€16M of turnover our Client's platform generates per week 
36,360 request / per second are supported by one of our systems 
German B2C and B2B transactional portals run on the framework we are developing! Northern Ireland calls for higher online gambling taxes
Northern Ireland’s call for higher gambling taxes marks a striking escalation in the United Kingdom’s ongoing debate over how to tax, regulate, and manage the fast growing online betting and gaming sector. What might look at first glance like a narrow fiscal proposal is in fact a window into deeper questions about addiction, social harm, offshore operators, and the future of iGaming policy in the UK and beyond.
What is happening in Northern Ireland right now
The Northern Ireland Assembly’s All Party Group on Reducing Harm Related to Gambling has written to the UK Chancellor to challenge Treasury plans to harmonise tax rates across different remote gambling products. The group argues that a one size fits all approach to online gambling tax would cut across the UK Government’s own commitment to reducing gambling harm, especially in digital environments where products behave very differently in terms of risk.
In place of harmonisation, the group backs specific tax rises on remote gambling. It supports think tank proposals to raise Remote Gaming Duty to 50 percent and General Betting Duty to 25 percent. According to analysis cited from the Social Market Foundation and the Institute for Public Policy Research, these higher rates could generate up to £2 billion in additional annual revenue, while also discouraging the most harmful forms of online gambling.
Why harmonised remote gambling tax is so controversial
The UK Treasury has been exploring plans to standardise tax rates across different remote gambling products, such as online casino, slots, and sports betting. Proponents argue that harmonisation would simplify an often complex tax system, reduce loopholes, and provide a cleaner framework for operators and regulators.
However, the Northern Ireland All Party Group sees a major flaw in this logic. Its members warn that treating all remote gambling products alike in tax terms ignores the fact that some products, in particular online gaming and slots, are significantly more addictive and harmful than others like traditional sports betting. By smoothing tax rates across the sector, they believe the Treasury could inadvertently change operator incentives in problematic ways.
How tax design shapes operator incentives
At the heart of the argument is a simple but powerful point about incentives. The All Party Group suggests that harmonised tax would encourage operators to push customers toward higher yielding, higher harm products. If online slots and casino games offer stronger profit margins and face no additional tax penalty compared with lower risk sports betting, then the commercial logic becomes clear.
From a business perspective, operators optimising for revenue might reweight marketing, product design, and promotional strategies toward those more addictive products. From a public policy perspective, this is exactly the outcome that harm reduction advocates want to avoid, especially in regions such as Northern Ireland where the social costs of gambling are already severe.
Proposed higher gambling taxes and what they aim to achieve
The alternative put forward by the All Party Group, and supported by the Social Market Foundation and the Institute for Public Policy Research, is to make online gambling more expensive in fiscal terms, particularly in high risk verticals. The suggested increase of Remote Gaming Duty to 50 percent and General Betting Duty to 25 percent is ambitious and would significantly shift the tax burden on remote operators.
This approach is intended to achieve two linked outcomes. First, it would raise up to £2 billion per year in extra revenue, according to the think tanks’ analysis, which could in theory be used to fund treatment, education, and broader public services. Second, the higher rates would act as a kind of price signal, discouraging the supply and promotion of the most harmful online gambling products by squeezing margins and making them less attractive to operators.
Gambling related harm and the £1 billion social cost
Philip McGuigan MLA, chairperson of the All Party Group, has highlighted the evidence that different remote products generate very different levels of harm. He stresses that online gaming and slots present greater risks than traditional betting, both in terms of addiction patterns and the intensity of financial losses that can accumulate in short periods of time.
He also points to the wider societal bill. Gambling related harm is estimated to cost over £1 billion each year in the UK, cutting across health, criminal justice, family breakdown, and lost productivity. By calling for higher taxation, McGuigan frames the policy not only as a deterrent, but also as a way to help offset the economic impact that problem gambling already imposes on public finances and communities.
Northern Ireland and its unique vulnerability
One of the most striking parts of the All Party Group’s intervention is its focus on Northern Ireland’s particular situation. The letter to the Chancellor notes that Northern Ireland has the highest rate of problem gambling in the UK, yet it does not enjoy the same regulatory protections that are in place in Great Britain, due to outdated gambling legislation that has lagged behind market reality.
This combination of high prevalence of harm and weaker regulation leaves players more exposed. It also amplifies the perceived responsibility of fiscal policy makers. If tax is one of the few powerful levers available in the short term, then advocates argue it should be designed to protect those at greatest risk, especially in a digital environment where remote platforms can be accessed at any time of day or night.
Offshore operators and the question of fairness
The All Party Group further contends that many remote gambling operators serving UK customers are based offshore and remain undertaxed compared with other jurisdictions. In their view, these companies contribute relatively little to the domestic economy through employment, local investment, or supply chains, yet generate significant revenue from UK players.
This perceived imbalance feeds into the case for higher online gambling taxes. If offshore operators are seen as extracting value without adequately contributing back, then raising Remote Gaming Duty and General Betting Duty is framed as a way to restore some fiscal fairness. It also places remote gambling more in line with sectors where companies have a larger onshore footprint and pay more comprehensive taxes.
Industry concerns and the wider policy debate
The intervention by Northern Ireland’s All Party Group comes at a time of heightened debate across the UK over how to regulate and tax gambling, particularly online. The Treasury’s harmonisation proposal has supporters who argue that a unified rate would simplify compliance and cut bureaucracy for operators, while providing a more predictable fiscal base for the government.
Critics however warn of unintended consequences. Beyond addiction risks, there are concerns that poorly calibrated tax reform could destabilise connected sectors, such as horseracing, that rely heavily on betting revenues. The All Party Group’s stance adds another influential voice cautioning that any simplification of tax must be balanced against the need to protect vulnerable players and preserve the sustainability of related industries.
How this fits into broader UK gambling reform
Debates over rates of Remote Gaming Duty and General Betting Duty sit within a much bigger conversation about the UK’s gambling framework. In recent years, policymakers have paid growing attention to affordability, advertising, sponsorship, and product design, especially as smartphones and always on connectivity have changed how and when people gamble.
Tax policy is increasingly seen as a powerful, if blunt, instrument in the toolkit. By making certain products more expensive to supply, governments can nudge the market away from formats that generate disproportionate harm. Conversely, poorly targeted tax changes can increase the appeal of high intensity products if they are not carefully structured, which is precisely what Northern Ireland’s All Party Group argues could happen with a flat, harmonised rate.
Implications for the iGaming industry
For online operators, the proposals supported by the All Party Group represent both a financial and strategic challenge. A Remote Gaming Duty of 50 percent would significantly affect margins, especially in product verticals that already face increasing compliance costs, marketing restrictions, and technology investment pressures.
In strategic terms, operators would likely need to reassess portfolio balance, deciding how much emphasis to place on higher risk online casino and slots compared with lower risk betting products. A steeper tax gradient between these categories would reward those able to pivot toward safer offerings or innovate in ways that reduce harm while preserving engagement. Those that rely heavily on high yield, high intensity games could find themselves squeezed.
What this means for players and communities
For players, higher taxation is rarely an obvious headline benefit, since it can translate into lower bonuses, tighter odds, or fewer promotions. However, from a public health perspective, the logic is different. If more expensive supply of high risk products means fewer aggressive marketing campaigns and a slower pace of product roll out, then some of the most vulnerable consumers may be shielded from the most damaging experiences.
At community level, the potential £2 billion in extra annual revenue, if realised and if allocated effectively, could support treatment services, debt advice, education campaigns, and wider social programs. The All Party Group’s argument links fiscal policy directly with harm reduction, not merely as a way to raise money, but as part of a broader strategy to address the underlying drivers and consequences of problem gambling.
Northern Ireland as a bellwether for future policy
The fact that such a strong intervention is coming from Northern Ireland is significant. With the highest rate of problem gambling in the UK and outdated regulatory protections, the region acts as an early warning signal for what can happen when digital gambling markets develop faster than legislation and oversight.
If the UK Government takes the All Party Group’s concerns seriously, it could influence not only the specific outcome of the harmonisation debate, but also the tone of future consultations on gambling tax and regulation. Northern Ireland’s experience may encourage a more precautionary, evidence led approach that gives greater weight to social costs, especially where the risks of online gaming and slots are most acute.
Key questions for policymakers and industry
The Northern Ireland Assembly Group’s call for higher online gambling taxes raises a number of pressing questions that policymakers, regulators, and operators will need to confront in the months ahead. Among them are the following
- how to balance simplicity in the tax system with the need to reflect different risk profiles across products,
- how to ensure that higher duties truly reduce harm rather than simply pushing activity into less regulated or offshore channels,
- how to use any additional tax revenue in a targeted way that supports prevention, treatment, and long term community resilience.
For the iGaming sector, a further question is how to adapt business models in a tax environment that increasingly differentiates between product categories on the basis of harm. Those operators who can demonstrate strong safer gambling credentials, transparent practices, and a willingness to work with policymakers are likely to be better placed in this evolving landscape.
Conclusion Northern Ireland’s role in shaping the iGaming future
Northern Ireland’s call for higher gambling taxes is more than a regional political skirmish. It is a test case for how governments can, or should, use fiscal tools to shape a complex and rapidly changing online gambling market. By challenging the Treasury’s proposed harmonisation of remote gambling tax and advocating for steeper duties on high risk products, the All Party Group on Reducing Harm Related to Gambling has pushed the UK wide conversation in a more explicitly harm focused direction.
Whether the government ultimately adopts the specific targets of a 50 percent Remote Gaming Duty and a 25 percent General Betting Duty, or chooses some other path, the issues raised by Northern Ireland’s politicians will resonate across the iGaming industry. Operators, regulators, and communities alike are entering a phase where the design of tax systems is inseparable from debates about addiction, fairness, and social responsibility. In that sense, this intervention may be remembered as a pivotal moment in the journey toward a more sustainable digital gambling ecosystem.
