TLDR
- The European Parliament’s Budget Committee will discuss a proposed 1% levy on gambling operators across all 27 EU member states on May 27
- The levy could generate between €2 billion and €4 billion per year, potentially reaching €28 billion over a seven-year budget cycle
- Industry groups warn the tax would push customers toward illegal gambling sites, which they say already make up 71% of Europe’s betting market
- The EU is searching for new revenue streams ahead of its 2028–2034 budget framework, expected to approach €2 trillion
- The proposal is still in early stages and faces resistance from both gambling companies and individual member states over tax sovereignty concerns
The European Parliament is preparing to formally discuss a proposal that would impose a continent-wide levy on gambling operators to help fund the EU’s next long-term budget.
The Parliament’s Budget Committee will hold discussions on the measure on May 27. The session will examine whether a 1% charge tied to gambling revenues or turnover should be introduced across all 27 member states.
Romanian MEP Victor Negrescu put the proposal forward earlier this year. It has now moved beyond political signalling into formal procedural territory.
Brussels Faces Growing Pressure to Find New Revenue
The discussion comes as Brussels scrambles to identify new income sources ahead of negotiations for the 2028 to 2034 budget cycle. That framework is expected to approach €2 trillion.
The EU needs money for defence spending, industrial policy, green transition programmes and debt from previous crises. Ideas once considered politically impossible are now being taken seriously.
Supporters of the levy, mainly from the centre-left Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, say the gambling sector is a natural target for EU-level taxation. They point to its cross-border expansion and increasingly digital business model.
Internal estimates from supporters suggest the levy could bring in between €2 billion and €4 billion each year. Over a full seven-year budget cycle, that figure could reach as high as €28 billion.
Advocates have framed the proposal around funding gaps in health, education and youth programmes. They have also tied it to concerns about illegal betting markets.
Negrescu has cited industry estimates that place unlicensed gambling activity at roughly 71% of Europe’s digital betting market. He argues that the lack of coordinated European action is costing governments revenue and exposing consumers to organised crime.
Gambling Industry Pushes Back Hard
The gambling industry sees the same black market data and draws the opposite conclusion.
The European Gaming and Betting Association has been vocal in its opposition. Secretary General Maarten Haijer has called the concept impractical.
The association argues that taxing licensed operators more heavily would drive customers toward unregulated sites. Those sites offer better odds and fewer restrictions.
This argument echoes debates in Britain last year, where operators warned that higher compliance costs would strengthen offshore competitors.
The European Casino Association has also weighed in. Citing research from YieldSec, the group claimed illegal gambling already costs European governments around €20 billion per year in lost tax revenue.
A key unresolved question is how the levy would be calculated. Two models are under discussion: one based on gross gambling revenue and another based on turnover.
The difference matters. A turnover-based tax would apply to total wagers, not just the money operators keep after paying out winnings. Operators would likely resist this approach more strongly.
There is also the question of jurisdiction. Gambling regulation has traditionally been handled by individual member states. Tax systems vary widely across the bloc.
Any attempt to centralise even a small portion of gambling revenue at the EU level could reopen tensions between Brussels and national governments over fiscal sovereignty.
The committee meeting next week is exploratory, not decisive. No legislation is expected immediately.
Resistance from both industry groups and member states is expected to grow if the proposal advances further. The levy remains far from becoming law, but it has reached formal discussion for the first time.
