Betting CEOs ask Chancellor to rule out gambling duty increases ahead of Budget
Industry letter opposes MGD rise to 40% and asks pause on GBD hike planned for April 2027
Key Takeaways
- CEOs from Entain, bet365, Bally’s Corporation, Evoke, Betfred and Flutter UK & Ireland wrote to Chancellor John Healey before the 28 October 2026 Budget.
- The Betting and Gaming Council says executives oppose raising Machine Games Duty from 20% to 40% and want the General Betting Duty increase due in April 2027 paused.
- The BGC reported more than 600 shop closures and over 10,250 jobs lost or at risk, citing UK Gambling Commission data showing a 38% fall in betting shops in Great Britain.
- The industry estimates the Treasury could lose up to £124 million (€146.8 million) and horseracing could lose at least £40 million (€47.3 million); Regulus Partners forecasts £92 million (€108.8 million) annual losses if MGD rises to 40%.
CEOs from major UK betting companies have written to Chancellor of the Exchequer John Healey asking him to rule out gambling duty increases ahead of the Budget on 28 October 2026. The Betting and Gaming Council said the executives oppose plans to raise Machine Games Duty from 20% to 40% and want the proposed General Betting Duty increase, slated for April 2027, paused until prior rises’ effects are assessed.
Who signed and what they asked
The letter was signed by executives from Entain, bet365, Bally’s Corporation, Evoke, Betfred, and Flutter UK & Ireland. The group asked the Treasury to abandon the MGD increase and to delay any GBD change due in April 2027 until the industry has had time to evaluate earlier tax increases.
Industry evidence on closures, jobs and shop numbers
The Betting and Gaming Council provided figures it says demonstrate recent harm to the retail sector: more than 600 betting outlets have closed and over 10,250 jobs were lost or threatened. The council cited data from the UK Gambling Commission showing the number of betting shops in Great Britain has fallen by 38%.
Fiscal and horseracing impact estimates
The BGC estimated the Treasury could lose up to £124 million (€146.8 million) in funds as a knock-on effect of further duty rises. It also said British horseracing could face at least £40 million (€47.3 million) in lost levy and media-rights payments. Separately, an analysis by Regulus Partners projects the horseracing sector could sustain £92 million (€108.8 million) in annual losses if MGD rises to 40%.
Timing and context
Operators delivered their appeal ahead of the UK Government’s Budget announcement on 28 October 2026 as the sector awaits confirmation of tax measures. The dispute highlights competing fiscal objectives for the Treasury and the potential commercial effects on retail operators and racing stakeholders. For regulatory developments see regulation and wider industry reaction at news.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who signed the letter to Chancellor John Healey opposing duty increases?
Executives from Entain, bet365, Bally’s Corporation, Evoke, Betfred and Flutter UK & Ireland signed the letter, according to the Betting and Gaming Council.
What specific tax changes are betting CEOs opposing?
They oppose raising Machine Games Duty from 20% to 40% and have asked for the General Betting Duty increase scheduled for April 2027 to be put on hold.
What evidence did the industry present about shop closures and job losses?
The Betting and Gaming Council cited more than 600 betting outlet closures and over 10,250 jobs lost or warned, and referenced UK Gambling Commission data showing a 38% drop in betting shops in Great Britain.
What fiscal impact did the BGC and Regulus Partners estimate?
The BGC estimated up to £124 million (€146.8 million) of Treasury funds could be lost and at least £40 million (€47.3 million) for horseracing from lower levy and media-rights payments; Regulus Partners projected £92 million (€108.8 million) in annual horseracing losses if MGD rises to 40%.
Tags
About the author
Eleanor Whitfield
Regulatory Affairs Correspondent
Eleanor Whitfield tracks gambling legislation, licensing decisions, and regulator enforcement across key markets — from the UKGC, MGA, and Germany's GGL to Spain's DGOJ and the state-by-state map in the Americas. The reporting answers three questions precisely: what changed, where, and who it affects, with jurisdictions, effective dates, and penalty figures named exactly as published. Compliance officers and operators read Eleanor Whitfield to know which rulebook moved before their next board meeting.
More from Eleanor Whitfield
