The discussion centred around the methods to identify to what extent different tax and licensing regulation contribute in directing the consumers to the regulated and licensed websites, in order the Industry’s common European objectives are to be met. After the audience had been informed on some of the key figures of growing online gambling market in EU (in terms of annual scale, number of consumers and growth rate), the debate was divided into four panels.

In first, Swedish Member of the European Parliament, Mr. Cristopher Fjellner, highlighted the adverse consequences of the Commission’s decision to close all the Industry-related infringement cases. By presenting the latest developments in liberalization of the Swedish online gambling market, he also stressed the practical inapplicability of monopolistic regimes in the context of globalized and digitalized market with the variety of different alternatives just a click away.

Discussing about the EU online gambling regulatory policy, EGBA’s Secretary General, Mr. Maarten Haaijer, focused on the regulatory vacuum clearly visible at the EU level as regards the Industry. Further on, he informed on the 2020 projected figures of growth at the EU level as 22.5 billion euros are expected to be generated annually through online gambling, as well as additional 84.3 billion euros via retail market.

Prof. Justus Haucap referred to some methodological aspect of calculating the national index values of channelled online gambling offer (channelling index), i.e. the level of gambling services that are rendered through licensed and regulated operators. In explaining the reasons for Germany being the negative example, whereas Denmark a positive one, he emphasized the importance of balanced taxation, liberalized licensing regime and high awareness on consumer protection as prerequisites for a successful policy of highly channelled online gambling offer, given the latter is highly price-sensitive.

Head of German Sports Betting Association, Mr. Luka Andric, identified the Germany’s complex federal structure as the main reason for the so-far failed licensing process, meaning that the country’s market lacks in legal certainty and consumer protection against unregulated operators and black market.

All the participants agreed that a unified, common EU approach is crucial for attracting the customers to a regulated and safe market user environment. This is particularly important in the case of online gambling, bearing the mind it is especially sensitive to any change in digital, societal or business regulatory framework, both nationally and EU-wide.

During the meeting, the biggest emphasis was put on the implications following the decision made by the European Commission to close all pending infringement cases and outstanding complaints against EU Member States, in their respective national provisions regulating online gambling which are deemed to be in breach of the EU acquis. It was ascertained that EOGL will continue encouraging all the European gaming industry subjects to file cases at the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

Furthermore, in spite of the decision made by the EU Commission, which is to bring adverse effects to the Industry as a whole, EOGL will continue to regularly communicate with the EU institutions with the aim of promoting a consolidated approach to regulating the EU gaming market.

As one of the most important activities carried out in recent year, EOGL Executive Committee recognized the promotion of the Responsible Gaming measures to encourage operators and associations to keep complying with the best Industry practices on a global scale

Our position paper tends to identify and highlight several conceptual deficiencies introduced by the Draft Law which, if adopted, could affect the core values of EU acquis and the functioning of the Internal market. As the most disputable, we have identified the provisions and definitions, envisaged by the Lawmaker, relating to the vicinity of gaming establishments in general, vicinity of the latter to hospitals, and to the extent of personal data asked by the players.

The proposed amendments do not, in an unambiguous manner, explain the exact minimal required vicinity of the gaming establishments from categories of objects encompassed by this Draft Law.

Furthermore, the Draft Law intends to include the hospitals in provisions regulating the distance of the Class IV gaming facilities. Our Organization would like to highlight the redundancy of this legislative intent. In our position paper, we emphasized that not a single study on gambling has so far outlined the vicinity of hospitals and similar facilities as a risk factor for developing problematic behaviour or underage gambling.

We believe that the foreseen mandatory documenting of occupation and place of birth of players while entering a gaming facility, represents a bad practice which will infringe players’ privacy, given it is to be expanded on irrelevant and unauthorized types of personal data.

However, there are several provisions of the Draft Law which our Organization finds very properly designed, in terms of achieving a more strengthened approach to responsible gambling. They are also included in our official letter addressed to the European Commission.

You can find the complete position paper of EOGL, sent to the European Commission, in Studies section of the page, or by clicking here