The Apparent Stability of Gaming in Belgium Hides Risks for Regulated Gambling

The latest data from the Belgian Gaming Commission presents a stable picture for the regulated gambling sector. In 2025, the licensed market recorded a marginal decline of only 0.07%, reaching €1.62 billion in gross gaming revenue (GGR). Superficially, it could be interpreted that the market has peaked. However, this stability conceals a deeper transformation: gambling does not disappear; rather, it shifts, and the risk to player protection increases.

Market Evolution: From In-Person to Online and Illegal

The licensed in-person channel declined by more than 7% that year, contrasting with a 5.4% growth in the regulated online sector. Currently, nearly 60% of the regulated market in Belgium corresponds to online gambling. This channel shift is not just a technical transfer: it affects how players discover and access offers, and how they migrate from one platform to another.

Online spaces bring together both legal and illegal operators in the same digital environment. Given the integration of search engines and platforms, the distance between playing on a licensed site and an illegal one often reduces to a few clicks. For many users, the distinction is not obvious.

Regulatory Restrictions and Asymmetry Against Illegal Operators

Recent regulatory developments have diminished the visibility and appeal of regulated operators. Among the measures are:

• The near-total disappearance of licensed advertising.
• Mandatory segmentation of websites by product category.
• Severe restrictions on bonuses and promotions.

In contrast to these limitations, illegal operators are not required to meet any of these obligations. This asymmetry in visibility, accessibility, and user experience grants them competitive advantages within the digital market. Restricting only the journey of regulated users exposes the system to a growing leakage towards the unregulated channel, where protection disappears.

The Impact of Channelization on Player Protection

Channelization — the percentage of players who remain within the regulated framework — is under pressure. According to a study by the Belgian Gaming Commission, 28% of young adults (18-30 years) have already played on illegal sites. Other national research estimates that about 25% of online spending occurs on platforms not authorized by the regulator.

The report highlights a particularly concerning fact: a significant number of self-excluded players via the National Self-Exclusion System (EPIS) continue to gamble in the illegal channel. This demonstrates that protection only works while the user remains within the regulated ecosystem.

The tools available for legal operators — identification, behavioral analysis, automatic detection mechanisms, protective interventions — become useless when the player migrates to environments without oversight or regulatory requirements.

Regulator Capacity and Challenges in the Fight Against Illegal Gambling

During 2025, the Belgian Gaming Commission requested Meta to remove more than 8,500 ads from illegal operators using the graphic identities of legal Belgian brands. In that same period, the regulator added 370 new domains to its blacklist of blocked sites. This acceleration of illicit activity surpasses the current resources of the agency: by the end of 2025, the secretariat had only 42 employees compared to the 57 planned in its staff. Furthermore, the report points out the difficulties in collecting fines from operators located abroad or hiding their identities.

The regulatory body's response capability is critical. A strict regulatory framework loses effectiveness if the authority responsible for enforcing it does not have the resources, expertise, and technological tools to keep pace with the digital market.

The Central Question: How to Keep Players in the Regulated Channel?

The debate is no longer about whether to increase or relax regulation on legal operators, but rather how to prevent players from migrating outside the protected perimeter. It requires:

• More effective actions against illegal operators: website blocking, restrictions on their payment channels, collaboration with banks, social platforms, search engines, and internet service providers.
• Preserving a sufficiently attractive and visible licensed offering that competes with illegal alternatives.

"In a regulated market, protection and the attractiveness of the offer are inseparable: an offer can only protect if it remains identifiable, accessible, and meets expectations," states Jean-Christophe Choffray, Director of Vision and Product at GAMING1.

Channelization is not merely a commercial indicator for the B2B online gambling sector; it is a prerequisite for any effective player protection policy. Each player who leaves the licensed market does not necessarily stop gambling, but may become an invisible user to monitoring and social responsibility tools. The decline in measured activity does not necessarily equate to a real decline: the main risk is confusing a decrease in the traceable market with a genuine reduction in gambling in Belgium.

Implications for Technology Providers and Sector Operations

For product and technology leaders, the implication is clear: identification, access control, monitoring, and protection solutions are only effective within the supervised ecosystem. If strict regulation pushes users outside this framework, the supervisory function loses scope. The sustainability of the Belgian model — and similar ones in Europe — will depend both on strengthening the fight against illegal activities and on ensuring that the licensed offering continues to attract and retain the target audience.