The Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling, Branschföreningen för Onlinespel, has called on clarification to be offered regarding newly imposed temporary restrictions which it says leaves “unclear directives”.
Issuing an open letter regarding the urgent need for clarity on the Social Security Minister’s mandated restrictions, the authority is appealing to the Swedish regulator to clarify to the industry what applies regarding the deposit restrictions.
Commenting that “the gaming companies have interpreted the new regulation in very different ways,” the plea comes after the state-controlled ATG received criticism in Expressen, a Swedish newspaper, for how they interpreted the new regulation.
Maintaining that “the chaos that the gaming industry warned about has now occurred, as a result of a hasty and weakly substantiated proposal,” the group warns that many more millions could be handed out in fine as well as more players turning to the unlicensed black market.
Documenting the changes imposed earlier in the year based on directives from Ardalan Shekarabi, BOS details the widespread criticism received as well as the need for further clarity on “hasty proposals that have the opposite effect are now puzzling an entire industry.”
The authority concludes: “Our message has always been clear; restrictions and measures must be based on well-substantiated facts and thorough impact assessments, otherwise the clock risks turning back to what it looked like before re-regulation.
“We are now in a situation where neither the private nor the state-controlled companies know how to act and it is obvious that different actors interpret the new regulation in different ways. The question is who really benefits from this apart from the companies that are outside the licensing system?
“In light of the above, the gaming industry is looking forward to the Spelinspektionen’s clarification regarding the interpretation of the new deposit limit”.
To read the open letter in full see below:
Only a few days after the Social Security Minister’s temporary restrictions came into force, it is clear that the gaming companies have interpreted the new regulation in very different ways. The chaos that the gaming industry warned of has now occurred, a consequence of a hasty and weakly substantiated proposal. We now appeal to the Spelinspektionen to clarify to the industry what applies regarding the deposit restrictions.
Recently, the state-controlled company ATG received criticism in Expressen for how they interpreted the new regulation. Most of the gaming companies’ lawyers I spoke to are of the opinion that the regulation is unfinished and poorly written, which has led to players interpreting the regulation differently. Many of us warned that measures, which were not based on facts and thorough impact assessments, risked leading to a worsening situation for both the licensed companies and their customers. More millions in fines may be handed out and more customers will certainly turn to the unlicensed market.
On 2 July, extensive changes came into force in the Swedish gaming market, based on directives from the responsible Minister Ardalan Shekarabi. The new regulation received strong and unanimous criticism from both private and state gaming companies in both referral rounds. The Spelinspektionen, which is responsible for ensuring that the ordinance is complied with, also had several objections. Among other things, against the extremely short time given to the gaming companies to implement the extensive changes and the risk of reduced channelling.
The chaos that the gaming industry, like other experts, warned of has now occurred. It is technically difficult to distinguish the products on a platform that aims to meet the requirements for both a good gaming experience and a high level of consumer protection. For fear of more millions in fines, most companies have been forced to deal with the new restrictions by setting a limit on all products, even though sports and horses are not covered by the regulation. When companies implement widely differing solutions, all of which seem to be within the boundaries of the law, the friend of order asks, what is really the matter?
We are not envious of the Spelinspektionen, which did not itself support the changes, but unfortunately it is now their task to clarify very quickly with regard to the deposit restrictions. We in the industry work for a continued sustainable gaming market and strong consumer protection, but it is difficult when hasty proposals that have the opposite effect are now puzzling an entire industry.
Our message has always been clear; restrictions and measures must be based on well-founded facts and elaborate impact assessments, otherwise the clock may turn back to what it looked like before the re-adjustment. We are now in a situation where neither the private nor the state-controlled companies know how to act and it is obvious that different actors interpret the new regulation in different ways. The question is who really wins this besides the companies that are outside the licensing system?
Against the background of the above, the gaming industry is looking forward to the Spelinspekionen’s clarification regarding the interpretation of the new deposit restriction.
