The UK Gambling Commission confirmed the widespread introduction of financial risk assessments (FRAs) on Tuesday. The gambling industry has vehemently opposed the measures, arguing they will send users to unlicensed, offshore betting platforms.
In a press release, the Commission confirmed it has decided to implement the checks to identify customers experiencing financial difficulties due to gambling.
Sarah Gardner, the acting CEO of the Commission, said the checks will be implemented in a careful, staged way and will take into account feedback from key stakeholders, including the gambling industry.
Commission Confident Checks Will Be Frictionless
“We are confident that our approach, using high-quality data, will enable support for high-spending customers in financial difficulties, while reducing friction for customers who are not in financial difficulties by removing the need for unnecessary and unpopular document checks to understand financial risk,” said Gardner.
The Commission has been trialing the checks since 2024 and says the system can be “frictionless” for the vast majority of users.
For years, opponents have argued that these kinds of checks are invasive and will require users to share personal documents containing detailed financial information. As a result, many will be unwilling to do so and will switch to unlicensed offshore betting platforms.
Gardner added, “We have listened to feedback throughout the pilot process, which has led to us deciding to carefully proceed. We will work with key partners to make sure that they are implemented in the most effective way for consumers and operators.”
Staged Implementation Starting This Summer
Gardner set out the implementation plans, which will start with a first phase that includes only the country’s largest operators.
| Stage of implementation | Consumers 25 years old and over | High risk groups such as consumers under 25 |
|---|---|---|
| Stage 1 implementation | Exceeds £5,000 net deposit in a rolling 24-hour period | Exceeds £2,500 net deposit in a rolling 24-hour period |
| Interim stages of implementation | To be set following further engagement with implementation groups and stakeholders | To be set following further engagement with implementation groups and stakeholders |
| Final stage of implementation | Exceeds £1,000 net deposit in a rolling 24-hour period or exceeds £3,000 net deposit in a rolling 90-day period | Exceeds £750 net deposit in a rolling 24-hour period or exceeds £2,000 net deposit in a rolling 90-day period |
Helen Rhodes, Policy Director at the Commission, emphasized that the vast majority of users will not be affected, and “punters are at the heart of everything we do.”
She further stressed that these are not affordability checks but risk assessments only for a select group of high-spending gamblers who are experiencing harm but are not being identified.
Commission Criticized for Not Sharing Pilot Data
Dr. James Noyes, a leading UK gambling reform advocate, called on the government to pause the checks earlier this year. Noyes criticized the Commission for failing to share the results of its trials and cited concerns about the threat to the horse racing industry.
When asked why it has not released the full results of the pilot, Rhodes said a great deal of information has already been released, including details on the risks posed by high-spending customers.
She said the pilot showed that high-spending customers are two to four times more likely to be in a debt management plan and two to five times more likely to have suffered a financial default recently than the general population.
Additionally, the Commission said the pilot showed that 97% of those spending above the threshold levels could be easily and frictionlessly assessed for financial difficulties.
However, some of the information from the pilot is sensitive, and not all data can be released to protect companies, such as credit reference agencies, said Rhodes.
No Enforcement Action If Operators Do Not Comply
The Commission said that operators who fail to implement the checks will not face any enforcement action.
In a press briefing, when asked why there would be no consequences for operators, Gardner said this was to ensure the process would not disrupt the industry and could be implemented smoothly and in stages.
She stressed that the FRAs have been designed to balance protecting those in financial difficulties from the risk of gambling-related harm, without creating unnecessary burdens for the industry or consumers.
“What we’re trying to do is strike the right balance so that assessments protect those consumers who may be in financial difficulties from the risk of gambling-related harm, while at the same time trying to minimize burdens for the industry and consumers,” Gardner stated.
She noted that operators will still be subject to all other regulatory requirements. The Commission previously restricted the VIP programs of gambling companies, which it says have been successful at reducing the harm of high-spending users.
BGC ‘Deeply Disappointed’
In response to the Commission’s announcement, Grainne Hurst, CEO of the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC), said, “We are deeply disappointed and frustrated that the Gambling Commission has decided to press ahead with Financial Risk Assessments despite the significant concerns raised over the last 18 months by the BGC, operators, racing, parliamentarians, and customers.”
Hurst added that the pilot showed that different credit reference agencies will provide different results for the same customer. This, she argues, demonstrates a failing that the Commission has not addressed.
“Customers risk being wrongly identified as financially vulnerable based on a system that remains unproven,” she added. “That is not a sound basis for regulatory intervention.”
She reiterated the warning that the checks risk “driving customers towards the growing illegal gambling market.”
Focus Should Be On Prevention, Not Harm Reduction
Rather than using financial checks to identify users already experiencing harm from gambling, the focus should be on prevention, argues Focal CEO Tracy Schrans.
“It is easier, less costly, and less stigmatizing to help people before harm develops or escalates than to respond after the fact,” Schrans told CasinoBeats in an interview last month.
She added that, “Affordability is one of the most important — and most difficult — issues in reducing gambling-related harm. Simple affordability checks or universal spend limits are hard to apply fairly at scale because people’s financial circumstances vary so widely.”
Gardner insisted that the Commission is not implementing affordability checks, but the BGC’s response suggests the terminology does not change the views of those opposed to the assessments.
