site.btaGambling Operators Protest Amendments to Gambling Act

The amendments to the Gambling Act will have lasting negative consequences on revenues in the state budget, on the licensed organizers of gambling games and manufacturers of gaming equipment themselves, on investments and employment in the sector, as well as on Bulgarian sport, the media and society as a whole, said in a statement on Monday the Bulgarian Gaming Association, the Bulgarian Gambling Association and the Association of Organizers of Gambling Games and Activities in Bulgaria.

On April 26, the National Assembly unanimously adopted at first reading amendments to the Gambling Act, which ban the advertising of gambling games in the media. The amendments were tabled by Temenuzhka Petkova (GERB-UDF) and Yordan Tsonev (MRF) and were supported by 186 MPs from all parliamentary groups. The second reading is scheduled for April 30.

The most significant negative result of the adoption of the amendments to the law is the risk that customers are redirected to illegal gambling. There are no regulations and consumer protection, there are no guarantees for compliance with the rules against money laundering and from where there are no revenues from taxes and fees for the state, the representatives of the gaming industry said.

The companies criticize the proposal for a near-total ban on gambling advertising, arguing that "the possibility of advertising is the sole advantage of the licensed operator over the unlicensed (illegal), in view of which gambling advertising must be reasonably restricted."

The ban on advertising will severely limit the revenues of a number of sports clubs, federations and other sports organizations and limit the ability to find sponsors for sports event organizers. No less will be the negative impact of the measure on Bulgarian media, which will lose a significant part of their advertising revenues.

Operators also disagree with the measure in the draft law, which prohibits the opening and operation of gaming halls in settlements with less than 5,000 inhabitants. They consider such a measure to be unjustified and disproportionate. According to the operators, the bill lacks any analysis of how many sites would be closed, how this would affect the state budget, how many employees would be at risk of losing their jobs and livelihoods. The proposal of the operators is, if such a measure is introduced, to impose it on settlements with a population of less than 1,000 or 2,000 people, instead of 5,000 as provided for in the current bill.