Jumpman Gaming wins £13.2m Remote Gaming Duty appeal against HMRC

Jumpman Gaming has won a significant tax dispute with HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), after the Upper Tribunal reduced approximately £13.2 million in Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) assessments to zero.

The dispute concerned Jumpman’s promotional “Mega Reel”, which new customers could play for free and which could award free spins on other casino games.

HMRC argued that although the initial promotional spin was not subject to RGD, the subsequent free spins awarded as prizes should be taxed.

The First-tier Tribunal broadly accepted that position in 2025. However, the Upper Tribunal has now ruled that the subsequent spins fall within the exclusion contained in section 159A of the Finance Act 2014.

Why the Jumpman ruling matters

The decision could extend beyond Jumpman. UK tax lawyer Stephen Hignett has said operators that previously paid RGD on comparable free-spin promotions should consider whether they can claim refunds from HMRC. The ruling may also affect businesses currently facing assessments based on similar promotional structures.

Importantly, the decision does not mean that free spins are automatically exempt from RGD. Its significance lies in the particular chain used by Jumpman. It was that players participated in a free promotional game and could win further free plays on other games.

RGD applies to profits generated from UK customers regardless of where an operator is located, meaning the ruling's relevance depends primarily on how promotions are structured rather than where the business is based.

Ruling comes after RGD rate nearly doubles

The judgment comes at a particularly important time for Britain's online casino sector. RGD increased from 21% to 40% on 1 April 2026. HMRC's latest figures show July receipts reached £589.7 million, compared with £283 million in July 2025. This was an increase of around 108%.

Against that figure, Jumpman's £13.2 million assessment is relatively small. However, the potential exposure becomes more significant if multiple operators have accounted for RGD on promotional arrangements that now fall within the Upper Tribunal's interpretation.

That could make the ruling financially important at a time when the Treasury is collecting substantially more tax from online gaming.

HMRC could still seek to appeal the decision. For now, however, the judgment provides an important precedent for how Britain's increasingly valuable Remote Gaming Duty regime applies to promotional free play.