Author: Tenstar Team

Junglee Games Fails to Overturn India Gaming Ban
India’s Supreme Court has dismissed a review petition filed by Flutter Entertainment-owned Junglee Games, closing off the operator’s last realistic route to overturning state-level bans on real-money gaming. The ruling leaves Flutter’s roughly $200 million investment in the business with no path back to market, reinforcing a prohibition that has already cost the company hundreds of jobs.
What happened to Junglee Games
A batch of ten review petitions, led by Junglee Games India, was dismissed by the Supreme Court, with the petitions challenging the court’s 27 May 2026 judgment upholding Tamil Nadu and Karnataka laws that ban online games played for stakes, and a bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan dismissing the petitions on October 15 without an open-court hearing
.
The companies’ applications for an oral hearing were also rejected
.
The judges stated that they had carefully gone through the review petitions and found no merit in them, so the petitions were dismissed
.
The Supreme Court had originally set aside Madras and Karnataka High Court rulings that struck down the state bans, and held that states can prohibit online games played for money or other stakes, including games of skill such as rummy and poker
.
Junglee Games was joined in the litigation by other skill-gaming companies including Play Games24x7 and Head Digital Works, along with industry bodies the All India Gaming Federation
.
Even a successful review would not have let Junglee resume operations, since the national Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act 2025 already prohibits real-money gaming, and a separate constitutional challenge to that law remains pending before the Supreme Court
.
Why it matters
Flutter owns 95% of Junglee after paying more than $200 million for its stake, and had already suspended the business in August 2025 and cut 350 jobs
. The exhausted review petition confirms that write-down was not premature caution but an accurate read of where Indian law was heading, with no further domestic legal avenue left for Flutter to pursue on the state-level question.
For operators and suppliers eyeing emerging real-money markets, the case underlines how quickly a favourable legal environment can reverse once legislatures and courts align against an industry. High Court rulings that initially protected skill-gaming businesses were overturned at Supreme Court level, showing that early-stage regulatory wins cannot be treated as durable without national-level legislative backing.
The ban, approved by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government in August 2025, effectively wiped out the country’s nascent gaming sector overnight when it came into force on 1 May 2026
.
Affiliates and performance marketers who had built India-facing funnels around skill-gaming brands such as Junglee’s products now have definitive confirmation that there is no near-term route back into that traffic, barring success in the separate constitutional challenge to the national Act still pending before the court.
The bigger picture
The Junglee Games ruling arrives as the global industry watches a near-identical dynamic unfold in Brazil, where courts and the executive are similarly tightening restrictions on regulated betting following President Lula’s re-election. Flutter itself is managing both situations simultaneously, having wound down Betfair’s Italian operations earlier this month while now absorbing a second definitive market loss in India.
The pattern suggests that large multinational operators can no longer rely on a single favourable jurisdiction ruling to secure a market; national legislation and apex-court review are increasingly the deciding factors, and both are moving in a more restrictive direction across several major geographies. Readers following Flutter’s broader exposure to these shifts may find useful context in our coverage of Stake’s challenge to the Brazil court reversal, which tracks a parallel legal fight over market access.
Sources
October 28, 2026
Betfair Italy Shutdown Signals Regulatory Squeeze
Flutter Entertainment has confirmed it is shutting down the Betfair Exchange, Sportsbook and Casino products in Italy, telling industry media that recent regulatory changes have made the Betfair Italy exchange business no longer commercially sustainable. The closure affects one of the market’s most recognisable betting exchange brands and comes with an accelerated wind-down of its local affiliate programme.
What happened
Betfair is fully winding down in Italy as parent firm Flutter Entertainment responds to regulatory changes in the market, with the Betfair Exchange, Sportsbook and Casino set to be discontinued
. A Flutter spokesperson said
recent regulatory changes in Italy have made the Betfair Exchange product no longer commercially sustainable
.
The shift follows a new Italian licensing framework.
Operators now need an individual licence for each of their brands rather than one covering multiple brands, meaning Flutter must hold separate licences for Betfair, Sisal, Snai and PokerStars issued by the Customs and Monopolies Agency
. The rules fall under
new regulations introduced under Legislative Decree No. 41 of March 2024, which require operators to pay €7 million for a licence lasting up to nine years
.
Flutter has not given a precise closure date for customers but has moved faster on the affiliate side.
A letter sent to Betfair affiliates states that the Italian programme will end on 31 October 2026, with partners instructed to remove promotional content aimed at Italian customers by 29 October
.
Commission generated in October is due to be processed and paid in November as the final payment cycle
.
Why it matters
For Flutter, the financial exposure appears limited. The company has described the closures as covering
a very small proportion of its Italian revenue, with no impact on its other brands or employees
. The wider Italian business, which also includes Sisal, Snaitech and PokerStars, continues to operate as normal.
The bigger signal is for affiliates and partners working with exchange-style products across regulated European markets. A compressed shutdown window, promotional content removed within days and a single final commission cycle leaves little time for partners to redirect traffic or renegotiate terms. Affiliates that built content or campaigns specifically around Betfair Italy’s exchange offering now need to pivot quickly toward Flutter’s remaining Italian brands or other operators, a reminder that licensing reform can change affiliate economics faster than commercial planning cycles typically allow.
The bigger picture
Italy’s regulatory overhaul is reshaping the competitive landscape for every operator with exposure there.
Italy’s Ministry of Finance and Economy is projecting it will gain €1 billion in gambling taxes between 2027 and 2028
, underlining how the new framework is designed to tighten both compliance requirements and tax take simultaneously. Exchange-style betting, where customers wager against each other rather than a bookmaker, appears to sit awkwardly within rules built around fixed-odds betting regulation.
Italy remains a significant market for Flutter despite the Betfair retreat.
The wider Southern Europe and Africa region, which covers Italy, was the group’s third largest region between January and June 2026, with revenue up 36% year-over-year to $896 million
. The Betfair Italy closure therefore looks like a targeted product retreat rather than a signal of broader weakness, arriving alongside separate cost discipline moves at group level, including the recently announced cut of 1,400 jobs across the UK and Ireland.
For other operators running exchange or peer-to-peer betting products in Italy, the Betfair exit raises the question of whether the format can survive under the new licensing regime at all, or whether further consolidation around standard fixed-odds books is now inevitable.
Sources
October 28, 2026
NBA Prediction Markets Deal Signals Operator Shake-Up
The NBA has named Kalshi and Polymarket as its preferred prediction market exchanges and signed a memorandum of understanding with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, becoming the fourth major US professional sports league to formalise ties with the sector. The move, announced on 26 October, also saw the league extend its existing DraftKings partnership to cover the operator’s prediction market offering, directly linking a licensed sportsbook brand to the same event-contract category.
The agreements matter because they legitimise prediction markets as a parallel revenue channel to regulated sports betting, at the exact moment several US states are contesting whether platforms such as Kalshi should be treated as gambling operators at all.
What happened
The NBA announced on Monday that it had
partnered with Kalshi and Polymarket, two well-known prediction market operators, according to press releases sent out that day
. As part of the framework,
the league signed a memorandum of understanding with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission covering integrity in basketball event contracts
. The MOU was
signed by CFTC Chairman Michael Selig and NBA Commissioner Adam Silver
and commits both sides to share information relevant to market integrity.
Under the commercial terms,
each platform will receive rights to use NBA intellectual property, marketing rights, and promotional activations across media channels within the United States
, along with
official NBA data from Sportradar to operate and settle authorised NBA-related markets
. In return,
the agreements with Kalshi and Polymarket put in place integrity protections, including limitations on permissible markets, prohibitions on trading event contracts by league and team personnel, and information-sharing relating to investigations and suspicious trading
.
The league simultaneously deepened its existing sportsbook relationship.
The NBA has expanded its agreement with DraftKings to include prediction markets and nationwide promotion
, with a company spokesperson noting the deal
allows the company to “reach and engage eligible customers around NBA event contracts throughout the league ecosystem”
. The NBA indicated this is only the start:
the league plans to expand its relationship with other current official sports betting partners, and others in the industry, in the coming weeks
.
No financial terms were disclosed, and the deal does not extend to the WNBA.
The NBA is the third of the big North American sports leagues to sign a prediction market deal, after the NHL and MLB
, with legal commentary also noting it is
the first league to expand a sportsbook partnership into prediction markets, extending its agreement with DraftKings to include DraftKings Predictions
.
Why it matters
For operators, the deal confirms that prediction markets are no longer a fringe curiosity but a structurally embedded part of the sports commercial ecosystem. By granting Kalshi and Polymarket the same marketing rights and league data access traditionally reserved for licensed sportsbooks, the NBA has put federally regulated exchanges on equal commercial footing with state-licensed operators such as DraftKings and FanDuel, without those exchanges needing individual state gaming licences.
That distinction is commercially significant.
Prediction markets are technically distinct from traditional sports betting, as there is no central sportsbook that sets odds; instead, users place monetary wagers directly against one another via online exchanges
. This regulatory structure already allows Kalshi to
take customers at 18 and operate on some level in all 50 states, including states where sportsbooks remain illegal
, giving it reach that licensed sportsbooks cannot match in restricted jurisdictions.
For affiliates and performance marketers, the arrival of two large new advertisers with official league branding changes the competitive set for sports-betting search terms and content partnerships. Prediction market operators are now entitled to the same promotional activations as sportsbooks, meaning paid media, influencer deals and content campaigns built around NBA fixtures will increasingly feature Kalshi and Polymarket alongside established sportsbook brands, intensifying competition for the same acquisition inventory.
The bigger picture
The NBA deal lands amid unresolved legal conflict over how prediction markets should be regulated.
Some states have questioned the difference, and New York attorney general Letitia James this summer sued Kalshi, accusing it of running an illegal gambling operation
. Meanwhile other leagues are taking opposing stances:
the NFL backed a request for the US Supreme Court to review a dispute over whether states should oversee sports-related prediction market contracts
, highlighting a split in how major sports properties are responding to the sector’s growth.
Scale is part of the attraction for leagues weighing these deals.
The partnership arrives as prediction markets record multibillion-dollar quarterly volumes, with Kalshi and Polymarket the largest platforms, accounting for 46.6% and 52.1% of the market, respectively
. The NHL’s own agreement, struck days earlier, was reported as
the first major US professional sports league to permit the use of its trademarks by prediction markets, or “licensed betting markets”
, with NHL business president Keith Wachtel noting
“Prediction markets are here to stay”
.
The commercial momentum behind prediction markets, and the regulatory uncertainty still surrounding them, add to a year of structural change already reshaping how sports betting operators compete for market share, a theme explored in our coverage of Polymarket’s marketing practices probe.
Sources
October 27, 2026
Brazil Betting Ban Deepens as Lula Wins Re-Election
Brazil’s federal betting licences expired on 25 October, the same day the Superior Electoral Court confirmed President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s re-election to a fourth term. The result removes the political path operators had been counting on to reverse the country’s betting ban, leaving Congress and the Supreme Federal Court as the only remaining avenues back to a regulated market.
The outcome matters well beyond Brazilian borders. The country’s online betting market had drawn some of the biggest names in global iGaming before the ban, and its political direction will now shape whether, and how, that market can reopen.
What happened
Lula reached almost 52% of the vote against just over 48% for Flávio Bolsonaro, a margin of just over 4.3 million votes.
The Superior Electoral Court officially confirmed his re-election as president on Sunday.
The result confounded prediction markets, which had moved heavily against the incumbent in the run-up to polling day.
Polymarket had priced Bolsonaro’s chances at around 78% in the weeks before the runoff, but as counting progressed that position shifted sharply, and by around 9pm Brasilia time, with roughly 80% of votes reported, Lula’s probability of victory had risen to 99%.
The vote fell on the deadline set by Provisional Measure 1,394, the decree that triggered the current Brazil betting ban.
Lula signed the measure on 25 September, prohibiting the exploitation, offer, intermediation and advertising of fixed-odds bets nationwide, including by operators based abroad offering wagers to people in Brazil.
Operators’ websites went offline on 6 October, and federal authorisations expired on 25 October, the same day as the vote.
The expiry carries no right to a refund of the licence fee or to compensation.
The regulated market had only opened in January 2025 after operators paid R$30 million for their licences, and those payments have not been refunded under the measure.
Two institutional battles now run in parallel.
The Supreme Federal Court must decide whether the provisional measure is constitutional, following actions filed by sector entities and football clubs, with rapporteur Justice Luiz Fux having promised a ruling once the election concluded.
Separately, MP 1,394 still requires congressional approval to remain in force, and lawmakers have already proposed more than 90 amendments.
Congress and the court are weighing the measure’s future while it remains in force in the meantime.
Why the Brazil betting ban matters for operators
Licensed operators that paid for market entry in 2025 are now sitting on invalid authorisations with no refund mechanism and no clear restart date.
The result disappointed betting companies that had expected a Bolsonaro victory could lead to changes to the measure, with industry representatives reportedly having been in contact with people close to his campaign about revising it.
That route has now closed.
The president does face a Congress in which the opposition has strengthened its position, which keeps some pressure on his administration.
But with the government that imposed the ban now re-mandated, analysts see little chance of a swift legislative reversal.
For affiliates and marketing partners that built traffic and revenue-share arrangements around Brazil’s brief regulated window, the practical effect is a continued freeze on commissions tied to licensed operators. Any audience-acquisition strategy built on Brazilian search or social traffic now needs to account for an extended period of legal uncertainty, with state-level licensing floated by some analysts as a possible alternative route back into the market well before any federal resolution.
The bigger picture
Brazil’s regulated betting market was one of the most closely watched launches in global iGaming, pairing a large, sports-mad population with formal licensing for the first time.
The Finance Ministry has previously estimated that Brazilian households spend around 60 billion reais annually on online betting, generating roughly 10 billion reais in tax revenue.
Those figures explain why the sector attracted so much international investment, and why its sudden suspension in September sent operators scrambling to adjust market plans.
Lula’s re-election now locks in the political will behind the ban for at least the medium term, even as Congress and the courts work through the legal mechanics of the Brazil betting ban’s future. The dispute sits alongside Stake’s separate fight over a court reversal, detailed in Tenstar Media’s earlier coverage of Brazil’s betting ban, underlining how fragmented the legal picture has become for operators trying to plan around the market.
Sources
October 27, 2026
Gibraltar Gambling Tax Lobby Enlists Farage Before Budget
Gibraltar’s Trade and Industry Minister, Nigel Feetham, met Reform UK leader Nigel Farage on 25 October as part of a last-minute lobbying push against further UK gambling tax rises ahead of the Chancellor’s Budget on 28 October. The Gibraltar gambling tax campaign reflects how exposed the territory’s economy is to decisions made in Westminster, given how many UK-facing operators are licensed there.
What happened
Nigel Farage was welcomed by high ranking officials in Gibraltar to discuss mitigation strategies against a potential gambling tax increase in the UK
.
The meeting on 25 October, reported by Gibraltar’s public broadcaster GBC, saw Feetham and other Reform politicians discuss the potential consequences of further UK gambling tax increases as part of a wider effort to engage politicians across the political spectrum
.
Feetham has continued his campaign against further increases to UK gambling taxes, having unsuccessfully campaigned last year to halt a rise in remote gaming duty by citing the impact on tax receipts for the UK overseas territory
. On the latest meeting, Feetham said his focus was to ensure Gibraltar’s interests were represented and that the message was
heard loud and clear by all political parties
with the Budget approaching.
Speculation ahead of the Budget had centred on Machine Games Duty.
Speculation was previously rife that Machine Games Duty would be increased to 40%, though concerns have since been tempered slightly as many now believe only a 5% increase to 25% awaits
.
A hike would dent betting shops, Adult Gaming Centres and bingo halls, with industry estimates warning of thousands of jobs cut and hundreds of venues closing
.
Why the Gibraltar gambling tax fight matters
Gibraltar is not a bystander in UK gambling policy. Several of the largest operators serving UK customers are licensed and headquartered there, meaning any change to UK duty rates lands directly on Gibraltar-based balance sheets and payrolls.
A UK tax increase would inevitably affect operators’ expenses, leading to cost cuts that could see closures and job losses replicated in Gibraltar itself
.
For affiliates and performance marketers, the stakes are indirect but real. Operators facing higher duty typically respond by tightening marketing and bonus budgets to protect margins, which can compress commission structures and slow the flow of new partnership deals. A further squeeze on Gibraltar-based brands would add to pressure already building across the UK market since the remote gaming duty increase took effect.
The bigger picture
The current lobbying follows a tax rise already in force.
Remote Gaming Duty rose from 21% to 40% on remote gaming profits for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 April 2026, with a new 25% rate for remote betting due from 1 April 2027
. Gibraltar’s exposure to that shift is substantial:
the territory’s online gaming sector contributes roughly 30% of its GDP, directly employs more than 3,400 people, and generates around one-third of total UK gambling tax receipts
, according to Feetham.
The Treasury has previously shown little appetite to reverse course.
Exchequer Secretary Dan Tomlinson welcomed Gibraltar’s engagement but made clear the government would not budge from its decision
when Feetham raised similar concerns earlier this year. With the Budget now imminent, Gibraltar’s government appears to be hedging its bets by widening its political contacts beyond the governing party, a tactic that mirrors how Betsson and other operators have already had to adjust guidance around the tax hit, as covered in Betsson’s record Q3 results despite the tax hit.
Sources
October 27, 2026
Finland Licensing: ComeOn and SuomiVeto Approved
Finland’s National Police Board has cleared ComeOn Group and newcomer SuomiVeto to operate in the country’s new competitive gambling market, taking the number of publicly confirmed licensees to four ahead of the sector’s opening to competition on 1 July 2027. The approvals mark a further step in the dismantling of Veikkaus’s long-standing state monopoly, one of the last of its kind in the European Union.
Neither ComeOn nor SuomiVeto can accept a bet or a casino stake in Finland until the licensed regime goes live. The Finland licensing process has been running since the application window opened on 2 March 2026, and the pair now join Wildz Group and Hippos ATG as the first operators to go public with approvals.
What happened
ComeOn Group and newcomer SuomiVeto have both confirmed that they hold Finnish gambling licences, taking the number of operators publicly cleared for the country’s new competitive online market to four.
Neither brand can take a bet or a casino stake in Finland yet, as the licensed regime only goes live on 1 July 2027, when Veikkaus loses its exclusive grip on online casino and sports betting.
The pair join Hippos ATG and Wildz Group, which became the first company to go public with an approval earlier this month, with the latest tally of four confirmed licensees compiled by Gaming Intelligence.
ComeOn’s owner, Swedish group European Entertainment Group (EEG), confirmed in a statement dated 22 October that
the Finnish National Police Board had granted all of the licences the subsidiary sought, covering both online casino and sports betting.
ComeOn filed its applications on 2 March 2026, the day the application window opened, positioning itself as one of the first operators to receive approval under Finland’s new Gambling Act.
EEG chief executive Itai Frieberger described the outcome as an important milestone for the group’s regulated market strategy, while chief financial officer Raffaele Amodio said
“Finland is a core part of our growth strategy.”
SuomiVeto, meanwhile, is
led by the successful founders of BetCity in the Netherlands
, who previously built that Dutch brand before its sale to Entain. SuomiVeto co-founder Melvin Bostelaar said the licence represents the start of a new chapter for the Helsinki-based operator.
Why it matters
Finland’s shift to a multi-licence model ends one of Europe’s last fully state-controlled online gambling regimes, opening a market with one of the highest per-capita gambling rates in the world to private operators for the first time. The staggered pace of licence confirmations, now standing at four with reports of roughly 80 applications submitted overall, gives a preview of which groups are moving fastest to secure first-mover positioning before the July 2027 launch.
For suppliers and platform providers, each new confirmed licensee signals fresh commercial activity. SuomiVeto has already lined up turnkey technology partnerships with Bragg Gaming and Kambi to support its Finnish launch, underlining how licensing decisions cascade into supplier contracts well before a market formally opens.
For affiliates and performance marketers, the build-up to Finland’s opening represents a rare opportunity: a developed Nordic market with strong digital engagement and no established competitive SEO or affiliate presence, since all online activity has until now run through the Veikkaus monopoly. Early positioning around Finnish-language content and licensed-operator comparisons is likely to carry outsized value once marketing restrictions and bonus rules under the new Gambling Act come into force.
The bigger picture
Finland’s reform follows a now-familiar European pattern of monopoly markets transitioning to licensed competition, mirroring earlier liberalisations in the Netherlands and elsewhere. The National Police Board will hand supervisory responsibility to a newly created Finnish Supervisory Authority once the market opens, with Veikkaus retaining only lottery, scratch card and physical slot machine exclusivity.
With four operators now confirmed and reports suggesting dozens more applications in the pipeline, competition for Finnish market share is shaping up well before the formal launch date. That mirrors the pattern seen in other recently reformed European markets, where early licence announcements have tended to cluster around operators with existing Nordic or Dutch regulatory experience, such as SuomiVeto’s BetCity pedigree and ComeOn’s established Scandinavian footprint.
Readers interested in how European regulators are tightening deposit and player-protection rules in parallel with market openings can see our coverage of Spain’s new cross-operator deposit cap, which reflects a similar regulatory direction across the continent.
Sources
October 26, 2026
Spain DGOJ Sets €700 Daily Cross-Operator Deposit Cap
Spain’s gambling regulator, the DGOJ, has introduced a joint deposit limit system that caps each player’s combined spending across every licensed online operator at €700 a day, €1,750 a week and €3,300 over four weeks. The cap entered a testing phase on 21 October alongside a new centralised Player Portal, with full enforcement due from 26 March 2027. The move marks one of the most significant shifts in Spanish player-protection policy since the market was regulated, replacing a per-operator approach with one that follows the individual.
What happened
Spain’s Directorate General for Gambling Regulation has introduced a single deposit cap that follows each player across every licensed online operator, set by default at €700 a day, €1,750 a week and €3,300 over four weeks.
The consumer affairs ministry that oversees the DGOJ launched the cap and switched on the Player Portal at the same time, according to the regulator’s release dated 21 October.
Until now, Spanish deposit limits were set per operator, so a customer with five accounts in effect had five separate allowances. The new model counts deposits per person: once the combined total across all licensed sites reaches the cap, no operator may take a further deposit.
Standard ceilings apply unless the player changes them, any change takes effect only after three working days, and a player can raise the limit no more than once every three months.
The DGOJ limits sit on top of existing per-operator controls.
The joint limits are additional and complementary to the per-operator deposit limits already in force in Spain, which stand at €600 a day, €1,500 a week and €3,000 a month.
The legal basis is Royal Decree 520/2026, approved by the Council of Ministers in June and given a nine-month lead-in before binding application. DGOJ director general Mikel Arana presented the full roadmap for the rollout at the Gaming in Spain Conference in Madrid.
Why it matters
The reform closes a loophole that let players spread deposits across multiple brands to exceed what any single operator would allow.
The DGOJ has noted that approximately a third of online gamblers in Spain engage with more than one operator, so the change is expected to affect a substantial share of the online gambling population.
For operators, it means real-time integration with a central DGOJ system becomes a compliance requirement rather than an optional safeguard, with technical and cost implications for every licensed firm.
The industry has not welcomed the change unreservedly. Trade body Jdigital has pushed back, warning the aggregation model could favour larger operators at the expense of smaller ones and risks pushing some spending towards unlicensed sites.
Citing DGOJ data, the trade body said roughly 80% of online players in Spain stick with a single operator, meaning the multi-operator behaviour the decree addresses touches a minority of the market.
The DGOJ has defended the scale of the intervention, arguing that joint limits and related measures target a genuine and growing risk among multi-account players.
For affiliates, the practical effect is on how cross-operator comparison and multi-brand sign-up campaigns in Spain are framed. Content that currently nudges players toward opening accounts with several operators to maximise welcome offers will need to account for a shared spending ceiling that applies regardless of how many brands a player joins. That changes the calculus for affiliates built around encouraging multiple sign-ups in the Spanish market.
The bigger picture
The cross-operator cap fits a broader pattern of Spanish regulators tightening player protection since online gambling was first regulated.
Both projects support the safer gambling framework overseen by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, including the Royal Decree on Safer Gambling Environments, authorised in 2023.
Deposit limits and a player self-assessment tool were mentioned as part of the DGOJ’s Safe Gambling Programme 2026-2030 earlier this year.
Spain joins a small group of European markets experimenting with centralised, cross-brand player protection tools rather than leaving enforcement to individual licensees, a trend regulators in other jurisdictions are likely to watch closely as the March 2027 deadline approaches and early compliance data becomes available. Readers following the Netherlands’ own enforcement push can see our recent coverage of the record KSA fine against EOD Code for a sense of how aggressively European regulators are now treating licensing and compliance failures.
Sources
October 26, 2026
EOD Code Fined Record €37m by Dutch Regulator
The Dutch gambling regulator Kansspelautoriteit (KSA) has fined Costa Rica-registered operator EOD Code SRL a record €37 million for offering unlicensed online gambling to players in the Netherlands. The penalty, which covers twelve websites including Instantcasino and Skyhills, is the largest the KSA has ever imposed for illegal gambling provision.
The size of the fine, and the method used to calculate it, signals that the regulator is prepared to pursue offshore networks more aggressively, even though it has acknowledged that most such penalties are never collected.
What happened to EOD Code
Kansspelautoriteit investigators tested Instantcasino repeatedly between November 2024 and July 2026, registering with Dutch address details, using the Netherlands’ +31 telephone code, depositing Bitcoin and gambling
.
No technical controls prevented participation from a Dutch IP address.
The investigation that began with Instantcasino subsequently uncovered eleven further sites linked to the same operator, among them Skyhills, Slotmonster, Betiro and Betblast.
The sites accepted cryptocurrency and anonymous payment methods, which the KSA said encourages money laundering
. The regulator had already tried to stop EOD Code once before.
It had ordered EOD Code in July 2025 to stop offering unlicensed gambling in the Netherlands, but follow-up inspections in September found Dutch players could still access Instantcasino, triggering the maximum €840,000 in periodic penalty payments, which the company did not pay.
Because the operator ignored requests for financial information, the KSA built its own estimate of EOD Code’s earnings.
The regulator estimated EOD Code’s 2025 Dutch gross gaming revenue at €108.4 million from search volumes, set the fine at 270% of that figure, then cut it to the legal ceiling of 10% of estimated worldwide revenue.
Dutch law limited the sanction to 10% of the company’s estimated worldwide turnover, which the regulator placed at €372.989 million for 2025, reducing the maximum to €37.2989 million before the Ksa rounded the final penalty down to €37.25 million. EOD Code can object within six weeks, but filing an objection does not suspend the decision.
Why it matters
The EOD Code case shows the KSA is willing to use revenue-based fines even when an operator refuses to cooperate, reconstructing turnover estimates from external data rather than letting non-disclosure limit enforcement. For licensed Dutch operators, that raises the bar on compliance expectations, since the regulator is demonstrating it can match penalties to the actual scale of an illegal operation rather than relying on fixed administrative fines that offshore brands can simply absorb as a cost of doing business.
For affiliates and performance marketers, the case is a reminder that promoting unlicensed brands carries growing reputational and legal exposure as regulators sharpen their investigative methods. A linked concern raised by the KSA this month is that
generative AI chat and search assistants frequently direct users towards online gambling sites lacking official Dutch licences
, meaning organic and AI-driven discovery channels are themselves becoming a regulatory target. Affiliates operating in regulated markets such as the Netherlands will need to keep licensing checks current as part of their due diligence, since search visibility for an unlicensed brand can now attract direct scrutiny.
The bigger picture
The EOD Code penalty breaks a record set only seven months earlier.
The fine for the operator of Instant Casino tops the €24.8m sanction handed out by Kansspelautoriteit to Novatech in March
, the Curaçao-based operator behind Qbet and 55Bet. The escalating scale of these penalties points to a regulator testing how far turnover-based calculations can be pushed against operators who refuse to engage.
Yet the KSA itself has conceded the limits of fines as a deterrent.
The regulator has admitted that fines against unlicensed operators are almost impossible to collect, meaning they are never paid and have no material impact on the operator under the spotlight, and confirmed in January that it was taking enforcement action to collect a previous fine of €840,000 after the Costa Rican firm failed to pay and continued targeting Dutch players. According to the KSA, 97.5% of the €56.4m in penalties issued to unlicensed operators since market legalisation in 2021 have gone unpaid.
That collection problem is likely to keep pushing the regulator towards working with payment providers, hosting companies and large technology platforms alongside headline fines against companies such as EOD Code.
The case sits alongside a broader pattern of European regulators tightening enforcement around licensing compliance, a theme covered recently in our report on L&L Europe’s £900k settlement with the UK Gambling Commission. For more coverage of regulatory and licensing developments across the sector, visit our industry news section.
Sources
October 25, 2026
Election Betting Scandal Ends in Suspended Sentences
Three people linked to the Conservative Party have received suspended prison sentences for cheating at gambling in a case the UK Gambling Commission calls the first of its kind it has taken to court. The election betting scandal centres on wagers placed on the date of the 2024 general election before it was publicly announced, using what prosecutors described as inside information. The sentencing closes one chapter of a wider investigation that still has ten defendants awaiting trial in 2027 and 2028.
What happened
The sentences were handed down at Southwark Crown Court on 23 October 2026, in a prosecution brought by the Gambling Commission under section 42 of the Gambling Act 2005.
All three had pleaded guilty, with the Lees entering their guilty pleas in September.
Anthony Lee, the Conservative Party’s former Director of Campaigning, received the heaviest penalty.
He was given 10 months and two weeks in prison on each count, running concurrently and suspended for 12 months, together with 100 hours of unpaid work.
His wife Laura Lee, the party’s Head of International and a candidate at the 2024 election, received four months and two weeks, suspended for 12 months, plus 40 hours of unpaid work.
The couple were each ordered to pay £1,000 towards prosecution costs.
Amy Hind, a former Conservative Party employee who was working for the NHS at the time of the offences, was sentenced to six months suspended for 12 months and 50 hours of unpaid work.
The court also attached two identical conditions to all three sentences: a 12 month probation requirement and a 12 month ban on using online gambling applications.
The judge set out how the scheme worked.
Then-prime minister Rishi Sunak held a private meeting in Downing Street on 10 March 2024 to discuss possible election dates, and although neither Lee nor Saunders attended, the prosecutor said the inference was that Lee received confidential information and acted on it.
Together, the three defendants stood to receive £49,380 in potential returns, including stakes.
Why it matters for the Gambling Commission and operators
This is the regulator’s first courtroom success of its kind, and it signals how far the Gambling Commission is prepared to pursue insider betting cases against high-profile individuals.
General Counsel Katharine Diamond called it a significant case and a first of its kind for the Commission, demonstrating its commitment to protecting the integrity of betting markets, adding that betting markets must be fair and must not be undermined by people using confidential information.
The case also shows the role operators play in flagging suspicious activity.
The scandal came to light after Ladbrokes referred the bets placed by Williams to the Gambling Commission after flagging Williams as a Politically Exposed Person.
That single referral triggered an investigation that has since produced 15 charges and now its first sentences.
For licensed operators, the gambling ban condition attached to all three sentences is notable. Courts can now restrict individuals from using online gambling applications as part of a cheating conviction, adding a new enforcement layer beyond self-exclusion schemes that operators already run.
The bigger picture
The sentences come after an investigation in which 15 people were charged for their involvement.
Other figures charged with cheating offences under the Gambling Act will have trials take place in 2027 and 2028.
Former Conservative MP Craig Williams, the highest-profile figure caught up in the scandal, pleaded guilty earlier this year and is expected to be sentenced at a later date.
The wider election betting scandal has already run for more than two years, since reports first surfaced that political insiders had bet on the July 2024 polling date. It now stands as a test case for how UK gambling law treats insider knowledge in niche political betting markets, a product line several licensed bookmakers continue to offer around elections. With more trials scheduled into 2028, the Gambling Commission is likely to keep this case in the headlines, and operators offering political markets will be watching closely for any further guidance on PEP screening obligations.
For more coverage of UK regulatory enforcement and compliance developments, visit our industry news section.
Sources
October 25, 2026
Polymarket Marketing Practices Probe Costs CMO His Job
Polymarket marketing practices are under scrutiny after the prediction market platform fired its chief marketing officer, Matthew Modabber, following an internal investigation into staged betting videos and undisclosed influencer payments. The dismissal, first reported by the New York Post on 22 October, follows a Wall Street Journal investigation published in June that exposed fabricated trading content used to attract new users. The episode lands as prediction markets push deeper into territory regulated sportsbooks and casinos already occupy, raising fresh questions about promotional standards in a fast-growing adjacent sector.
What happened
Modabber’s departure marks the end of his long-standing professional relationship with Polymarket’s founder and CEO, Shayne Coplan, with Modabber having joined the company in 2024 as one of its earliest executives.
He went on to build Polymarket’s marketing function into a team of more than 50 people before his responsibilities were reportedly scaled back ahead of the dismissal.
The internal review focused on allegations that Polymarket employed staged betting videos, engaged social media influencers without sufficiently transparent disclosure, and presented simulated trades as though they represented actual customer gains.
The Wall Street Journal investigation revealed that some online creators had posted videos falsely depicting customers winning approximately $1.9 million through the platform.
Separate reporting has put a figure on the money flows involved, with more than $2.5 million said to have moved through Modabber’s personal PayPal account, including payments to content creators for posts that lacked required disclosures.
The fallout extends beyond the boardroom. The National Association of Consumer Advocates has filed a lawsuit against Polymarket, Coplan and Modabber in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, alleging deceptive promotional campaigns involving undisclosed financial relationships with influencers. The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission has also opened its own inquiry, though no wrongdoing has so far been established. Polymarket has declined to comment publicly, and Modabber has not responded to requests for comment.
Why it matters
The Polymarket marketing practices case is a governance story as much as a marketing one. Reports suggest the company’s board concluded that Modabber was holding back efforts to professionalise its image as it weighs a potential initial public offering. For a platform valued in the tens of billions and courting institutional investors, unresolved questions about promotional honesty carry a direct cost to credibility and valuation.
For operators and affiliates across iGaming, the episode is a pointed illustration of where influencer-led acquisition can go wrong. Staged content and undisclosed paid promotion are exactly the practices that regulators in licensed betting markets, including the UK and several US states, have spent years trying to stamp out through advertising codes and affiliate disclosure rules. A high-profile enforcement-style fallout at a prominent prediction market platform gives ammunition to regulators already inclined to tighten scrutiny of performance marketing tactics, including those used by licensed sportsbook and casino affiliates.
The bigger picture
Prediction markets have spent much of 2026 positioning themselves as a lighter-touch alternative to traditional sports betting, with platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket attracting both bettors and operator partnerships. DraftKings has talked up its own DKeX platform’s growth in the same period, and IG Group has applied for a UK gambling licence to support its own prediction markets launch later this year. That expansion has brought prediction markets closer to the compliance expectations long placed on licensed gambling operators.
Polymarket’s experience suggests that proximity brings scrutiny it may not yet be fully equipped to handle. As prediction market platforms seek legitimacy, partnerships and eventually public listings, the standards applied to their marketing will increasingly mirror those already enforced against regulated betting brands and their affiliates. Operators weighing partnerships with prediction market platforms, and affiliates considering where to direct traffic, now have a fresh case study in how quickly promotional missteps can turn into regulatory and reputational liabilities.
Sources
October 24, 2026