The High Cost of Responsible Gaming: BGC Raises Concerns Over Proposed Gambling Levy

Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) head, Brigid Simmonds, has voiced significant worries regarding the possible effects of a legal levy on the gambling sector. Simmonds contends that the present propositions would impose an excessive financial strain on BGC constituents, encompassing betting establishments, bingo venues, and casinos.

Although the BGC originally proposed a compulsory levy, the government’s stance has subsequently evolved. Current deliberations center on a fluctuating rate, a mechanism the BGC deems impractical.

Simmonds emphasized the industry’s current contributions to GambleAware, noting that in the preceding three years, the National Lottery has donated roughly 0.01% of its yearly Gross Gambling Yield (GGY) to the problem gambling organization. This translates to an average yearly contribution of about £440,000, contrasted with a GGY of approximately £3.5 billion. The suggestion is that the sector is already providing its equitable portion to tackle gambling-related harm.

The fact that our constituents, who provided upwards of £50 million in the 2022/23 fiscal year, are essentially given a free pass on financing Responsible Gaming Tech (RET) appears illogical.

To illustrate this point, independent wagering establishments are mandated to allocate 0.4% of their earnings to RET, while adult amusement arcades are only obligated to contribute a mere fraction of that amount. The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) expresses apprehension that this imbalance could compel additional gaming enterprises to cease operations, citing the shuttering of more than 170 independent bookmakers since 2019.

Moreover, the suggested distribution of these resources – with 40-60% earmarked for the National Health Service, 15-30% for preventative measures and public awareness campaigns, and 10-20% for scholarly investigation – is being met with skepticism. Although the NHS does operate facilities for the treatment of compulsive gambling, some contend that this apportionment is unbalanced given the substantial efforts undertaken by charitable organizations such as GamCare and Gordon Moody.”

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *