In September 2025, the Swedish government presented a report including a proposal to change the scope of the Swedish Gambling Act. In summary, the report suggests that an accessibility-based licence obligation be implemented as opposed to the current regime, which is based on the vague concept of whether the gambling services are directed towards the Swedish market. The proposal has been widely applauded by the current licence holders, who hope that it will form an important piece of the puzzle to effectively shut down unlicensed gambling in Sweden. If adopted, unlicensed foreign operators will in practice be required to implement geo-blocking of their services in relation to Sweden to avoid providing illegal gambling services under Swedish law. The amendments are proposed to come into effect on 1 January 2027.
The report also includes proposals to extend the concept of liability for contributory illegal gambling, particularly in relation to payment service providers (PSPs), which may also become subject to a rule of presumption that payments issued by Swedish residents are related to gambling in Sweden. If adopted, this will facilitate supervision and put additional pressure on PSPs.
Further, the government has also presented a proposal to prohibit all gambling on credit. Currently, operators are prohibited from offering credit themselves but may still allow credit card payments from payment service providers and banks. The proposed change will in essence prohibit operators from both allowing and contributing to gambling funded by credit, and will come into effect on 1 April 2026 if adopted.
Online betting, bingo, poker, and casino games are permitted for licensed commercial operators. Online lotteries are reserved for state-owned businesses.
According to the legislative bill, fantasy sports generally qualify as betting and require a licence. The Swedish Gambling Authority (SGA) has held that an online football manager game involving prizes constituted provision of betting services within the meaning of the Gambling Act.
Social games without any bets or winnings/prizes do not require a licence.
From 1 January 2026, the provision of full-scale land-based casino services will be prohibited, even for the state-owned operator. This marks the end of full-scale casinos in Sweden.
Commercial operators may, under certain conditions, obtain a licence for land-based betting, casino games that are not held in casinos, and goods gambling machines. Non-profit entities may obtain licences for land-based bingo and lotteries.
The two key legislative acts governing the Swedish gambling market are the Swedish Gambling Act (2018:1138) and the Swedish Gambling Ordinance (2018:1467).
In addition, the following legislation should be mentioned:
According to Chapter 2, Section 1 of the Gambling Act, gambling is defined as lotteries, betting, combination games and pyramid schemes.
The Swedish Gambling Act includes no legal definition of land-based gambling; however, according to the legislative bill of the Gambling Act, land-based gambling is defined as games between a player and a gambling operator that take place in a physical setting.
According to Chapter 2, Section 1 of the Gambling Act, online gambling is defined as any form of gambling provided through electronic means of communication and played by a player or multiple players and the party that provides the gambling.
Under Chapter 19, Section 1 of the Gambling Act, anyone that intentionally or through gross negligence provides unauthorised gambling services or gambling services without a licence may be found guilty of unlawful gambling operations (unlawful gambling).
Further, and under Chapter 19, Section 2 of the Gambling Act, anyone that intentionally or by way of gross negligence aids and abets participation in such unlawful gambling may be found guilty of promotion of unlawful gambling. For both crimes, there will not be any sentencing for minor infractions.
According to Chapter 19, Section 4 of the Gambling Act, anyone who takes inappropriate actions to manipulate the outcome of a game that is subject to licence requirements under the Gambling Act may be found guilty of cheating.
Unlawful gambling, aiding and abetting of unlawful gambling and cheating may entail fines or imprisonment for up to two years. In serious cases, sentences of up to six years’ imprisonment could be handed down. When assessing whether a case of cheating is serious, particular attention is paid to whether the offence was conducted as part of a crime that was:
The SGA is the authority appointed to grant gambling licences and acts as the regulator in relation to compliance with the Gambling Act, the Gambling Ordinance and the regulations issued by the SGA.
As regards marketing of gambling services, the Swedish Consumer Agency conducts separate supervision, and the Swedish Tax Agency is the supervising authority when it comes to payment of the relevant taxes.
The Gambling Act is drafted as a framework regulation which, in turn, mandates the SGA to issue regulations on matters including responsible gambling requirements, annual fees, technical requirements, and the specific games covered under each licence category, etc. Due to the nature of this area of law, combined with the SGA’s limited practice of issuing regulations on many fundamental matters, Swedish gambling law has become heavily reliant on case law.
In general, and in line with most Swedish authorities, the SGA’s supervisory approach is entirely reactionary as the regulator does not issue preliminary decisions on specific matters. However, the growing number of published guidance documents on, for example, AML and RG issues, may, in time, help to reduce the number of supervisory interventions required.
The following main types of licences exist in Sweden, with the final five available to commercial operators.
Licences are readily available and unlimited in the competitive market, including online commercial gambling and land-based gambling operated on board ships in international waters or within amusement parks and hotels or restaurants with a permit to serve alcohol.
Licences can and are normally issued for a period of five years. However, the SGA holds full discretion to limit the licence period and has done so in several instances. Historically, the reasons to limit the duration of an operator’s licence have been uncertain solvency issues within the applying company, evidence of previous regulatory violations in other jurisdictions, and where operators apply for multiple licences through various subsidiaries.
Licences may only be granted to those who:
Applicants must submit general information about the business and structure, along with information on key personnel within the applicant company, members of the board of directors of the applicant company and all qualified owners (holding 10% or more of ownership), as well as the ultimate beneficial owners holding a qualified position, including:
Further, for all qualified owners (legal entities) of the applicant company, the following due diligence documents must be submitted:
Service providers located outside the European Economic Area (EEA) are required to have a representative domiciled in Sweden.
The timescale of a licence application varies from case to case, mainly depending on how complete an application is and the regulatory and financial status of the applicant and its owners. A complete application submitted by gambling operators with strong finances and an otherwise uncomplicated history or group structure should normally be expected to be processed within two to three months.
If an application for renewal is filed four months prior to expiry, the licence will automatically be extended pending the examination of the renewal application.
The following application fees apply to licences available to commercial (ie, non-state-owned) operators in Sweden:
The following annual fees apply for the different commercial licence categories:
Personal licensing is possible and is subject to the same general requirements as for legal entities (see4.6 Application Requirements). Further, the applying individual must not:
The licensing requirements correspond to the general requirements for gambling operations (see4.6 Application Requirements).
The available land-based licences are as follows.
As set out in4.3 Types of Licences, commercial operators may apply for commercial online gambling licences and commercial online betting licences.
B2B licences are mandatory in Sweden for all entities producing, amending, providing, or installing gambling software for gambling operators on the Swedish market.
Strict umbrella arrangements for single entities within a company group are not available. In situations where multiple entities in a company group are involved in the manufacturing and development of the gambling software, the SGA will, however, normally accept a single licence arrangement if the licensee has control of the design and content and fully holds the title to the gambling software.
The use of affiliates is well established in the Swedish Gambling Market but is not specifically regulated by the Swedish Gambling Act but is subject to the general restrictions therein. For example, any use of affiliates must acknowledge the marketing restrictions, including the prohibition on direct marketing towards players who have registered for self-exclusion.
In terms of liability, affiliates are subject to the restrictions on illegal aiding and abetting of unlicensed gambling towards the Swedish market and thus have a responsibility to ascertain that the necessary licences are held by their business partners.
A licence holder may, under certain conditions, contract an affiliate (or a non-associated entity) to carry out operative work or functions in its business operations, provided that the licence holder remains responsible for the services in relation to its customers.
Except for certain gambling services (eg, casino business and slot machines), a joint licence may be sought together with another service provider that is authorised to provide gambling services within the EEA.
White-label arrangements are accepted and will require the entity providing the white-label product to apply for a gambling licence.
The SGA may order internet service providers to include a warning notice clearly displayed on a gambling website that does not hold a Swedish licence. The notice shall include information that the operations are conducted without a licence in Sweden, are not subject to Swedish supervision, and that potential winnings are subject to tax.
All licence holders are subject to RGrequirements. This includes a general “duty of care” to:
All licence holders must adopt an action plan for how the duty of care obligation will be complied with. The duty of care obligation includes responsibility for monitoring all customers and, in the event of excessive gambling, licence holders may need to apply restrictions and limitations; for example, by contacting the customer and/or limiting deposit limits and/or gambling time, or ultimately suspending the customer. Both feedback and restrictions should be applied at an early stage to limit the potential harm that may be caused by excessive gambling.
The central RG requirements of the Gambling Act are as follows.
Moreover, the SGA has provided a guide featuring examples of how signs of excessive gambling can be identified, and which individualised measures the SGA expects licence holders to take when customers show signs of excessive gambling. Factors to consider in this regard are:
In addition to the RG requirements in the Gambling Act, the SGA has issued RG regulations in LIFS 2018:2, which includes certain deposit, loss and session limits.
The following RG management tools are required to be implemented for all Swedish licence holders:
The Act (2017:630) on Measures Against Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism, which has implemented Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing (the “Fourth AML Directive”) is the central AML legislation.
Further, the Regulation (2009:92) on Measures Against Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism includes additional regulations on AML issues.
Moreover, the SGA has issued regulations on the prevention of money laundering and the financing of terrorism (LIFS 2019:2).
Lastly, in the spring of 2025, the SGA published updated AML guidance, which includes useful recommendations on the fundamental regulatory requirements, such as registration verification, risk assessments and KYC protocols.
All gambling operations in Sweden are subject to the restrictions in the Act on Measures Against Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism.
The SGA has also issued binding regulations on AML measures in SIFS 2019:2 and published guidance on how licence holders should work to counteract money laundering and terror financing. In short, the following safety measures should be conducted:
If the licence holder is part of a corporate group, there are special provisions on group-wide procedures, which include a requirement for parent companies to establish procedures that apply to the entire group.
The SGA and the Swedish Consumer Agency jointly supervise the marketing restrictions of gambling services on the Swedish market. In brief, the SGA supervises marketing issues that relate directly to gambling operations such as bonus campaigns, etc. The Consumer Agency supervises the compliance with general marketing restrictions for gambling services – for example, the requirement of moderate marketing of gambling services.
The Swedish Public Prosecutor’s Office enforces criminal matters.
Under the Swedish Marketing Act, the concept of marketing is defined as “advertising and other business activities intended to promote the sale of and access to products, including a trader’s act, omission or other measure or conduct before, during or after the sale or delivery of products to consumers or traders”. In case law, the concept of advertising has been given an extensive interpretation.
The key legal provisions governing advertisement of gambling products and services are set out in the Swedish Marketing Act and in Chapter 15 of the Swedish Gambling Act.
Under the Swedish Gambling Act, all marketing of gambling services must be “moderate” (måttfullhet). In essence, this means that advertisements for gambling services must be designed with additional caution and should not come across as aggressive or overly outreaching. In particular, advertisements may not insinuate that certain games are free if they require a bet, or that they are risk-free, etc.
At the time of writing (November 2025), there is no case law from the appellate courts on the issue of moderate gambling marketing and the few first instance court judgments include somewhat conflicting statements as to how the assessment should be carried out in practice.
In addition to the moderation requirement, the following specific regulatory restrictions on advertising of gambling services apply.
In minor matters within its mandated field, the Swedish Consumer Agency may issue injunctions, subject to a fine, requiring the cessation of certain marketing activities. In severe cases, the Agency will instead seek such injunctions before the Patent and Market Court and the Patent and Market Court of Appeal. The Swedish Consumer Agency may also request that the courts issue a marketing fine.
Within its separate parallel field, the SGA may order that the licence conditions be amended and issue:
In exceptionally severe cases, the SGA may also revoke gambling licences with immediate effect. It is possible to appeal such decisions and, where relevant, request a stay of execution to suspend the immediate effect.
All entities and individuals that directly or indirectly hold 10% or more of the shares or voting rights in a licence holder are subject to approval from the SGA and need to provide documentation on their board members and management personnel, along with corporate and financial documentation.
Any changes to the direct or indirect ownership of a licence holder or the key personnel mentioned in10.1 Disclosure Requirementsmust be reported to the SGA within 14 days of the decision that will trigger the change. To process such notifications, a fee of SEK1,000 must be paid to the SGA.
As described in10.1 Disclosure Requirements, indirect owners of the licence holder (ie, those with 10% or more of the shares or voting rights) are also subject to disclosure requirements.
The SGA has a mandate to enforce the restrictions on gambling set forth in the Swedish gambling regulations and the Act on Measures Against Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing. The enforcement is carried out under administrative law and the decisions can be appealed to the Administrative Court of Linköping. If leave to appeal is granted, such judgments may, in turn, be appealed to the Administrative Court of Appeal in Jönköping and then ultimately to the Supreme Administrative Court. Except for certain cases, the legal effect of the SGA’s decisions is suspended until it has become final – that is, upon the expiry of the appeal deadline or when all appeal possibilities have been exhausted.
Depending on the severity of the violation of the Gambling Act or the applicable licence obligations, the SGA has a mandate to:
If a licence holder fails to provide any information that it is obligated to provide under the Gambling Act, the SGA may issue a delayed payment fine of up to SEK100,000.
The SGA may refrain from ordering a sanction if:
The powers of enforcement vested with the Swedish Consumer Agency are regulated under administrative law. However, the Agency’s decisions are appealed to the Patent and Market Court and Patent and Market Court of Appeal, and such cases are normally administered under the Swedish Code of Civil Procedure.
In cases involving criminal offences, the Swedish Public Prosecutor’s Office is the appointed enforcement authority. Such enforcement is conducted under general criminal procedural law, which vests the prosecutor with more far-reaching remedies in comparison with the administrative remedies available to the SGA and the Swedish Consumer Agency.
The SGA’s supervision and use of sanctions have primarily been focused on issuing warnings and sanction fees rather than using injunction orders to address violations of the Gambling Act, which has led to extensive regulatory litigation in the administrative court system.
In the last couple of years, the SGA has had a particular focus on supervising AML and RG issues but has also broadened its focus to target payment service providers and B2B operators due to aiding and abetting of unlicensed operators with connections to the Swedish market.
The Swedish Consumer Agency has been rather passive in its supervision of the field of gambling since 2019 but has enforced two matters concerning the moderate marketing requirement. The Patent and Market Court issued injunctions subject to a fine in both cases, neither of which was appealed to the appellate court.
As mentioned in11.2 Sanctions, the SGA may issue sanction fees and delayed payment fines.
Depending on the violation, different calculation methods for the fine applies.
For violations of the Gambling Act, fines are set between SEK5,000 and 10% of the GGR for the preceding year.
For payment service providers that fail to comply with their payment blocking restrictions, fines are set between SEK5,000 and SEK10 million.
For AML violations, the cap for the sanction fee is limited to the highest of the following three alternatives:
Gambling services are currently subject to a tax rate of 22% of the monthly profit – ie, the difference between the total bets minus the total payouts. Only bets and payouts that concern the Swedish market should be included.
Players’ gambling winnings from licensed operators are tax-free in Sweden. Conversely, winnings that stem from unlicensed operators are subject to tax.
Regeringsgatan 66
Stockholm
Sweden
+46 857 840 300
info@westerberg.com www.westerberg.com/
Introduction
The question of how best to direct customers towards licensed operators remains a persistent and central topic within the Swedish gambling industry. Opinions differ regarding the current level of channelisation, although it is generally accepted that the target rate of 90%, set prior to re-regulation, has not been achieved. In an investigation conducted by the Swedish Gambling Authority (SGA) for 2023, results suggest that Swedish licensees covered approximately 86% of the competitively exposed part of the Swedish gambling market, even though the number for commercial online gambling is expected to be lower. The industry has questioned such findings, suggesting that this number is indeed significantly lower.
In summary, both the licensed operators and the legislature agree that more must be done but opinions differ on how to address the problem. In general, licence holders advocate an ease of the regulatory burden in terms of, for example, allowing more bonuses to become more competitive in relation to unlicensed operators, whereas the legislature currently seems more focused on facilitating the SGA’s enforcement.
The upcoming year will be highly interesting for the Swedish gambling market considering the imminent appointment of a new general secretary for the SGA, and the upcoming Swedish election next year.
Proposal of Changes to the Swedish Gambling Act
Potential change of the scope of the Swedish Gambling Act
In September 2025, a government-appointed commission presented a proposal to broaden the scope of the Swedish Gambling Act. The report suggests that a UK-inspired accessibility-based licence obligation be implemented from 1 January 2027. Considering the failure to meet the intended channelisation rates, the proposal was expected and has been widely applauded by the industry, which hopes that it will form an important piece of the puzzle to effectively shut down unlicensed gambling in Sweden.
Presently, the Swedish Gabling Act merely covers online gambling services that are provided in Sweden, in the sense that they are directed towards the Swedish market. This essentially requires an intent to target the Swedish market by way of, for example, the Swedish language, the use of Swedish currency for deposits and/or withdrawals, or Swedish customer support. Considering the vague concept of the direction criterion, it has been subject to extensive litigation without desirable clarification.
In practice, the direction criterion forms a tripartite competitively exposed Swedish gambling market, which includes the following three segments:
According to the SGA, roughly two-thirds of the gambling on unlicensed platforms in Sweden are currently legal – ie, attributable to platforms not targeting the Swedish market. The proposed abandonment of the direction criterion would reshape the above sectioning and instead create a bipartite market by merging the two latter categories into one illegal category. If adopted, an accessibility-based scope of the Gambling Act would in practice force unlicensed foreign operators to implement geo-blocking of their services in relation to Sweden to avoid providing illegal gambling services under Swedish law. It is worth noting that such a measure was initially proposed by the commission that investigated the re-regulation of the Swedish gambling market in 2017, although it was ultimately excluded from the final proposal. At this stage, however, it would be surprising if the bill were not adopted.
Extended scope of liability for PSPs
The government report also includes a proposal to extend the liability for payment service provider (PSPs) in relation to gambling-related payment services provided to unlicensed operators. PSP liability is presently limited to the provision of services specifically developed for gambling operations, which has led to significant difficulties for enforcement. The narrow scope has led to unsuccessful enforcement against a number of PSPs as the SGA was unable to prove that their services were designed accordingly. To address this, the proposal aims at extending the liability to all gambling-related payment services provided to unlicensed operators. Furthermore, it introduces a proposed rule of presumption, under which PSPs must assume that payments made by Swedish residents are connected to gambling activities in Sweden. In practical terms, this would require PSPs to block gambling-related payments from Swedish customers to unlicensed operators, unless there is clear evidence that the player is located outside Sweden. It is, however, noteworthy that the proposal stops short of introducing an outright prohibition on the provision of payment services to unlicensed operators, as the effectiveness of this less restrictive approach needs to be assessed before considering stricter measures.
A broadened credit prohibition
The Swedish government has also presented a proposal to broaden the current prohibition to allow gambling funded by credit. Presently, operators are prohibited from offering credit but may still allow credit card payments from payment service providers and banks. The proposed change will in essence prohibit operators from both allowing as well as contributing to gambling funded by credit, which will effectively ban all use of credit cards. Unsurprisingly, the proposal has been met with criticism from certain industry organisations, which argue that it creates yet another regulatory burden and competitive disadvantage in relation to unlicensed operators. As with other regulatory requirements, the fear is that a credit prohibition will drive customers to unlicensed operators that presumably will continue to allow credit card payments. The prohibition will come into effect from 1 April 2026 if adopted.
Supervision of B2B Operators
Following the implementation of B2B licences in the summer of 2022, the first regulatory actions against B2B operators are currently being adjudicated by the administrative courts, including a first instance court judgment of fundamental importance for B2B liability. In short, the case concerns a B2B licence holder that provided gambling software to two international B2C operators lacking Swedish licences, both of which were subject to injunctions by the SGA. Interestingly, a geo-blockage had been implemented, and the games were thus not accessible from Sweden. In addition, the licence agreement expressly prohibited the B2C operators from offering the games in jurisdictions where they did not hold the necessary licences. However, by applying a strict, verbatim application of the prohibition on providing gambling software to operators without a Swedish licence who are directing their services to Sweden, the Court somewhat surprisingly dismissed the relevance of the precautions taken by the B2B operator.
As expected, the judgment caused strong reactions within the Swedish gambling industry primarily because the B2B operator had indeed geo-blocked the Swedish market. Arguably, the court’s interpretation of the statute makes it virtually impossible to ascertain compliance as it places the risk outside of the B2B operator’s control. The judgment has been appealed and is currently pending before the Administrative Court of Appeal. While the precedential significance of the upcoming judgment may depend, at least in part, on whether the Swedish government decides to introduce an accessibility-based licensing requirement, the case nonetheless raises important issues regarding B2B liability that could prove fundamental for operators active in relation to the Swedish market.
Responsible Gambling – A Continuing Focal Point
Landmark judgment from the Supreme Court on civil RG liability
In June 2025, the Supreme Court rendered its first precedent on operator liability for net losses of previous customers with gambling problems. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the player, and the operator was ordered to reimburse his net losses (approximately EUR530,000) attributable to a certain VIP customer period.
In summary, the case concerned a former customer who was given VIP status due to his high-volume gambling. Throughout the VIP period, the customer was repeatedly targeted with tailored bonus offerings and individualised marketing, including bonus offers and gifts, despite showing signs of excessive gambling. The court held that the operator, by way of its access to and usage of the customer’s gambling data, was aware of his excessive gambling issues. Considering that the individualised marketing was considered intrusive and concerned high-risk games targeted at an exposed, vulnerable customer, all bets placed were considered null and void under contract law. Consequently, his full net losses attributable to the VIP period had to be reimbursed.
It is somewhat premature to anticipate what consequences the judgment will ultimately have on the Swedish gambling market, but operators fear a worst-case scenario in that it could spark litigious trends like those in, for example, Germany and Austria. Presumably, the hesitancy among former players to file subsequent actions could be explained by the fact that the Supreme Court case concerned gambling prior to the re-regulation of the Swedish gambling market when no statutory RG requirements applied in Sweden which makes the precedent somewhat difficult to apply to customer relations post-2019. Nonetheless, the judgment arguably contains principles that carry authoritative weight even for gambling conducted after that point, and it is unsurprising that claims filed following the Supreme Court’s decision rely heavily on its conclusions.
Notably, a parallel action based on RG liability concerning recovery of post-2019 net losses, which was stayed pending the outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings, is expected to be adjudicated by the Svea Court of Appeal in early 2026. Considering the momentum of the player-friendly Supreme Court judgment and the additional regulatory RG burden implemented as of 2019, a judgment in favour of the customer currently appears the most likely outcome. If the Court of Appeal were to rule in favour of the player in that case as well, Swedish courts can be expected to experience a significant rise in the number of claims brought against gambling operators in the near future.
Regulatory RG proceedings
On the regulatory side, the SGA has been highly active in its enforcement of the RG requirements in recent years. In general, the identified RG violations mainly concern insufficient monitoring of gambling patterns, and missing, late, or unsuccessful protective and mitigating RG measures. The supervision has led to high fines, which have mainly been upheld or lowered by the administrative courts on appeal.
However, in the spring of 2025 the Administrative Court of Linköping rendered a highly interesting judgment in a high-profile case concerning the “duty of care requirement” against the state-owned operator Svenska Spel. In essence, the duty of care requirement requires operators to take proper measures in relation to their customers to limit the negative consequences of gambling.
The Court held that the general, vague nature of the duty of care provision in the Gambling Act, and the lack of authoritative case law entailed that assessment of compliance thereof must be considered with caution. Accordingly, administrative sanctions – which comprise elements of criminal law – due to violations of the duty of care obligation should be reserved for severe cases – eg, when no or highly limited mitigating measures have been taken, or when no deposit limits have been required, etc. Considering that Svenska Spel had indeed taken some RG measures in relation to the customer cases examined, the Court revoked the SGA sanction decision and the SEK100 million fine issued by the SGA.
The Administrative Court’s judgment, which has been appealed, is startling in the sense that it essentially disqualifies the duty of care requirement due to its vague nature. The judgment can be seen as a rebuke to several actors: the legislature, for failing to provide sufficient guidance on how the duty should be applied in the legislative bill; the SGA, for not issuing specific regulations clarifying the duty of care; and arguably the Court of Appeal, for not further developing the requirement through its case law.
Irrespective of the outcome, but particularly if the judgment is upheld on appeal, the SGA should reasonably take action and issue detailed regulations on the duty of care requirement. If the SGA remains passive, the matter will ultimately fall to the legislature to address – otherwise, there is a risk that the duty of care will become little more than a paper tiger.
The SGA has indicated that the supervision of RG issues will remain one of its focus areas and more supervisory actions are thus likely to follow even though the legal position is presently highly uncertain pending the upcoming decision from the Administrative Court of Appeal.
End of Full-Scale Casino Operations in Sweden
In the spring of 2025, the Swedish government adopted a proposal to prohibit land-based full-scale casino operations in Sweden from 1 January 2026. Even after the re-regulation of the Swedish gambling market, full-scale casino operations had remained exclusively reserved for the state-owned operator.
This prohibition must be seen in the context of the closure of three out of Sweden’s four casinos in recent years due to a lack of profitability. Seemingly, the COVID-19 pandemic dealt a severe blow to the industry, with visitor numbers in 2022 and 2023 dropping to almost half of pre-pandemic levels. It is difficult to determine whether the pandemic and its restrictions were the decisive factor that sealed the fate of Sweden’s land-based casino sector, as the global recession and rising inflation likely also played a role.
The main rationale for ending the Swedish land-based casino regime was that it arguably no longer fulfilled its primary objectives – namely, to generate state income and effectively prevent illegal land-based casino operations. As regards the latter, a study report from 2006 indicates that the opening of the casinos in 2000 only had a marginal effect on illegal land-based casino operations. Moreover, the provision of land-based casino games at certain licensed restaurants is maintained, which arguably could help prevent a surge in illegal casino operations following the closure of the licensed casinos.
The decision not to allow private operators to fill the void of the unprofitable state-owned casinos has drawn criticism from within the Swedish gambling industry. Aside from the obvious threat of increased opportunities for illegal operators, arguments relating to jobs and Sweden’s appeal as a tourist nation have been raised. While the closing of the state-owned casinos appears sensible considering their poor profitability and limited success in combating illegal casino operations, it appears short-sighted not to have properly explored the possibility of granting land-based casino licences to private operators. Indeed, land-based gambling venues arguably offer greater opportunities for effective, on-site RG measures to support customers.
The next couple of years will show whether the end of the land-based casino regime in Sweden leads to an increase in illegal operations. However, for the foreseeable future it seems unlikely that Sweden will reconsider the question of allowing private operators to enter this segment of the gambling market.
Regeringsgatan 66
Stockholm
Sweden
+46 857 840 300
info@westerberg.com www.westerberg.com/