Ireland Leads EU Budget Talks: A Pan-European Gambling Tax by 2028?

The European political landscape is shifting as Ireland takes the helm of the Council of the EU. Starting August 1, Dublin has assumed the lead broker role in negotiations for the 2028-2034 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). The European Commission is aiming for a budget of at least 2 trillion Euros, equivalent to roughly 1.26% of the average gross national income. The goal is to fund defense, IT security, and climate initiatives while repaying 600 billion Euros in COVID-related debt. To achieve this, Brussels is looking for "own resources" rather than relying solely on national contributions.

A significant part of this plan involves the online gambling sector. Romanian MEP Victor Negrescu, with backing from the Socialists & Democrats (S&D), has proposed a 1-to-2% EU-wide levy on online gambling and betting. Negrescu suggests that a standardized levy could raise at least 4 billion Euros annually. This move is seen as a way to harmonize the currently fragmented European gambling market and protect licensed operators from offshore competition. However, resistance is already stiff, particularly from Malta, whose economy is deeply intertwined with the iGaming industry through the Malta Gaming Authority (MGA).

Numbers and facts

The financial stakes are high. The Commission estimates new revenue streams could generate 58.5 billion Euros a year. Meanwhile, national governments are already squeezing the sector. In the Netherlands, the gambling tax is set to rise from 30.5% to 34.2% in 2025, reaching 37.8% GGR by January 2026. Holland Casino reported a loss of 3.5 million Euros in the first half of 2024, warning that such tax hikes make profitable operations nearly impossible.

In the UK, the situation is equally dire for some. Starting April 2026, remote gaming duty will jump from 21% to 40%. Evoke plc, owner of William Hill and 888, faces an estimated annual impact of 125 million to 135 million Pounds. Analysts from Deutsche Bank have already downgraded the company, noting that its UK online margins could drop from 23% to 13% by 2027 due to these fiscal changes.

"A common taxation framework could serve as an initial step towards the harmonisation of European gambling laws in addressing the fragmentation of gambling laws across Europe." - Victor Negrescu, Vice-President of the European Parliament

Background

Ireland is in a unique position. While moderating the EU-wide debate, it recently sanctioned its own new gambling regime, with the Gambling Regulatory Authority of Ireland (GRAI) now accepting license applications. Dublin must balance the Commission's desire for fiscal self-sufficiency with the sovereignty of member states like Malta and Cyprus. Malta’s Prime Minister, Robert Abela, has been vocal about rejecting an EU-wide levy, maintaining that taxation should remain a national competency.

For the industry, the Irish presidency is a turning point. If the levy is adopted, it could be the first step toward a more unified European gambling law. If it fails, the market remains a patchwork of national regulations and ever-increasing local taxes. Proponents believe a common tax protects tax-paying businesses, while critics argue it simply adds another layer of cost that will eventually be passed on to the consumer.

Why it matters for German players

German players are already operating in one of the most regulated environments in the world under the GlüStV 2021. With the LUGAS system enforcing a 1,000 Euro monthly deposit limit and a strict 1 Euro per spin cap on slots, the market is tight. Germany already imposes a 5.3% tax on stakes for online slots and poker. An additional EU levy would likely force GGL-licensed operators to further adjust their Return to Player (RTP) percentages. This makes legal gambling less attractive compared to the unregulated black market, potentially undermining the primary goal of player protection.

What it means for GGL-licensed casinos

For GGL-licensed operators, an EU-wide tax represents a double-edged sword. On one hand, the S&D argues it could help filter out illegal operators targeting Europe from outside regulated markets. On the other hand, the financial burden on legal casinos is already significant. Compliance with LUGAS and OASIS, combined with existing stake taxes, leaves thin margins. If an EU levy is added, GGL-licensed sites might struggle to compete with offshore operators that ignore such taxes. The success of the Irish presidency in brokering this deal will determine whether German operators face a more harmonized European market or just a more expensive one.