search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Comment December 2025


A politically tidy fix, perhaps, but one that leaves the betting industry wondering whether the UK intends to lead in a fast-changing global market or simply tax it until it slows down.


Last week’s Budget delivered a raft of headlines - frozen income-tax


thresholds, a mansion levy, ISA cuts, a rejig of pension tax breaks - but for the UK gambling industry it was a body-blow. Most consequential of all: the decision to almost double the tax on online casinos. Te Remote


Gaming Duty leaps from 21 per cent to 40 per cent from April 2026. Online sports betting isn’t spared either: a new remote-betting duty rate of 25 per cent is set to kick in by April 2027.


At least the government has scrapped duty on bingo - a modest nod to the issues facing the land-based sector. On paper, the changes will raise roughly £1.1bn for the Treasury by 2030. Tat may echo well with policymakers keen to claw back revenue for further welfare handouts -


but for the gaming industry there is no silver lining. It couldn’t have been any worse (Mick McCarthy’s “it can” anyone?)


Te Treasury’s logic isn’t *entirely* without merit. Online gambling


revenues have surged, and the argument that high-growth digital industries should shoulder more of the national burden isn’t unreasonable. But


balance matters. Over-correct, and you don’t just trim excess - you cut into the competitiveness of a sector that has consistently delivered jobs, investment, and global reach.


4


WILLIAM BOLTON Editor


Te Treasury’s logic isn’t *entirely* without merit. Online gambling revenues have surged, and the argument that high-growth digital industries should shoulder more of the national burden isn’t unreasonable. But balance matters. Over-correct, and you don’t just trim excess - you cut into the competitiveness of a sector that has consistently delivered jobs, investment, and global reach.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134