Key Moments:
- Ireland’s draft for the EU’s 2028–2034 budget does not include an online gambling levy among proposed new revenue sources.
- The proposed Multiannual Financial Framework sets commitments at €1.62 trillion in 2025 prices, €141 billion below the European Commission’s suggestion.
- Revenue estimates for an EU-wide online gambling levy have been sharply disputed by analysts and industry stakeholders.
Proposal Overview: New EU Revenue Sources
Ireland, currently presiding over the Council of the European Union, has presented a draft budget framework for 2028–2034 that omits an EU-wide online gambling levy. Circulated on 10 October in a negotiating box, the framework outlines five potential new sources of revenue for the union, explicitly excluding gambling from consideration.
The draft proposes a spending cap of €1.62 trillion over seven years, measured in 2025 prices. This figure is 8%, or €141 billion, less than the plan outlined by the European Commission. The Council’s table, adjusted for current prices, brings the total commitments to roughly €1.83 trillion.
Details of Proposed Revenue Channels
| New revenue source | Description |
|---|---|
| Corporate Resource for Europe (CORE) | Annual contribution between €100,000 and €750,000 from companies with net turnover above €100 million, determined by turnover tier |
| Tobacco | National contributions calculated by manufactured tobacco released for consumption, multiplied by each member state’s minimum rate, with a 15% call rate |
| Electronic waste | €2 per kilogram of non-collected electrical and electronic equipment |
| EU Emissions Trading System (ETS 1) | 30% of revenue |
| Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) | 90% of revenue |
According to the Irish Presidency, this package could generate around €55 billion annually. However, all five revenue items remain under negotiation, as denoted by their brackets in the text, and require further deliberation by member states.
This negotiating box is non-binding, and no proposals are finalized until consensus is reached. European leaders are scheduled to review it in Brussels on 15 and 16 October, with ambitions to secure an agreement by the end of 2026.
Opposing Views and Budget Debate
Sweden and the Netherlands have argued that the proposed 8% budget reduction does not go far enough. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated, the EU budget ‘must be affordable for those who bear the main burden of financing it’. In contrast, members of the European Parliament, favoring a 10% increase over the Commission’s proposal, have voiced opposition, according to Reuters.
Background of the Gambling Levy Proposal
The concept of an online gambling levy originated with the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) group in the European Parliament. In May, this group suggested a 1% levy on the revenues or turnover of major online gambling and betting operators within the EU. Their vision was to allocate the proceeds to education, youth initiatives, mental health, addiction prevention, and minor protection.
Victor Negrescu, vice-president of the European Parliament, posited that such a levy might yield €2 billion to €4 billion per year, resulting in €14 billion to €28 billion over the 2028 to 2034 period. His estimates considered anticipated growth in the online gambling market and additional measures targeting illegal platforms.
An interim report from the Parliament in April named an online gambling levy as a possible revenue stream. Subsequent modeling by the Commission suggested a 3% charge on net turnover might produce approximately €1.9 billion per year on average, or €13.3 billion over these seven years.
Revenue Projections Challenged
Ed Birkin, H2 Gambling Capital’s managing director, has publicly questioned the Commission’s estimate, stating a 3% levy across all 27 EU countries ‘would not raise €1.9bn a year’. According to Birkin, such a tax would generate just under €1 billion based on 2026 data, or slightly more than €1 billion in 2027, with his calculations excluding online revenue from national lottery operators.
Birkin said:
‘Whoever put that estimate together needs to base it on better data … the starting figure is way off.’
Responding to questions regarding tax collection, Birkin remarked, ‘The easiest way is to get the individual states to collect it, which should be easy enough. Getting them to agree to it is the hard part.’
He further commented,
‘Put simply, if individual markets thought they could put up taxes by 3% without impacting channelisation, then they would do it themselves. However, my main concern is that a policy is being based on false data.’
Industry Rejection and Member State Resistance
The European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA) referred to an EU-level gambling levy as ‘fundamentally unworkable’ in a statement following the budget committee’s call to consider the idea.
Maarten Haijer, then-secretary general of EGBA, said: ‘Gambling is currently not harmonised at EU level and there is no legal basis to define, administer or collect such a levy.’
Malta has expressed broad opposition to EU-wide taxes. Prime Minister Robert Abela told parliament Malta would not back any taxes intended to support the bloc’s expenditures, without specifying the gambling levy, despite its presence in current discussions.
The negotiating box requires that any new own resources, including a possible online gambling levy, must be unanimously approved by all EU member states under their national constitutional procedures. As a result, any individual government holds effective veto power over such measures.
- Author
Daniel Williams
