ES
IT
PT
DE
NL
Report relies on technical assumptions that don’t reflect the realities of the UK’s land-based betting and gaming market
The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) has rejected calls by the Social Market Foundation (SMF) to double Machine Games Duty (MGD), warning the report fails to properly assess the impact its proposals would have on jobs, local communities, high streets and Britain’s regulated betting and gaming sector.
The BGC said the report relies on a series of technical assumptions that do not reflect the realities of the UK’s land-based betting and gaming market.
While much of the analysis focuses on adult gaming centres, the proposed tax increase would also affect betting shops, bingo clubs, casinos, working men’s clubs and miners’ welfare clubs, despite the significant differences between those venues, including levels of supervision, staffing, age verification, customer demographics and consumer protections.
The BGC said the report also fails to distinguish between taxation by machine category and taxation by venue, despite the fact that different licensed environments operate under different regulatory controls.
It further criticised the report for assessing potential gambling harm by game type rather than by venue or machine category, while acknowledging that no category-level harm data currently exists. As a result, the report assumes B-category machines present the same level of risk regardless of whether they are located in a fully staffed, supervised and ID-checked casino or another licensed venue.
The BGC also questioned the report’s reliance on Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB) prevalence estimates, despite ongoing concerns that it significantly overstates the levels of gambling participation, and its use of broader fiscal cost estimates that are scaled up to produce headline economic figures. It warned this risks overstating the costs associated with gambling while failing to account for the economic contribution of land-based venues, including employment, taxation, business rates, investment and the wider benefits they bring to local high streets.
Grainne Hurst, Chief Executive of the Betting and Gaming Council, said:
“We fundamentally oppose any increase in MGD, and nothing in this report justifies such a damaging policy.
“Bingo clubs, betting shops, casinos, working men’s clubs and miners’ welfare clubs play an important role in communities across the country. The regulated betting and gaming sector supports around 109,000 jobs, contributes billions to the UK economy and provides valued leisure venues for the millions of adults who enjoy betting safely and responsibly.
“Doubling Machine Games Duty would not protect those communities. It would force venue closures, cost jobs and weaken high streets, while benefiting only the growing illegal gambling market, which pays no tax, contributes nothing to local communities and offers none of the consumer protections found in the regulated sector.
“Remarkably, the report makes no attempt to quantify the venue closures or job losses its own proposals would cause.
“Perhaps most strikingly, the report’s own polling shows that a majority of people, across the political spectrum, do not support increasing taxes on gaming machines. Tax policy should be evidence-led, proportionate and based on a full assessment of its impact on jobs, investment, consumers and communities.”
The BGC also criticised the report for assuming that spending displaced from betting shops, bingo clubs and casinos would simply be redirected elsewhere in the local economy, without modelling the likely closure of venues or assessing the wider economic and social consequences for affected communities.
The trade body said any future consideration of Machine Games Duty should be based on a full assessment of the different land-based venues affected, the consumer protections they provide, their contribution to jobs and local economies, and the potential impact of further tax increases on investment, employment, high streets and the growth of the illegal gambling market.
