Month: July 2023

Spelinspektionen handed warnings and penalties to AML, Kindred Group and Pinbet in November of last year. The regulator highlighted “shortcomings” in each operator’s AML and terrorist financing processes.

ATG was ordered to pay a penalty of SEK6m (£437,532/€508,050/$551,946) as part of its sanction.

Spelinspektionen, which investigated each operator for certain period between 2019 and 2021, said ATG breached awareness for eight customers. The regulator also said ATG did not work proactively or take a risk-based approach during the periods in question. 

As such, Spelinspektionen ruled the failures were systematic and repeated, which therefore warranted a warning and penalty fee.

Unjustified penalty

However, ATG appealed the verdict to the Administrative Court in Linköping, with the court ruling in favour of the operator.

In its ruling, the court agreed with Spelinspektionen that there had been shortcomings with ATGs handling of the eight customer cases. The court said ATG had breached the country’s Money Laundering Act by failing to take the relevant protection steps.

The court also considered whether the actions were systematic or repeated. It said while there were shortcomings in these cases, they did not entail a clearly increased risk of the business being used for activities such as money laundering.

“The violations are not, either individually or collectively, so serious as to warrant a warning and a penalty fee,” the court said “The court has therefore decided to approve ATG’s appeal and annul the regulator’s decision.”

Responding to the ruling, ATG chief executive Hasse Lord Skarplöth said the decision was a “very important” victory for the group.

“The members of the Administrative Court were unanimous in their view to approve our appeal and annul the decision of Spelinspektionen,” Skarplöth said.

Proposed penalty fee increase

Skarplöth added that the successful appeal raises questions about other matters, including Spelinspektionen’s request to increase penalty fees.

“Spelinspektionen has requested to raise the limit for penalty fees to over ten million kroner in future cases,” Skarplöth said. “My opinion is this request should be strongly questioned after the decision from the Administrative Court. 

“The same applies to Spelinspektionen’s strategy, which differs from the rest of the world of authorities. One should spend more time supporting than punishing the actors within the licensing system. 

“Instead, put the resources into defending the Swedish license market and chasing the unlicensed gambling companies.”

Spelinspektionen has three weeks from the date of the ruling (29 June) to appeal the court ruling.

The funding was issued to the Nevada Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (GLCCNV) during a Pride Month event. June has been known as Pride Month in the US since 1999.

Funds will support the GLCCNV’s efforts to support members of the LGBTQ+ community in Nevada with entrepreneurship and business opportunity.

Jyoti Chopra, chief people, inclusion and sustainability officer at MGM Resorts, said the group was “honored” to support the GLCCNV.

Read the full story on iGB North America.

Players bet $30.8m on sports, down 25.1% from $41.1m in May 2022 and 17.9% less than $37.5m in April this year. This was also the lowest amount since $27.7m was bet during August last year.

Some $22.4m was wagered online, while $8.4m was spent betting at retail sportsbooks. The latter was split $4.8m at Twin River and $3.5m the Tiverton Casino.

Revenue for the month amounted to $3.9m, up 69.6% from $2.3m last year and 30.0% more than $3.0m in April 2023.

Read the full story on iGB North America.

On 29 June, the Court of First Instance of Tournai rejected the arguments of the operators and sports teams on the grounds that the decree was lawful and can therefore enter into effect. This removed the final legal hurdle before the imposition of Belgium’s near total gambling ad ban, which is due to begin tomorrow.  

“I am pleased that the judge confirms that this drastic restriction on gambling advertising is a proportionate and legally based measure,” said Minister of Justice Vincent Van Quickenborne, responding to the decision. “Hopefully this will put an end to all attempts at lobbying and legal sabotage from the gambling sector and sectors addicted to gambling money.”

The legal challenges

On 24 March, several major Belgium sports organisations announced that they would be looking to fight the Royal Decree. The country’s top level association football and ice hockey leagues, the Pro League and the BeNe League, went to court to have the ban suspended.

In addition to these major proceedings, a number of other sports teams and operators simultaneously filed suits in 11 other courts throughout Belgium. The Ministry of Justice speculated that the number of cases filed was in order to maximise the chances of success.

The court ruled against the Pro League and BeNe League in its decision, arguing that that since the bans sports sponsorship provisions are not set to enter into effect until 2027, there is plenty of time for the sports organisations to prepare.

Multiple cases fail

Courts made judgements on similar reasoning with cases involving other organisations aiming to have to ban overturned Club Brugge, Cercle Brugge, OH Leuven, KV Kortrijk, KRC Genk and Napoleon Games. 

The remaining cases – which were brought to a number of separate courts by RFC Seraing, Standard Liège, Racing Molenbeek, Brussels Basketball, Continuum Sports Belgium, Golden Palace and SA Gambling – were all referred to the Tournai court, which ruled on the matter as a single case.

Ultimately, the court ruled against the operator-sports team coalition. The court did so on the grounds that the Royal Decree pursues a “legitimate aim of public interest”.

“It is time for everyone to accept the new reality: from July 1, the tidal wave of gambling advertising in our country will be over,” said Van Quickenborne.

“As of 1 July, we are finally fully protecting the many addicted gamblers and their families from its devastating impact. With these measures we will also protect minors against its normalising effect.”

Belgium’s gambling ad ban

From 1 July, most forms of gambling advertising are to be banned nationwide. This includes on television, radio, in print and online. In contrast with the Dutch gambling advertising ban – which is to also enter into effect on 1 July – the Belgium case makes no distinction between untargeted and targeted advertising, with personalised advertising also set to be prohibited.

The kinds of gambling advertising tolerated is to be minimal. For instance, the name and logo on the retail premises of a casino, slot parlour or betting shop will be allowed. As will placing gambling advertising on your own gambling website and unsponsored posts on social media accounts.

Gambling sponsorship will remain in place for now. However, the government has also issued a phased ban of the activity, with stadium and team sponsorship to end 2025 and 2028 respectively.

Industry criticises ban

The ban has been subject to criticism by industry who have characterised it as a boon to the illegal market.

In addition, the Belgium gambling trade body Bago highlighted that the government acted against the advice of the country’s regulator the Gambling Commission when it chose to impose the ban.

The industry noted that the government has allowed the country’s largest gambling operator to continue, the National Lottery. The lottery – which is 40% of the gaming market in Belgium – came under criticism in June last year for what some considered to be inappropriately lobbying for an advertising ban for which it would be exempt.

Instead of an advertising ban, Bago highlighted player protections methods such as increased use of AI and increased awareness for the country’s self-exclusion platform the EPIS list as possible alternatives.  

“Today, more and more legal operators are using algorithms and artificial intelligence to identify emerging problematic gaming behaviour at an early stage and offer players solutions, even advising them to register on the EPIS list,” says Tom De Clercq, chairman of BAGO. “If we want to fight gambling addiction effectively, this is the way to go.”

The 2023 edition of iGB Live will take place from 12-14 July in the RAI, Amsterdam.

The study is titled Breaking Barriers: Assessing Women’s Sports Growth, Betting Trends, and Integrity Challenges. It was conducted by the German Sport University Cologne.

The results will be presented by Henry Steinfeldt, professor at the German Sport University Cologne on 12 July at the event. This will then be followed by a discussion with Vasileios Bountzouklis, commercial manager, betting at Stats Perform and Silvia Paleari, director of public affairs at IBIA, which will be chaired by Christina Thakor-Rankin, co-founder of the AIDP.

The study examines economic developments across five women’s sports – soccer, cricket, tennis, basketball and volleyball. It also looks at betting trends across women’s sports, as well as integrity measures.

Rise in women’s sports

Khalid Ali, CEO of IBIA, said that the study is essential to understanding the rise in women’s sports.

“Women’s sport has moved from the margins to the mainstream – it is the future of sport and sports betting,” he said. “That is why understanding the transformation of women’s sports and what it means for the sports betting market and sports integrity is so important.”

“With the Women’s Football World Cup due to start in July, this is a great moment to kick-off the conversation about women’s sports, betting and integrity. We look forward to presenting the results of the study at iGB Live!”

Thakor-Rankin said that the prevalence of women’s sports has major implications for all areas of the industry.

“The rise in women’s sport is bringing in a new, younger and more female generation of sports bettors whose attitude and approach to betting is very different to male bettors,” she said. “This has implications not just for sports integrity, but also trading practices, market making and safe gambling.

“By understanding what this new and rapidly evolving landscape looks like we put ourselves in the best possible position to keep customers, sports betting operators, athletes and sport safe for all.”

Dr. Sören Dallmeyer, professor at the German Sport University added that the study aimed to identify key aspects of growth and integrity threats.

“As women’s sports continue to gain popularity, so does the expansion of sports betting within this domain,” said Dallmeyer. “One of our roles as a research institution is to study this rapid growth closely.”

“Based on existing scientific evidence and data, we aim to identify where threats to the sport’s integrity may arise and determine the most effective strategies to counteract these challenges.”

Today, the D.C. Circuit Court released its ruling on the Florida sports betting case, saying the Seminoles should be permitted to operate mobile sports betting in the state.

This reverses a federal district court ruling that held the 2021 compact with the tribe, effectively granting it a sports betting monopoly in Flordia, violated the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).

The suit filed by casino operators West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Myers Corporation forced Hard Rock Digital’s sportsbook offline after just over a month in December 2021.

“The Seminole Tribe of Florida is pleased with today’s unanimous decision,” Seminole spokesman Gary Bitner told iGB.

“It is a positive outcome for the Seminole Tribe and the people of Florida, and for all of Indian Country.  The Tribe is fully reviewing the decision to determine its next steps.”

The background: 2021 push for Florida sports betting

The case stretches back to early 2021. That year a compact allowing the tribe to offer mobile and in-person sports betting in the state was approved by Governor Ron DeSantis. The compact also covers roulette and craps games at the tribe’s casinos in the state, while betting would be powered from servers on tribal lands.

This agreement allowed the Seminoles to partner parimutuel betting operators, for which they would pay a 13.75% share as well as a 10% contribution from its casino sportsbooks into Florida coffers.

After it was ratified by the legislature and signed into law by DeSantis, the US Department of the Interior ‘approved’ the compact. While the DOI did not explicitly approve or reject the agreement, it took no action within the 45-day window, meaning it automatically came into effect.

The case against the compact

Parimutuel betting operators West Flagler Associates West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Myers Corporation filed suit in September 2021 arguing the mobile component amounted to an expansion beyond tribal lands. This, the plaintiffs argued, could only be approved through a statewide referendum.

Further, they claimed it amounted to a breach of both the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) and the Wire Act, as the bets in theory being placed from a US jurisdiction where online wagering is prohibited.

The suit claimed Indian Gaming Regulatory Act makes clear that tribal bets must be placed on tribal land. The State of Florida and the Seminole Tribe cannot change the boundaries of tribal land or “convert gaming that occurs off tribal land to gaming that occurs on tribal land”, it argued.

This was supported by Judge Dabney Friedrich, who ruled the compact attempted to “authorise sports betting both on and off Indian lands”.

“In its own words, the compact authorises such betting by patrons who are ‘physically located in the State [of Florida] but not on [the Tribe’s] Indian Lands’,” Friedrich noted, reinstating the Seminoles’ 2010 compact.

The ruling explained

The Circuit Court judges ultimately rejected the claim Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by failing to act on the compact. Instead, she allowed it to pass into law after a 45-day deadline for action passed.

It also rejected that this “approval through inaction” violated the APA for four reasons:

its authorisation of gaming off of Indian lands was unlawful under IGRA,it violated the Wire Act,it violated the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA)it violated the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee.

Are mobile bets on or off Indian lands?

The first claim was rejected by the court as compacts wording allows the Seminole Tribe to offer sports betting on its lands. For mobile bets, it “deems” these to have been placed on Indian land, and does not authorise online wagering.

“The lawfulness of any other related activity such as the placing of wagers from outside Indian lands, under state law or tribal law, is unaffected by its inclusion as a topic in the compact,” the ruling explains.

However the presiding judge admitted the scope of this judgement was particularly narrow and only ruled that Secretary Haaland did not violate the APA.

“We express no opinion as to whether the Florida statute ratifying the compact is constitutional […].

“That question and any other related questions of state law are outside the scope of the Secretary’s review of the compact, are outside the scope of our judicial review, and as a prudential matter are best left for Florida’s courts to decide.”

This effectively means that a successful challenge could ultimately force the Seminoles’ mobile sportsbook back offline.

What about the other claims?

The suit argued that the compact would authorise transactions in violation of the 1961 Wire Act. West Flagler argued online communications are “almost invariably” routed between servers in and out of state.

However, the judges rejected this line of reasoning not least because the compact does not authorise transactions, a fact that “itself forecloses the Wire Act challenge”.

In any case the compact expressly states the Seminoles must act in “strict compliance” with the Wire Act, the judge noted. Further, the argument does not hold up as even wagers placed on Indian lands using West Flagler’s reasoning.

The claim of violating UIGEA was given equally short shrift. The compact itself could not facilitate a violation, the ruling explained, therefore the charge was entirely hypothetical.

Finally, the Fifth Amendment violation was dismissed on the basis that “promoting the economic development of federally recognised tribes” was entirely constitutional.