The black-market boogie man: When does fear become an excuse?

Who’s afraid of the black-market? Apparently, everyone. And with good reason.

However, extinguishing the illegal operator threat is less a fight between good and evil and more cyclical conundrum with no real winners – but plenty of losers.

During a debate at the 2026 Battle of Ideas Festival, Global Gaming Insider contributor Jon Bryan, along with economist Christopher Snowdon and former MP Sir Philip Davies, discussed the issue.

The conversation highlighted not only the obvious dangers of the black-market and how overregulation and taxation may contribute to its growth, but also the issue of gambling companies using the black-market as somewhat of a scapegoat.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t

To regulators, the situation may appear as lose-lose. On one hand, increasing taxation and safeguards for operators could push players to unregulated alternatives, but on the other, loosening regulations may put some players at risk.

Illegal gambling websites are far from a safe option. Bryan pointed out the lack of age restrictions, safety measures and the choice of using a credit card as some of the main risk factors associated with these domains.

Nevertheless, regular people are slowly being pushed towards the black-market. Snowdon (not so) elegantly explained how the Government “messed around and now will find out.”

Snowdon pointed to the tobacco industry as an example. According to the Office for National Statistics, since raising tobacco duty the sale has decreased by half, however, the number of smokers only fell by a quarter.

Although any drop in smokers will be seen as a success, the number of people shifting to the black-market remains concerning.

In July, during an iGB Live panel in London, Andrew Lyman, Gambling Commissioner, explained that accurately measuring the size of the illegal gambling market was still very difficult. Yet, Lyman was certain that the illegal market is substantial and continuing to grow.

The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) estimates that the entirety of the black-market is worth £2.7bn ($3.55bn).

Although many of the unregulated sites players access are just regulated abroad, several others have been tied to criminality. Davies addressed this point directly, stating that the links between illegal gambling websites and criminal activity mustn’t be underestimated.

In an investigation conducted by GAMRS on MyStake, an offshore online casino brand operated by Santeda International BV, it was discovered that the unregulated operator had been generating over £1.2bn in annual turnover.

One of the players interviewed as part of the report had lost £21,400 in one evening on the website. Moreover, players confirmed that after self-excluding from one Santeda brand, others would begin directly marketing to them with offers and bonuses.

These predatory practices are one of the many reasons the black-market must be tackled. However, despite agreeing that overregulation and increased taxation contribute to leading players towards offshore websites, Davies believes that gambling companies are not entirely blameless.

Faceless corporations won’t win the public over

When Global Gaming Insider asked the panel whether the industry was focusing too much on the black-market issue, Bryan was quick to agree.

Davies claimed gambling companies have been acting too much as “faceless corporations” and therefore need to put on a “human face.”

The former MP went on to say that anti-gambling campaigners aren’t angry on behalf of those losing money, they are angry at those who are winning. There is a reason why the lottery is never included in anti-gambling discussions; the National Lottery has raised over £53bn for good causes across the UK since 1994.

If operators were to put on this aforementioned “human face” and give back to the community, rather than take “as much money as possible from their customers,” as Davies puts it, perhaps the public’s opinion will also shift and lead to looser measures.

The panel was unanimous in its belief that the industry is being unfairly targeted not for a genuine concern for people struggling with addiction, but because some regulators and politicians simply don’t like gambling.

For Bryan the solution is straightforward: “Change the general narrative and discussion around gambling.”

As Global Gaming Insider’s Tim Poole explained in the Huddle Report, the industry’s overreliance on blaming the black-market for any and all issues is not helping tackle the problem.

If players are opting for offshore websites because of the lack of regulations, operators shouldn’t be trying to meet them on that level but go beyond and offer a better proposition for its licensed counterparts.

Treating the black-market as the industry’s “boogie man,” a problem meant to scare regulators who may want to raise taxes or justify problems within the regulated market, will not solve the issue.

Regulated operators must instead raise their own standards and create products players simply won’t find offshore.

Moreover, lobbying against further taxation and regulation by relying on the possibility players will migrate towards illegal operators is not going to stop anti-gambling campaigns.

Brazil is proof that anti-gambling sentiment can be enough to drive a government to prohibition despite the risk of increasing traffic to the black-market.

Davies puts it best by stating: “Emphasising the black-market argument will never work, win votes or please anti-gambling campaigners. There is no point in making a distinction between regulated and black-market operators to people who want to stop all gambling. Instead, they should emphasise the positives of gambling as an activity.”

The black-market trolley problem relies on two core beliefs: that stricter rules on the industry will push people offshore and that all gambling companies are evil and must be limited. Therefore, if operators managed to sway public opinion through better products or community initiatives, perhaps the dilemma will finally be resolved.