Thirteen Swedish gambling operators just submitted a petition to the government. They’re not happy.
BOS, Sweden’s online gambling trade group, signed it too. The petition targets ATG CEO Hasse Lord Skarplöth’s recent comments about taxes. He runs a horseracing organisation.
Skarplöth called Britain’s recent tax increase “courageous.” He wants Sweden to do the same thing. But there’s a catch – he thinks horse betting should get lower taxes while online casinos pay more.
The operators see this differently.
Why This Tax Split Doesn’t Make Sense
The numbers tell the story. Horse betting keeps 98-99% of players in regulated channels. That’s nearly perfect.
Online casinos? They’re at 72-82% at best.
BOS Secretary General Gustaf Hoffstedt explained the problem. Higher taxes push players toward unlicensed sites. Those black market operators don’t pay gambling tax. They don’t protect consumers either.
“To then lower the gaming tax for horse betting, which already has a very strong channel, and raise it for online casinos that have a very weak channeling would be completely incomprehensible,” Hoffstedt said. “At least for those who put consumer protection first.”
The logic cuts through ATG’s argument. Why give tax breaks to the sector that’s already winning? Why squeeze the sector that’s losing players to illegal sites?
What Sweden’s Gambling Market Looks Like Now
Sweden’s regulated market hit SEK 6.7bn ($720m) in Q3 turnover. Spelinspektionen, the gambling regulator, released those figures last month.
The country already changed its Gambling Act recently. New AML rules came through to tighten market security. Those proposals arrived in November.
ATG itself felt the pressure from earlier tax changes. The company reported a 5% drop in net gaming revenue during Q3. Those losses came right after Sweden implemented previous tax increases.
So ATG wants relief. Just not for everyone.
How This Fight Shapes Swedish Regulation
The petition sits with government officials now. Fourteen signatures oppose one CEO’s vision.
Sweden’s gambling industry rarely speaks this loudly. Thirteen competitors don’t often agree on anything. But they’ve united against this specific proposal.
The channeling rate argument gives them solid ground. Consumer protection matters more than horseracing subsidies. At least that’s how the petitioners frame it.
And they’ve got data backing them up. The black market already captures nearly a quarter of online casino players. Higher taxes would make that worse.
The government faces a choice. Listen to fourteen industry voices or one horseracing executive.
