum level of fees that local authorities in England and Wales can charge for gambling premises licences. This activity may include inspecting gambling premises to ensure that they are complying with their licence or dealing with complaints from residents or neighbours.
This means we have asked Qualtrics to collect your information via an online survey platform, which we will review as part of the consultation process. You have the option to select ‘Prefer not to say’ in response to any of the questions that ask for your personal data. We will use your data to enable us to carry out our functions as a government department.
The evidence illustrated that while there have been recent instances of bad practice in casework, the risks posed to consumers are not fundamental to white label arrangements themselves. Importantly, while third parties typically undertake a range of peripheral tasks related to the gambling offer (e.g. marketing, data storage, age verification, due diligence checks, customer interaction), only the licensee may provide “facilities for gambling”. Respondents were also divided on the presence of ‘white label’ gambling brands in sports sponsorship as a means to target overseas customers. If the licensee falls short of the Commission’s expectation to conduct due diligence before entering into a white label arrangement, they may proceed unaware of regulatory risks which would have been identified by the Commission had the third-party partner applied for a licence itself. Some concerns have been raised that ‘white labels’ amount to ‘hiring out’ of a gambling licence to companies (potentially in other jurisdictions) that would unlikely be suitable to hold a British licence in their own right. This arrangement can enable an established licensee to partner with a third-party brand to attract new customers to their gambling offer.
Chapter 6: Land-based gambling
1We expect operators to take into consideration the Gambling Commission’s views expressed in this document. The ICO report that the gambling sector is one of the most complained about sectors in this respect. Separately, concerns have been raised about the volume of unsolicited direct e-marketing (predominantly via email and SMS) for gambling products which consumers receive. Although Article 10 of GDPR provides that, usually, processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences shall only be carried out under the control of official authority, there are exceptions to this.
With technological developments, land-based casinos have been able to introduce a greater range of customer protections and the experiences of applying these across each type of licence have provided insight on the likely impact of any proposed changes. Since the Gambling Act 2005, land-based casinos have operated under two licensing regimes with different requirements in terms of the type and volume of product they are able to offer, as well as venue size. Illegal operators often try to subvert the system, including on player protection requirements, and this move will further strengthen the regulatory environment protecting those most at risk of harm. In a move aimed at supporting those who may be suffering harm or in the grip of addiction, gambling operators will now be required to do more to protect customers. We will consult on the protections needed for gaming machines to be able to accept cashless payments directly.
We therefore hope this measure will shore up these critical controls, and give assurance to operators that they are not accepting funds from bank accounts with an active gambling block. The vast majority of gambling deposits are made via debit cards, so this may only marginally strengthen transaction blocks, but any workarounds to tools which support those recovering from gambling harm could be particularly problematic. That is why the Commission has mandated operator participation in a national self-exclusion scheme, GAMSTOP, and why we worked with other sectors to introduce a range of further friction-based measures which can support those who want to stop gambling. No self-exclusion or gambling cessation tool in isolation can be completely effective in preventing someone who is determined to gamble online from doing so.
Despite support among consumers and some licensees, the proposal was not technically feasible at the time, since online retailers could not access verified cardholder details when processing a payment. Safeguarding against this risk through regulatory change will benefit both parties and reduce the burden on public services. Specifically, there are currently no provisions to verify that payment information used by online gamblers matches the account holder’s identity. Once we are satisfied, the Commission will consult on any outstanding details and on requiring all remote operators to integrate with the system. Following the ICO’s report, the government and the Gambling Commission challenged industry to start trialling solutions as a matter of urgency.
This includes lotteries, betting on sports and horse races, bingo, as well as gaming machines at pubs and land-based casinos. We do not see this as being an issue for operators or manufacturers as it is already widely available on Category B gaming machines within all land-based gambling premises. While it is acknowledged that the risk of gambling harm may increase somewhat following a transition to 50/50, the stipulation outlined in Option 2 would ensure that operators offer a balance of higher and lower stake non gamestop casinos gaming machines.
Removal of unused Category C and D gaming machines
The consultation asked the following questions on licence fees. We would expect operators to inform the Commission that they are intending to move onto the expanded regime as these changes will have a material impact on an operator’s business. Operators moving onto the new regime would almost certainly result in a material change to the layout of the premises.
- By embedding self-regulation tools directly into the gaming experience, these requirements mirror protections familiar to online gambling—and levels the regulatory playing field.
- Respondents in favour of sports betting pointed to evidence of casino customers placing sports bets via mobile devices while in casinos, with casinos being an environment in which people habitually watch sport.
- Self-reported gambling participation by 11 to 16-year-olds has fallen substantially over the last decade and most forms of gambling are already illegal for under 18s, but we will continue to strengthen protections.
From the early days of underground gambling to the modern era of licensed casinos and online gaming, the UK has continually adapted its regulatory approach to meet the needs of a dynamic and evolving industry. Each category is permitted in specific types of premises, with Category A and B1 machines available “only in the highly regulated environment of casinos“. These casinos were licensed by the Gaming Board of Great Britain and had to operate as members-only clubs where no more than 10 gaming machines could be installed. Given the largest cost to business is purchasing and installing new gaming machines, which is linked to the overall size of casinos, the IA explains that this cost is likely to increase with the size of the business.
The same research found that rates of risky gambling were lowest amongst those who only play bingo compared to those who play fruit/slot machines and bingo, who have the highest rates of risky gambling. The PHE gambling-related harm evidence review highlighted Health Survey evidence that non-remote bingo (3.3%) and in-person horse race betting had the lowest problem gambling rates of all non-lottery activities. The proposal to make provisions within the Gambling Commission’s gaming machine Code of Practice for alcohol licensed premises binding (when Parliamentary time allows) will give the regulator and licensing authorities clearer powers to intervene in these instances of failure. We expect this to enable operators to reduce the number of energy-intensive older machines that are less used by customers. We acknowledge that some player safety improvements have been made to modern Category B3 gaming machines which cannot be easily replicated on the older Category B3, C and D machines.
(3) The maximum number of separate betting positions that may be made available for use at any time in relation to betting machines is determined in accordance with the table below. 5.—(1) This paragraph applies to all premises in respect of which a converted casino premises licence has effect. (b)the converted casino premises licence is not varied under section 187 of the 2005 Act(4) so as to relate to premises to which it did not relate on that date. (3) Sub-paragraph (2) does not apply to premises in which the floor area of the gambling area of the casino was 1,500m² or greater on 12th May 2025 provided that, after that date— (5) No gambling is permitted in the table gaming area of the premises other than gambling by way of table gaming. “(1) This paragraph applies to all premises in respect of which a converted casino premises licence has effect.”;
Starting 29 July 2026, a new licence condition will require land-based gambling operators to remove gaming machines deemed non-compliant by the Commission. The changes made enable the holder of a converted casino premises licence relating to premises in England and Wales to make up to 80 gaming machines (including Category B gaming machines) available for use, provided a number of specified conditions are satisfied (“the extended entitlement”). Bacta (the trade organisation for family entertainment centres, adult gaming centres, operators and manufacturers), proposed the live-testing of concepts for new machines so that industry, the Gambling Commission and government could gather evidence on the potential gambling harms and mitigations. Currently, gaming machines can only be linked in casinos — and only sub-category B1 machines on the same premises — with the maximum prize set at a double that for a non-linked sub-category B1 machine.
Gambling Commission
Based on our experience of investigations to date, licensees should ensure that data which relates in any way to regulatory compliance should be available for a minimum period of five years after the end of a relationship with a customer. Licensees should ensure that their retention policies ensure that such data will be available to the Commission if requested6. Where data which is relevant to a licensee’s compliance with the regulatory regime has been obtained, licensees should have regard to the fact that we may wish to investigate whether a licensee has complied with their obligations.
Beyond the 10x wagering cap, the new rules require casinos to display all bonus terms clearly and in plain language before a player opts in. All UKGC-licensed casinos must offer deposit limits, loss limits, session limits, and wager limits. Responsible gambling sits at the heart of the UK casino regulations 2026. To understand exactly what to look for, read our guide on how to choose a UK online casino.
Some land-based operators proposed that players in venues other than casinos should be able to choose to allocate a small proportion of their stake towards an additional prize pot. A number of proposals from the land-based industry related to concepts of new machine games and categories of gaming machine which do not currently fit into existing regulations or current technical standards. In response to this, we received a number of proposals for changes to rules surrounding gaming machines in venues. We agree that operators should maintain a range of payment options, including cash, to allow for customer choice and ensure that gambling harm is kept to a minimum.
The United Kingdom Gambling Commission also has rules that dictate how operators can advertise their platforms. The latest stipulation regarding the handling of player funds is just one of many licensing conditions the UKGC has put in place to ensure the safety of all players. The arrangements falling in the medium category include Quistclose accounts and insurance arrangements. Therefore, when you choose one of our recommended UK casino sites, you can ante-up safe in the knowledge that every game is fair and all your funds will be protected and insured by the UK government.
The Gambling Act 2005 defines a casino as an arrangement whereby people are given an opportunity to participate in one or more casino games. The white paper set out the government’s plans for modernising the regulation of the gambling sector.
Firstly, much of the available data on children being able to access age restricted forms of gambling comes from their own self-reporting which may be unreliable. However, evidence suggests that some children are still able to participate in gambling which they should be barred from. It should create a clear distinction between gambling products for adults and lower risk products for children which have non-cash prizes or (like a penny pusher) are entirely unlike an adult gambling product. Although we will consult further on the details of our proposal above, slot machines in FECs which are legally adult-only (Category C machines) are required to be in a segregated part of the venue to prevent children accessing those machines. Category D machines which do not pay out cash will not be subject to the increase in the minimum age to play. We welcome Bacta’s voluntary commitment, but to ensure all operators comply with it, we propose to move that requirement into legislation, making the legal minimum age to play cash-out Category D slot machine style games 18 years old.
For example, 5 out of the 7 operators focus on betting, so the PoP dataset accounts for operators providing 86% of online betting in Great Britain, as against 38% of online gaming. We recommend that licensing authorities update their policy statements using a wide range of data and analysis, including making use of spatial tools and public health data to identify vulnerable areas and to state their position on additional gambling premises in these areas. CIAs could allow licensing authorities to put a presumption against new premises in a particular area, based on evidence related to harm, which may take the form of ‘high impact zones’ being identified within a licensing authority boundary. We consider that allowing bingo premises to offer side bets in a more flexible or expanded form as described by industry, within a defined set of parameters, would allow them to diversify their offer to customers and that conditions could be attached to reduce the risk of harm. When granting a premises licence, a licensing authority must consider the impact the premises might have on the surrounding area, for example, the risks of anti-social behaviour or of children attempting to access gambling facilities.
Broadcasters also provided evidence highlighting that their sector is vulnerable financially following the pandemic, and a loss of revenue from gambling adverts could impair public service broadcasters’ ability to meet their obligations. Alongside operators themselves, online platforms also have an important role to play in ensuring that advertising is safe and socially responsible. The industry will commence a review of the sixth edition of the IGRG Code, including considering the extent to which 25+ age filtering could be used with regards to other digital advertising where that functionality is made available. Research from Australia also indicates that for young people exposure to more types of advertising is correlated with gambling participation and harmful gambling. Data from the Gambling Commission’s online tracker survey shows that younger adults are more likely to follow operators on social media than older adults, and more likely to spend money as a result of operators’ posts than older age groups.
The same principle would apply for in-fill machines and tablets. By contrast, industry responses argued that Option 2 would be highly restrictive for many operators and would overall provide less commercial flexibility than is currently available under the 80/20 ratio. This is a necessary objective to help mitigate against gambling-related harm. Therefore it is likely that increases in Category B machines will lead to slight increases in sessions with greater losses. In considering gambling-related harm we were attuned to the various perspectives provided by respondents.
For example, it is likely to be acceptable for personal data to be processed where a licence obligation requires it. We expect licensees to continue to be able to evidence that they have complied fully with their licence conditions. It would also mean that operators’ may be fined, and their licence could be revoked.
A more substantial role for the Commission in directly commissioning research to inform its regulatory role will also produce further progress in building the evidence base around gambling, supporting our understanding of gambling-related harms and ways to prevent them. Online members of BGC offered to pay 1% of GGY, matching the commitment of the four biggest operators in 2019, and land-based casinos to pay 0.4%. A licence condition requires operators to make an annual financial contribution to one or more organisations which deliver or support research into the prevention and treatment of gambling-related harms, harm prevention approaches, or treatment for those harmed by gambling. Increasing the amount of data that the Commission collects from operators will improve its capability to regulate the gambling industry in a modern way and will allow it to identify compliance issues at an earlier stage. Unlicensed sites can pose a variety of risks to customers, including allowing access to those who have self-excluded from gambling through GAMSTOP. The Commission will build on the expansion of datasets it collects from operators for regulatory purposes to develop a rich resource that will strengthen the evidence base on gambling and inform data-led regulatory action.
Recent Comments