Important factors to consider when revising licence conditions

With the emergence of a new gambling regulator, everyone expects changes in licensing conditions. This is logical, because any large-scale administrative changes always mean a change in approaches to work and rules that govern the market. Of course, against the backdrop of existing regulatory challenges, everyone expects some positive developments, in particular in the field of tax legislation and the fight against illegal operators. However, there are lobbyists who are already working to create legal loopholes in the updated licensing conditions that will allow lottery operators to imitate gambling with impunity.

Lotteries are already preparing for another attempt to discredit the legal market. That is why my position on lotteries has always been very simple: there should be no imitation of gambling by lotteries. If lottery companies want to provide gambling services, they should obtain appropriate licences like any other legal organisers. If they provide access to gambling without appropriate licences, they are illegal. There can be no other interpretation of their activities, because imitation brings nothing but harm to neither players nor the state.

What is imitation in practice? Let's take a look at a simple example that will be clear to everyone. Imagine that you sell something on the market for 1000 hryvnias and pay hundreds of thousands of hryvnias a month for the opportunity to trade, while your neighbour sells the same product on the same market and does not pay a single penny. How long will you be able to compete with him? The question is rhetorical, but this is exactly the position of licensed companies in relation to lottery operators without licences.

However, this is not the end of the negative impact of lottery activities, as:

1. Lottery owners do not have not only gambling licences but also lottery licences. Most state-owned lotteries have been operating without licences for more than a decade, which leads to a lack of budget revenues.

2. Lottery operators cooperate with illegal operators in the offline segment by imitating gambling through "instant lotteries", which violates the law and simultaneously finances and supports the land-based illegal gambling sector.

Of course, such a situation is beneficial to lottery operators, and their lobbyists are already preparing relevant proposals to update licensing conditions that will allow lotteries to actually "legalise" their "right to imitation". Therefore, the fight against such "proposals" and the corresponding actions aimed at their lobbying should become one of the top priorities.

I am convinced that the new regulator will be able to quickly understand the intricacies that lottery representatives will undoubtedly create. And it will be able to protect the legal gambling business from speculation, which lottery operators have been dreaming about for more than five years. After all, during this entire period, it was possible to prevent the introduction of imitation gambling into the legal field. This inefficient and corrupt model has always remained in the shadows. I sincerely hope that the new regulator will be able to prevent technical provisions in the licensing conditions that could lead to the transition of imitation gambling to the legal field.