⚖ EU Gambling Regulations

History of Gambling Regulation in Europe: Key Milestones, Treaty Rulings, and the Evolution of National Frameworks

A chronological examination of how European gambling regulation evolved from royal decrees and church prohibitions to the sophisticated national licensing frameworks and EU-level coordination mechanisms that govern the industry today.

Historical Highlights

First State-Sanctioned Casino: Venice's Ridotto, 1638 — operated during carnival season under government control
First CJEU Gambling Ruling: Schindler (Case C-275/92), 1994 — confirmed gambling as a service under EU law
Online Gambling Era Begins: First online casinos launched 1996; EU member states began legislating from early 2000s
Modern Milestone: Germany's Interstate Treaty on Gambling (GlStV), 2021 — unified licensing for Europe's largest economy

Gambling in Ancient and Medieval Europe

Gambling is deeply woven into European civilization. Archaeological evidence confirms that dice games were common in ancient Greece and Rome, where lawmakers oscillated between permitting and prohibiting wagering. Roman law under the Lex Alearia forbade most gambling except during the Saturnalia festival, though enforcement was notoriously inconsistent. Soldiers gambled freely in military camps, and emperors including Augustus and Claudius were known devotees of dice and board games.

During the medieval period, the Christian Church exerted considerable influence over gambling policy. Church councils repeatedly condemned games of chance as sinful, and secular rulers often followed suit with periodic bans. However, these prohibitions were rarely effective. In England, King Richard I restricted gambling among soldiers during the Third Crusade (1190) by rank — only knights and clergy could wager, and common soldiers were forbidden entirely. France's King Louis IX enacted a gambling ban in 1254, though it was widely disregarded.

The tension between moral prohibition and practical tolerance established a pattern that would persist throughout European history: governments recognizing gambling's social risks while acknowledging its inevitability and revenue potential.

The Rise of State-Sanctioned Gambling (1600s–1800s)

The modern concept of regulated gambling emerged when European states shifted from outright prohibition to controlled permission. This transition was driven by two forces: the impossibility of suppressing gambling entirely, and the realization that state-operated or licensed gambling could generate significant public revenue.

Venice's Ridotto: The First Regulated Casino

In 1638, the Great Council of Venice authorized the Ridotto, a government-controlled gambling house located in the San Moisè Palace. Operated by the city-state during carnival season, the Ridotto required patrons to wear masks and three-cornered hats — a social leveling measure that allowed citizens of different classes to gamble together. Though the Ridotto was closed in 1774 by reformist Doge Giorgio Pisani over concerns about impoverished nobles, it established the blueprint for state-sanctioned gambling: government authorization, controlled premises, and regulated conduct.

The model spread. Baden-Baden opened its famous Kurhaus casino in 1824, quickly becoming a destination for European aristocracy. Monte Carlo's casino, established in 1863 by Prince Charles III of Monaco, transformed the principality's finances and remains operational today as one of Europe's most iconic gambling venues. According to the Monte-Carlo Société des Bains de Mer, casino revenues allowed Monaco to abolish income tax for its residents by 1869.

National Lotteries as Public Finance

Lotteries became a crucial instrument of European public finance from the 16th century onward. The first recorded European public lottery was organized in 1446 in the Low Countries to raise funds for town fortifications, as documented by the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Queen Elizabeth I authorized England's first national lottery in 1566 to fund harbor improvements. France followed with its Loterie Royale in 1539, and by the 18th century, state lotteries operated across most of Europe.

This period cemented a regulatory philosophy still visible today: gambling is acceptable when the state controls or benefits from it. The state monopoly model that persists in Finland and formerly in several Nordic countries traces its intellectual origins directly to this era.

The 19th and Early 20th Century: Prohibition and Liberalization Cycles

The 19th century saw dramatic swings in European gambling policy, driven by moral reform movements, economic pressures, and political upheavals.

Germany's Casino Closures

In 1872, newly unified Germany closed all casinos under Chancellor Otto von Bismarck's cultural modernization campaign. The closures lasted until the Weimar Republic era, when Baden-Baden and other spa towns gradually reopened gaming facilities in the 1920s and 1930s. This cycle of prohibition and reopening would repeat across Europe, reinforcing the lesson that gambling suppression creates underground markets rather than eliminating demand.

Early Statutory Frameworks

The early 20th century brought the first recognizably modern gambling legislation. Belgium enacted its gambling law in 1902, establishing a regulatory framework that would be substantially reformed only in 1999. The United Kingdom passed the Betting and Gaming Act 1960, followed by the more comprehensive Gaming Act 1968, which created a licensing system for casinos, bingo halls, and betting shops that endured for nearly four decades.

France formalized its casino regulatory regime through a series of decrees beginning in 1907, restricting casinos to designated spa and resort towns — a geographic limitation that remained largely intact until the late 20th century. As our France country guide explains, this tradition of geographic restriction continued to influence French gambling regulation well into the digital era.

The European Community and Early Cross-Border Questions (1957–1993)

The founding treaties of the European Economic Community in 1957 established the free movement of goods, services, persons, and capital — principles that would eventually collide with national gambling monopolies and restrictions. However, gambling regulation remained firmly a national matter for the Community's first three decades.

The question of whether gambling constituted a "service" under the Treaty was largely academic until the single market program of the late 1980s and early 1990s intensified scrutiny of national barriers to cross-border trade. As gambling companies began exploring opportunities beyond their home markets, inevitable conflicts arose between operators asserting Treaty freedoms and member states defending their regulatory autonomy.

Landmark CJEU Rulings: Defining Gambling's Place in EU Law

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU, formerly the European Court of Justice) has delivered a series of landmark rulings that fundamentally shaped the legal framework for gambling regulation in Europe. These cases established that gambling services fall within the scope of EU Treaty freedoms, while simultaneously confirming that member states retain broad discretion to regulate gambling for public interest reasons.

Schindler (1994): Gambling as a Service

The Her Majesty's Customs and Excise v Schindler case (Case C-275/92) arose when German lottery operators sent advertisements for the Süddeutsche Klassenlotterie to UK residents. UK customs seized the materials, arguing they violated domestic lottery laws. The CJEU ruled in March 1994 that lotteries constituted "services" under Article 56 TFEU (then Article 59 EEC), bringing gambling within the scope of EU free movement rules for the first time.

Crucially, the Court also held that national restrictions on gambling services could be justified on grounds of public interest — including consumer protection, crime prevention, and the maintenance of public order. This dual finding created the foundational framework: gambling is an EU service, but member states can restrict it.

Zenatti (1999) and Läärä (1999): Confirming National Discretion

Two 1999 cases reinforced Schindler's framework. In Zenatti v Azienda Autonoma delle Terme di Montecatini (Case C-67/98), the Court upheld Italian restrictions on betting intermediaries, reaffirming that member states could limit gambling to protect consumers and prevent fraud. In Läärä (Case C-124/97), the CJEU upheld Finland's slot machine monopoly, finding that concentrating gambling operations in a single state-controlled entity could serve legitimate public interest objectives.

Gambelli (2003): The Consistency Requirement

The Gambelli ruling (Case C-243/01) marked a pivotal evolution. Italian authorities had prosecuted individuals for facilitating bets with licensed UK bookmaker Stanley International Betting through Italian data collection centers. The CJEU held that while Italy could restrict gambling on public interest grounds, it must do so consistently. A state cannot claim to protect consumers from gambling harms while simultaneously encouraging gambling through state-run entities or expansive advertising campaigns.

This consistency test became a powerful analytical tool. As our analysis of EU Gambling Laws Explained details, the Gambelli principle forces regulators to demonstrate that their restrictions genuinely serve stated objectives rather than merely protecting domestic monopolies from foreign competition.

Placanica (2007): Proportionality in Practice

The Placanica joined cases (C-338/04, C-359/04, C-360/04) further developed the proportionality test. The CJEU found that Italy's exclusion of certain companies from its licensing process — effectively shutting out foreign operators — was disproportionate. The Court emphasized that licensing systems must be transparent, non-discriminatory, and genuinely oriented toward their stated objectives, as analyzed by the EUR-Lex database of EU law.

The Accumulated Doctrine

By the late 2000s, through cases including Liga Portuguesa (C-42/07, 2009) and Stooss (C-316/07, 2010), the CJEU had established a coherent if complex doctrine:

The Online Revolution: Regulating Digital Gambling (1996–2015)

The emergence of online gambling in the mid-1990s created the most significant regulatory challenge since the invention of the casino. The first online casinos appeared in 1996, operating primarily from Caribbean jurisdictions with minimal regulatory oversight. By the early 2000s, online gambling had grown into a multi-billion-euro industry that fundamentally challenged the geographic basis of traditional gambling regulation.

Early National Responses

European countries responded to online gambling with a spectrum of approaches:

The European Commission's Engagement

As national approaches diverged, the European Commission attempted to promote coordination. In 2011, the Commission published its Green Paper on On-line Gambling in the Internal Market, which analyzed the fragmented regulatory landscape and explored options for EU-level action. The consultation received over 260 responses from stakeholders across the industry, according to records available from the European Commission press archive.

In 2012, the Commission followed up with a Communication and Action Plan titled "Towards a Comprehensive European Framework for Online Gambling." The Action Plan proposed not harmonized legislation, but a series of recommendations covering consumer protection, advertising, match-fixing, and responsible gambling. Crucially, the Commission acknowledged that full harmonization was neither politically feasible nor necessarily desirable, given the diversity of national traditions and preferences.

The 2014 Commission Recommendation on principles for the protection of consumers and players of online gambling services (2014/478/EU) represented the most concrete EU-level guidance, establishing best-practice standards for age verification, self-exclusion, advertising, and responsible gambling. While non-binding, these principles influenced national legislation across Europe.

The German Journey: From Prohibition to the Interstate Treaty (2008–2021)

Germany's path to a comprehensive gambling regulatory framework illustrates the difficulties of achieving consensus in a federal system. The original Interstate Treaty on Gambling (GlüStV) of 2008 established a restrictive framework that largely prohibited online gambling except for sports betting, subject to a state monopoly.

The monopoly system was challenged before both German courts and the CJEU. In 2010, the CJEU's Stooss ruling found aspects of Germany's gambling monopoly inconsistent with EU law, as the monopoly holder actively advertised its services while claiming to restrict gambling for public interest reasons. This decision forced a fundamental rethinking of German gambling regulation.

After years of political negotiation among Germany's 16 federal states, the Third Interstate Treaty on Gambling (GlüStV 2021) entered into force on July 1, 2021. The new framework introduced:

Germany's regulatory evolution encapsulates broader European themes: the tension between prohibition and licensing, the challenge of reconciling state-level authority with market realities, and the growing emphasis on player protection. For a detailed analysis of Germany's cross-operator tracking system, see our guide to Net Loss Limits and Activity Statements.

Anti-Money Laundering: The Parallel Regulatory Track

Alongside gambling-specific regulation, the EU's evolving anti-money laundering framework has increasingly shaped how gambling operators must conduct business. The intersection of AML and gambling regulation represents one of the most significant developments in the industry's regulatory history.

The First EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive (91/308/EEC) in 1991 initially targeted the financial sector. However, successive directives progressively expanded their scope to include gambling:

The establishment of the EU Anti-Money Laundering Authority (AMLA) in 2025, headquartered in Frankfurt, represents the latest and most ambitious step. As detailed in our AML Compliance guide, AMLA has direct supervisory powers over high-risk entities and can impose fines of up to EUR 10 million or 10% of annual turnover.

The Responsible Gambling Movement (2000s–Present)

The emergence of responsible gambling as a regulatory priority represents a fundamental shift in the philosophy underlying European gambling regulation. Where earlier regulation focused primarily on revenue generation, crime prevention, and market control, contemporary frameworks increasingly center player welfare as a core objective.

Key milestones in this evolution include:

Research from the International Center for Responsible Gambling (ICRG) and organizations like the European Association for the Study of Gambling (EASG) has provided the evidence base driving these regulatory developments. Studies demonstrating correlations between advertising exposure, deposit limit structures, and gambling harm have directly informed legislative choices across the EU.

Recent Transformations: 2020–2026

The most recent period of European gambling regulation has been shaped by several converging forces: the COVID-19 pandemic, technological change, expanded player protection expectations, and growing regulatory coordination.

Pandemic Acceleration

The COVID-19 lockdowns of 2020–2021 drove unprecedented migration to online gambling. Land-based venues closed across Europe, and online gambling revenue surged by 10–20% in most regulated markets during the initial lockdown period. This shift accelerated regulatory attention to online gambling, responsible gambling tools, and digital enforcement mechanisms. Several countries that had been slow to regulate online gambling fast-tracked legislative initiatives in response.

Advertising Restrictions Tighten

A marked trend toward stricter gambling advertising regulation emerged from 2019 onward. Belgium's 2019/2023 advertising ban, Italy's Decreto Dignità (2019), Lithuania's comprehensive advertising ban (effective July 2025), and the Netherlands' enhanced advertising restrictions reflect growing concern about gambling normalization and youth exposure. Our comprehensive analysis of Gambling Advertising Bans in the EU documents this accelerating trend.

New Licensing Waves

Several major markets underwent significant licensing reforms:

Major Licensing Reforms 2020–2026

  • Germany (2021): Interstate Treaty creates unified online gambling licensing framework with GGL oversight
  • Netherlands (2021): Remote Gaming Act (KOA) opens market to licensed online operators under KSA regulation
  • Italy (2026): New nine-year online gambling licenses at EUR 7 million each, the highest entry cost in the EU
  • Finland (2025–proposed): Government announces intent to transition from Veikkaus state monopoly to licensing regime
  • Ireland (2023–ongoing): Gambling Regulation Act establishes new regulatory authority with comprehensive oversight powers

The AMLA Era

The establishment of the EU Anti-Money Laundering Authority in July 2025 introduced a new layer of EU-level oversight affecting gambling operators. While AMLA does not directly regulate gambling, its AML supervision powers create additional compliance requirements for operators handling significant transaction volumes, as the European Parliament factsheet on combating money laundering explains.

Themes Across Five Centuries of Regulation

Several enduring themes emerge from this historical survey that continue to shape EU gambling regulation today:

1. The Prohibition-Licensing Cycle

Repeatedly throughout European history, governments have attempted to prohibit gambling, found that prohibition drives activity underground, and ultimately transitioned to licensing and regulation. This pattern occurred with Venice's Ridotto, Germany's post-Bismarck casino reopenings, and most recently with the shift from online gambling prohibition to licensing across multiple EU member states.

2. Revenue vs. Protection

The tension between governments' interest in gambling revenue and their obligation to protect citizens from gambling harm has never been resolved — only managed. State monopolies justified themselves partly through revenue channeling, while modern licensing regimes attempt to balance market openness with player protection. The consistency requirement established by the Gambelli ruling codified this tension into legal doctrine.

3. National Sovereignty over Regulation

Despite decades of European integration, gambling regulation remains one of the areas where national sovereignty is most fiercely defended. The CJEU has consistently respected member states' right to set their own gambling policies, and the European Commission's attempts at harmonization have been limited to non-binding recommendations. As our guide to EU Gambling Laws Explained describes, this fragmented approach results directly from this historical commitment to national regulatory autonomy.

4. Technology Outpacing Regulation

From the advent of mechanical slot machines in the late 19th century to the online gambling explosion of the 2000s and the emergence of cryptocurrency gambling and skin gambling, technology has consistently created new gambling formats faster than regulators can adapt. This pattern shows no sign of abating as AI, virtual reality, and blockchain technologies create new regulatory challenges.

Looking Forward: Where Regulation Is Heading

The history of European gambling regulation suggests several likely trajectories for the coming years:

⚠ Note

This article provides a historical overview for educational purposes only. Gambling regulations change frequently and vary by jurisdiction. For current legal requirements, consult the relevant national regulator or qualified legal counsel. For a directory of current EU gambling regulations, visit our Country Index.