Anti-money laundering responsibilities for casino businesses
The firm’s commitment to excellence is underscored by its numerous accolades, including awards for ‘Future of Legal Services’ and ‘Best Use of Technology.’ The firm has also consistently received recognition as the UK Copyright Firm of the Year by Managing Intellectual Property and achieved top-tier rankings in media and entertainment by Chambers and Partners. The firm has established several spin-off ventures and solutions that leverage its expertise in media, technology and IP, including Incopro, Overmorrow, Curio, Kritic, Viewfinder, Wiggin Data Services and IR35 Manager. Wiggin distinguishes itself by anticipating future trends and their potential impact on clients’ businesses.The firm has successfully campaigned for significant industry changes, such as the extension of the UK Film Tax Credit and mitigation of the impact of IR35 changes on the media sector. Wiggin is a UK-based full-service law firm, headquartered in London, with a dedicated focus on media, technology and intellectual property (IP) matters. It is also worth noting that, in recent months, the Gambling Commission issued an “Industry Warning Notice” to those B2B operators that it has licensed after observing that certain games developed by such licensees appear accessible to British consumers on B2C websites that are not licensed by the Commission.
Chapter 5 ‘Review of licensing authority fees’ outlines proposed changes to premises non gamestop casino licence fees for Small 2005 Act casinos, which 1968 Act casinos that elect to move onto the new regime will also be subject to. The government intends for operating and premises licence fees to be harmonised between 1968 Act casinos and Small 2005 Act casinos. This measure will also bring greater consistency to the different licensing regimes and greater parity between online and land-based casinos.
The people most likely to have a gambling problem
Other evidence suggests adolescents have a greater risk tolerance compared to older adults and this may be reflected in their attitudes towards gambling specifically. PHE’s evidence review highlights a higher problem gambling and at risk rate among younger age groups than older age groups. Making the Gambling Commission’s code of practice for alcohol licensed premises binding would provide licensing authorities with greater powers on underage gambling in premises, but we do not expect it to create an additional burden for them. In their submissions to the review, representatives of the pub sector outlined a number of steps they are taking to address this, including regular staff training and building age verification into the machines themselves to reduce the reliance on staff supervision. However, due to the exemption, the Gambling Commission currently has an incomplete picture of the risks from underage gambling in premises run by smaller licensees. There have been calls from both industry and campaign groups to introduce ‘Think 25’ as standard for all land-based gambling, a position shared by the Advisory Board for Safer Gambling (ABSG) in its 2018 report which pointed to findings from the retail alcohol industry.
Government proposals
In practice, operators elect to site Category B machines and typically have an offering of 20 Category B1 machines. Without intervention, there is a risk that machines could become obsolete as we move towards a “cashless” society. The white paper proposed to reform the 80/20 rule in response to evidence that the current rule does not allow operators to adequately meet consumer demand, while still providing a balanced product offer to customers. Arcades and bingo premises are subject to an 80/20 rule which governs the balance of Category B (maximum £2 stake) and Category C or D machines in these venues (up to a maximum £1 stake). The size of Britain’s land-based casino sector has remained relatively flat in recent years, in contrast to an expanding online market.
We will also permit casinos of all sizes to offer sports betting in addition to other gambling activities and will take steps to reallocate unused 2005 Act casino licences to other local authorities. We will allow smaller casinos to benefit from more machines on a pro rata basis commensurate with their size and non-gambling space, subject to the same table to machine ratios and other conditions. The 2005 Act sets out a range of restrictions for land-based gambling based on the assumption that restrictions on supply (for example casino numbers and gaming machine availability) are an important protection.
For example, data provided by the Bingo Association indicates an average staff to customer ratio of 1 to 12, with the ratio ranging between 1 to 4 and 1 to 31 in various sessions. The latest statistics from the Gambling Commission show that in-person gambling participation in the year to December 2022 increased to 28% from 25% in the year to December 2021, showing some signs of recovery since the pandemic. We will also bring the licensing regime into line with that for alcohol by legislating to introduce a formal system of cumulative impact assessments (CIAs), when Parliamentary time allows. We will work with the Gambling Commission to develop specific consultation options for cashless payments, including the player protections that would be required before we remove the prohibition. The Gambling Commission has set out in the proposed customer interaction guidance that age can be a key determinant of vulnerability which operators should consider in customer interactions. In our view, it would be disproportionate to raise the minimum age for participation in gambling to higher than 18.
Please provide any views or any other information on the adequacy of player protections for those using gaming machines in casinos. How do you expect the measures allowing more gaming machines in 1968 Act casinos to impact the provision of other product offerings within casinos e.g. table gaming? How do you expect the measures allowing more gaming machines in 1968 Act casinos that meet certain size requirements to affect the demand for gaming machines in casinos?
1The Gambling Act 2005 sets out how gambling is regulated in Great Britain (gambling policy is almost entirely devolved to Northern Ireland). The white paper is structured around the six main themes in the call for evidence, followed by annexes on the estimated overall impact of our proposals and a summary of the submissions received to the call for evidence. The Review was set up to ensure our gambling laws are fit for the digital age and is the broadest examination of the regulatory framework for gambling since the 2005 Gambling Act. We have therefore commenced the review of the horserace betting levy which we are required to undertake by 2024 and will take account of the changes set out in this document to ensure the levy delivers an appropriate level of funding for the sector. The government recognises the significant contribution that horse racing makes to British sporting culture and its particular importance to the British rural economy, and is keen to ensure that measures such as financial risk checks do not adversely affect the sector.
- Casinos in the UK are generally operated under historic licences that were rolled forward under the “new” Gambling Act 2005.
- Overall, they would either prefer the current contactless payment restrictions to apply for debit card payments on machines or for chip and pin to only be required at the beginning of any session.
- The measure would also bring Great Britain’s casino experience more in line with other gaming jurisdictions, with sports betting being an expectation for international visitors.
All casinos listed on Accord Global hold active UKGC licences. The UK government has increased Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) from 21% to 40% of gross gambling yield for online operators. UKGC-licensed casinos can no longer offer autoplay functionality or turbo-spin (accelerated spin) features on online slots.
Venues would be required to comply with these requirements in order to increase their gaming machine allowance. Contrastingly, respondents from local government, campaign groups and academia were more cautious about any measures which could be seen as increasing the supply of gambling opportunities, due to links between rates of gambling participation and gambling-related harm. This fee enables licensing authorities to fund their enforcement and administrative gambling duties on a cost recovery basis. We will increase the maximum premises licence fees which can be charged by local authorities by 15%. To ensure that this is enforced we will make it a criminal offence to invite, cause or permit someone under the age of 18 to use these machines.
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 UK Gambling Commission is the independent regulatory body responsible for licensing and overseeing all commercial gambling in Great Britain (England, Scotland, and Wales). Understanding UK gambling regulations is not just for industry professionals. The UK online gambling landscape has undergone its most significant transformation since the Gambling Act 2005. UKGC licence is current, responsible-gambling controls are properly placed, and affordability monitoring kicks in at the legally required thresholds. UKGC licence is current, the site uses GAMSTOP integration, and the responsible-gambling toolkit is properly in place. UKGC licence is current and responsible-gambling controls are properly placed.
We have reviewed and analysed the evidence received through both consultations to arrive at an evidence-based policy position which we believe meets our objectives. Evidence was received in response to the land-based gambling consultation and through an additional supplementary consultation which focused on this reform specifically. Operators will also need to be able to demonstrate that their new gambling and non-gambling areas abide by the updated rules in the Mandatory and Default Conditions, which will include the sliding scale and other restrictions on the sizes of different areas of the casino.
The primary benefit of this measure is increased GGY for casinos that take up additional gaming machines. Gambling operators must ensure that their supervision and monitoring of gaming machines enables them to meet the requirements of the Act and conditions of their licence. Data from the National Gambling Treatment Service shows that a relatively small proportion of patients report participating in gaming machines in casinos. Taken together, the three measures will determine the maximum number of gaming machines that casinos will be entitled to. The sector views an increase to this ratio as essential in order to ensure these casinos’ long term viability by allowing them to site more gaming machines, and this conclusion was reflected in the white paper. It has also meant that none of these casinos are able in practice to satisfy the current conditions which would allow them to offer the maximum number of gaming machines due to the amount of space they take up.
These initial checks use publicly available data and do not require sensitive personal information such as postcodes or employment details. Additionally, a mandatory minimum 2.5-second interval between spins is required to slow down gameplay and promote safer gambling. To promote responsible gambling in the UK, it is essential to understand the laws governing these games. The firm also plays a role in observing and influencing the regulatory environment and crafting innovative structures for commercial relationships within the industry.
The draft Casinos Regulations form part of a package of interlinked statutory instruments which make changes to the regulatory framework for land-based casinos. Draft statutory instruments that form part of the package of measures that will change the regulatory framework for land-based casinos. We believe this is particularly important within the wider context of the modernising measures we are taking to support land-based gambling operators. The respondents received an average of 2 premises licence applications and held an average of 44 live premises licences, per licensing authority, over the same period.
While we understand the industry’s desire to remove these limits, we still think that they provide a valuable and proportionate point of friction for the customer that is important, particularly when using a cashless payment method. Industry’s perspective was mixed, with some responses stating that the limits for cashless payments should mirror the current ones to minimise the risk of delay to implementing the relevant legislation. In relation to taking a cautious approach, we think that a £100 limit is appropriate considering that our aim is to try and replicate the process by which someone uses cash to play on a machine. This will act as a safeguard in case someone tries to put more than £100 onto the machine. Using a debit card on a machine is a different experience for the customer compared to cash or tickets where a process such as going to an ATM has been undertaken before the person can put money onto the machine.
Likewise, 9% of ‘non-problem gamblers’ restarted gambling after taking a break after receiving an offer, compared to 53% of those with ‘problem gambler’ classification. Gamblers have reported engaging in higher-risk behaviours, such as playing multiple games simultaneously or using ‘auto-play’ functionality in order to play through bonus wagering requirements as quickly as possible. However, such incentives are not exclusively for existing customers, and ‘sign-up bonuses’ which reward new customers with a one-off benefit have become a key element of market competition. Often this involves giving certain individuals or cohorts a wide range of offers to encourage play and reward loyalty, including free bets or spins, cashback, and best odds guarantees.
Any measure that increases the availability of Category B machines risks leading to increased gambling harm for those playing on the machines. The rationale for considering this option is primarily to ensure that a truly balanced offer of gaming machines is available to customers following the loosening of restrictions from 80/20. Significant increases in Category B machines may increase the amount of money staked by customers, and/or the risk of harm. The objective of providing customers with a genuine choice of higher and lower stake machines is understood in terms of providing a safeguard against increased gambling harm. As some of the differences between 1968 Act and Small 2005 Act casinos are brought in line, operating and premises licence fees and mandatory licence conditions should be harmonised accordingly. We propose that an operator must notify the licensing authority of their intention to increase their number of gaming machines.
Such apps have so far only been rolled out for use on a relatively small proportion of gaming machines, principally in pubs. However, the advice is that the onus should be on industry to demonstrate how developments on cashless payments can be offered in a manner which does not increase the risk of gambling harm or gambling-related crime, such as money laundering. They also pointed to anecdotal evidence that indicates a decline in gaming machine usage in alcohol licensed premises by casual pub goers, who now pay by card but who previously might have played a machine using spare change. The original purpose of rules prohibiting the use of debit cards on gaming machines was to protect players. As well as supporting the recovery of those businesses which choose to offer betting, offering an alternative to betting on a phone while in a casino could lead to player protection benefits where the casino operators are better able to monitor all the customer’s activities while in their premises. In line with the intention of the 2005 Act to create casinos providing a range of gambling and non-gambling activities, we propose to permit sports betting in all casinos.
Currently, gambling treatment services and support in both countries are mainly provided through primary care and the voluntary sector, though those in need of more specialist treatment services may be referred to the National Problem Gambling Clinics in London and elsewhere in England. While the majority agreed that operator data regarding consumer behaviours at the individual account level would be fundamental to any repository, others also argued for datasets around treatment demand and access, complaints, and wider commercial data. There was widespread support for the creation of a data repository which would be available to researchers, though specific proposals as to the extent of the repository and the sort of data it would collect ranged widely. Three researchers account for nearly 40% of all British studies published on gambling in academic journals between 2019 and 2021.
In at least some of these instances, customers in this country are incidental to the main purpose of the arrangement which is often to attract customers in overseas jurisdictions to the brand. In these instances, the target market is mainly customers in Great Britain, and the licensee is leveraging the third-party’s brand to expand its appeal. It is the licensee which contracts with any customers and is responsible for providing the ‘facilities to gamble’ as set out in the 2005 Act, in spite of any branding on the website.