Gambling Commission: “Finance Risk Assessments Are Not Just Another Name for Affordability Checks”

(AsiaGameHub) –   The UK’s Gambling Commission has reaffirmed that its proposed affordability measures will affect only a small fraction of British gamblers, despite widespread criticism.

These “affordability checks,” a term the Commission itself avoids, have recently sparked significant debate. The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) has even suggested potential legal challenges to block their full introduction.

Speaking at the Clarion Payments Providers event this week, Ian Angus, the Commission’s Director of Policy, reiterated that the proposed Finance Risk Assessments (FRAs) are “not affordability checks by another name.”

“Nor do the proposed thresholds for an assessment limit or cap customer spend,” he added.

Commission maintains its stance on affordability figures

The demand for an affordability framework in UK gambling was a central theme for reform advocates during the 2020-2023 review of the 2005 Gambling Act.

The subsequent White Paper from the review introduced the concepts of FRAs and Financial Vulnerability Checks, with FRAs being more comprehensive and Vulnerability Checks offering a lighter approach.

Last year, the Commission conducted a six-month pilot of these checks. Critics, including Conservative Party politicians and Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, contend that the pilot failed to provide clarity.

Angus, however, presented a contrasting view. During his speech, he reaffirmed the Commission’s consistent position that “less than 3% of active customer accounts” would necessitate any financial scrutiny, be it a Vulnerability Check or a Risk Assessment.

For the 3% of accounts requiring an assessment, Angus and the Commission assert that 97% would undergo this process without friction, presumably through the less intrusive Vulnerability Checks, which are triggered by deposits exceeding £150 over a 30-day rolling period.

“This is significantly better than the government’s White Paper estimate of 80%,” Angus stated, further noting that “only a small percentage of active accounts would require an assessment and be unable to complete it frictionlessly.”

“The pilot indicates the figure would actually be 0.1%, again, an improvement on the White Paper’s estimate. This means only one in 1,000 accounts would be unable to undergo a frictionless assessment.

“Furthermore,” he added, “this number could be lowered even more if operators fulfill their initial obligations to consumers by ensuring accurate customer details and proper identity verification.”

The Commission is scheduled to meet later today to determine the next steps for its affordability measures. Vulnerability Checks have already been implemented, with a £500 threshold introduced on August 30, 2024, and a £150 threshold set for February 28, 2025.

However, FRAs represent a distinct challenge for many.

These assessments are the primary concern for stakeholders in the betting and racing sectors. Even some proponents of reform and affordability solutions, such as Dr. James Noyes of the Social Market Foundation (SMF), suggest the measure requires further consideration.

Updates on the fight against the black market

A central argument put forth by the betting industry, its ally in horse racing, and their political supporters is that stringent affordability checks will push customers from the regulated sector towards unregulated alternatives.

This argument is widely recognized due to several factors. The black market, grey market, and the presence of unlicensed operators in the Premier League have been frequent subjects of discussion recently, with Entain, owner of Ladbrokes and Coral, notably championing the latter issue.

Last year, the black market was a focal point in taxation discussions, as the industry argued that increased tax rates would necessitate compensatory actions, ultimately directing customers to unregulated operators offering more permissive services.

Although the industry’s opposition to tax increases, which took effect in August, was unsuccessful, the government committed to providing the Commission with an additional £26 million annually, specifically earmarked for combating the black market.

Angus stated, “The Gambling Commission welcomed the £26 million in funding over three years for our efforts to combat illegal gambling, and we view this as an endorsement of the Commission’s effectiveness in addressing illegal gambling in recent years.”

Considering the industry’s strong opposition to last year’s tax increases, stakeholders are likely keen to understand how this £26 million will be utilized. Angus indicated that the Commission plans to intensify its focus on illegal gambling “to examine the factors driving consumer demand towards the illegal market and how regulation can foster innovation.”

The regulator aims to expand upon its previous year’s actions against illegal gambling, which involved issuing 741 cease and desist orders to operators and advertisers, reporting 397,528 URLs to search engines, and achieving 266,667 URL removals.

Angus further disclosed that the Commission has submitted 1,068 websites to search engines for delisting and has disrupted 1,134 websites, resulting in their takedown or geo-blocking.

The regulator encourages innovation

The Commission has also been included in the Department of Culture, Media and Sport’s (DCMS) Illegal Gambling Taskforce, a new entity established earlier this year specifically to disrupt the illegal market.

Nevertheless, the industry continues to express serious concerns. The BGC claims that over £16.6 billion was wagered through offshore companies last year, and the industry has long protested against what it perceives as excessive regulation and taxation.

Both the Commission and DCMS must strive to assure operators that anti-black market initiatives are achieving their intended impact, particularly as the industry persistently raises alarms regarding affordability, taxation, marketing, and other related issues.

Concluding his address, Angus noted that “as the illegal market potentially intensifies its challenge to the licensed sector, we wish to clearly state our support for innovation that aligns with our licensing objectives.”

He concluded, “If you have ideas to enhance the customer experience, making it more positive and competitive, we encourage you to share them.”

“While the existing statutory and public policy framework imposes certain limitations on what can be accomplished, it does not outright prevent innovation. Therefore, if you have ideas that could provide a superior consumer experience, please contact us.”