EGBA blasts call for EU gambling tax as ‘gift’ to illegal betting

The European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA) has strongly opposed calls for a harmonised EU gambling tax. They’ve warned the move would hand an advantage to illegal operators.

The criticism follows comments by Victor Negrescu, Vice President of the European Parliament. Negrescu suggested introducing a European levy on online gambling providers.

He argues the sector generates substantial profits while operating under fragmented national tax systems. However, EGBA says the proposal is both legally flawed and economically risky.

EGBA says EU levy is ‘fundamentally unworkable’

According to Negrescu in his address to the European Parliament, an EU-level gambling levy could raise between €2bn and €4bn each year. He suggested funds could be directed towards education, prevention, addiction treatment and mental health services.

The proposal would sit alongside existing national turnover taxes and be paired with stronger enforcement against illegal platforms.

However,  EGBA Secretary General Maarten Haijer said there is no legal framework for such a measure.

“Gambling is not harmonised at EU level, and there is no legal basis or mechanism to collect such a levy,” Maarten Haijer, EGBA Secretary General.

He warned that adding another layer of taxation to already heavily regulated operators would distort the competitive balance.

Black market risk highlighted

A central concern for EGBA is channelisation.

Licensed operators across Europe already face significant compliance obligations and high national tax rates. Illegal operators, by contrast, pay no tax and are not bound by EU consumer protection standards.

Haijer argued that increasing costs for licensed businesses would allow offshore sites to offer more attractive pricing and bonuses.

“Imposing an EU tax on top of existing national taxes would only make this situation worse,” he said, adding that the result could be lower overall tax revenues as players migrate away from regulated markets.

Recent examples are often cited in this debate.

In the Netherlands, higher tax rates were introduced to boost public revenue, yet reports later indicated lower gross gaming revenue and continued black market growth.

Meanwhile, Germany’s turnover-based tax model has faced criticism for contributing to low channelisation rates and sustained illegal activity.

Political appetite for EU-level funding

Negrescu framed his proposal as a “simple and responsible” way to generate new EU funding without directly increasing taxation on citizens.

He argued that the online gambling industry benefits from the EU single market and digital infrastructure. Though it does operate under unequal national rules and insufficient enforcement.

The proposal has not yet been formalised as draft legislation. However, it reflects wider discussions in Brussels around fiscal consolidation and new revenue streams.

For now, EGBA’s position is clear. The trade body believes additional taxation at EU level would undermine regulated markets rather than strengthen them.

The debate now centres on a familiar question in European gambling policy: can revenue ambitions and consumer protection objectives coexist without driving players towards the very illegal operators regulators aim to eliminate?