The Gambling Regulatory Authority of Ireland (GRAI) has published the results of its recent public consultation on the country’s proposed gambling licensing regulations, noting it will now consider a tiered licensing fee structure and a five-year licence.
Between 7 April and 5 May, GRAI conducted a consultation that sought feedback from industry stakeholders on two sets of proposed regulations under the Gambling Regulation Act 2024.
The first set of regulations covered the application fee for betting and gaming licences under section 38 of the Act, while the second set covers the duration of a gambling licence under section 108, as well as some additional conditions that will apply to gambling licences under section 129.
The Irish gambling regulator noted that it received 27 formal responses, coming from various areas of the industry, including operators, representative bodies, consultants, public bodies, and civil society organisations.
Evaluating the submissions, GRAI stated that most of the responses, particularly from operators, either demonstrated “supportive or pragmatic views on the proposals, including constructive suggestions for enhancement, rather than fundamental objections”.
Tiered licence fee structure
For the application fee for betting and gaming licences, one of the most common concerns raised was that a turnover model for calculating the total licence cost is “unfair as it does not take into account the differentiation in the margins earned through different operator and game types”, penalising businesses that have low margins.
In addition, respondents highlighted that the definition of turnover is not aligned with what is widely used within the industry.
Concerns were also expressed regarding the €20,000 baseline fee for a remote licence as it is “a major increase in the minimum cost of a licence vis a vis the current licensing system”, alongside being “prohibitively expensive for small operators”, as well as far higher than what is charged in the UK and other European markets.
Regarding the €1,200 per premises fee, most respondents felt this fee was unfair because the same fee would apply across premises, despite their size, penalising smaller local operators while no such fee applies to remote operators. There was also confusion regarding “the proposed fee structure owing to a lack of clarity on some components”.
Specific concerns raised included that a turnover-based system creates “a disconnect between fees and actual operator revenue” and could be a threat to “sustainability of specialised betting offerings” in the market.
Most respondents called for a tiered licensing fee structure with metrics that “ensure it is proportionate to the size and economics of the operator”, in addition to greater licensing structure clarity and information, as well as utilising a gross gaming revenue formula for turnover when calculating the licence cost.
Respondents also asked for a scaled entry-level approach for the remote licence to be considered for smaller operators and start-ups, as well as a scaled approach to the in-person premises fee based on gaming unit numbers.
In response, GRAI stated that it will consider a tiered licensing fee model based on GGY or a hybrid of turnover and GGY as the approach “enhances fairness, and minimises market distortion”.
The regulator will also consider a layering premises fee that is “commensurate with the scale of the operation within the premises”, in addition to publishing clear definitions for financial terms and transparent methodologies for calculating fees.
GRAI also commented on reviewing fees against other fees in different jurisdictions, such as the UK, but noted that the fees are not directly comparable due to regulatory structure and responsibility differences.
“Many of the regulatory obligations that will be part of the GRAI’s responsibilities are not part of the Gambling Commission’s remit in Great Britain and instead are part of the functions of the local councils,” said GRAI.
“Market size variations, differences in taxation policies and sectors that are regulated by Regulators in other jurisdictions also mean that the cross-jurisdiction comparisons are not comparing like-for-like.”
Five-year licence term
Regarding the licence term, respondents highlighted that longer or indefinite licence periods are present in many international markets due to the renewal administration involved, its unclear if an application fee will have to be paid again upon renewal after three years, and there’s a lack of clarity on “anticipated frequency and ongoing checks and information requests”.
In addition, respondents noted that high fees and short licence durations can “discourage full compliance and potentially drive marginal operators underground”, and that the renewal process will “place a burden on the licensee’s resources” due to the documentation and information that will need to be updated and resubmitted.
As a result, suggestions put forward by respondents included a five-year or indefinite licence, with the latter potentially offering long-term benefits for an operator and the regulator, as well as considering a licence structure that “offers longevity to operators with more robust safer gambling set-ups”.
In response, GRAI stated that it will consider a five-year licence or provide longer terms to operators with a strong compliance history, as it will incentivise good governance and reduce administrative renewal burdens. The regulator will also publish clear and timely licence renewal guidelines for greater certainty and help operators plan and prepare for renewal.
“Whilst the GRAI notes that the proposed three-year licence term was supported by three respondents, the GRAI acknowledges the theme of the responses in relation to the consideration of an extension of the licence term,” detailed the regulatory body.
“As such, the GRAI will commit to keeping the licence term under review as the licensing regulatory framework is established, but are satisfied that three-years duration is an appropriate starting point.”
Next steps
With the consultation concluded, GRAI will now send a formal notification of the regulations to the European Commission, member states, and the public under the Technical Regulation Information System, which is a standard procedural requirement for technical regulations, ensuring regulatory coherence across the European Union.
The regulator added that it will continue to engage with stakeholders as the licensing framework is implemented, providing further guidance when necessary.
GRAI concluded: “Constructive dialogue remains central to our approach, and we welcome ongoing collaboration with all relevant parties, including industry participants, public health bodies, members of the public, civil society groups, and regulatory peers.
“The GRAI remains committed to transparent, proportionate and effective regulation of Ireland’s gambling industry.”
