The European tax that Malta wants to block 

A potential European tax on online gambling is already facing strong political resistance. Malta is leading the opposition, with Spain, Portugal and Italy sharing its reservations. 

A tax that could raise €1.86 billion a year 

The EU is seeking new sources of revenue to bolster its common finances, and the online gambling sector is one of the avenues being explored in the preparation of the European Union’s next long-term budget, scheduled to cover the period from 2028 to 2034. On 28 April, the European Parliament therefore included a levy on online gambling amongst several potential sources of new revenue. Digital services and crypto-assets were also among the options under consideration. 

The European Commission subsequently sought to estimate how much such a levy might generate. In a working document dated 28 May, it examined a scenario based on a tax equivalent to 3 per cent of the net revenue from online gambling. The result gives an idea of the financial stakes: such a scheme could generate around €1.86 billion per year, or nearly €13 billion over the seven years of the next European budgetary framework. 

The Commission has clarified that these figures are provided for information purposes only. Neither the final tax base nor the method of collection has been finalised and, crucially, no formal legislative proposal has yet been put forward. 

Malta could theoretically contribute €165.1 million 

National gambling markets vary in both size and organisation, which would lead to significant differences between Member States. 

According to the Commission’s modelling, Spain would bear the highest theoretical contribution, at around €414 million per year. 

Germany would follow with some €208.7 million, ahead of Malta, whose contribution would amount to around €165.1 million. For Italy, the figure would be close to €143.3 million per year. 

These figures remain hypothetical and should therefore not be regarded as sums definitively owed by the Member States concerned. They do, however, help to explain why several major European markets are following the discussions closely. 

There is also a regulatory challenge. The Commission itself acknowledges that the sector remains highly fragmented across the European Union. Licensing systems, market structures and tax regimes differ from one country to another. 

Establishing a common levy therefore amounts to finding a formula applicable to markets that currently operate under very different national rules. 

Malta places fiscal sovereignty at the centre of the debate 

Among the reluctant countries, Malta has taken the strongest public stance. The Maltese Prime Minister, Robert Abela, defends the principle that fiscal sovereignty must remain in the hands of national governments. In June, he stated that his country would not accept new taxes imposed at European level to finance common expenditure. 

Online gambling plays a significant role in the island’s economy, which is home to a large number of major European operators. For Malta, therefore, the issue goes beyond the debate on how the European Union should finance its next budget. It directly affects a key sector of its economy and, more broadly, the ability of Member States to retain control over their fiscal policy. 

A single vote against could be enough to block the tax 

The creation of new EU own resources requires the unanimous agreement of the Member States, prior to approval in accordance with national constitutional procedures. A broad coalition of countries opposed to the tax is therefore not essential to prevent its adoption. The refusal of a single government may be enough. Malta therefore wields considerable influence despite the country’s size. Its declared opposition already represents a major obstacle to the scenario currently under consideration. 

According to reports based on discussions amongst European diplomats, Spain, Portugal and Italy have also expressed reservations about the idea of a European levy on gambling. 

The risk of a shift towards unauthorised operators 

One of the main arguments put forward by the Maltese government and industry representatives concerns the ability of regulated markets to retain players with authorised operators. 

If a new tax increases the costs borne by licensed companies, they could become less competitive compared with operators based outside the relevant regulated markets. Some players might then turn to unauthorised operators or those based outside the European Union. 

This risk is not only raised by opponents of the tax. The Commission itself has acknowledged that additional taxation could create a risk of consumers shifting to unlicensed operators or those based outside the EU. 

Supporters of the tax also cite public health 

Proponents of higher taxation do not merely present the measure as a source of funding for the EU budget. They believe it could also contribute to public health objectives. 

Former England goalkeeper Peter Shilton, who has spoken publicly about his experience of gambling addiction, supports higher taxation of the sector. The aim is, in particular, to reduce the resources that operators can devote to marketing and acquiring new customers. 

The sector argues the opposite. According to its representatives, increasing the tax burden on licensed companies could encourage the unregulated market rather than reducing the harms associated with gambling.