Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin on Why Regulatory Consistency Is the Antidote to Gambling Normalisation

As Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin prepares to step down as president of the Autorité Nationale des Jeux (ANJ) on 15 June, her exit interview offers a clear window into the regulatory philosophy that has shaped French gambling since 2020. Falque-Pierrotin, who has chaired the ANJ since its creation amid the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, oversaw the consolidation of oversight for all gambling verticals under one authority. This structural shift moved horseracing, land-based casinos, lottery activities and the digital sector away from fragmented ministerial remits toward unified supervision focused on player protection, compliance and market balance.

Her tenure marks the end of an era for French gambling governance. For operators and executives navigating similar debates across Europe and beyond, her reflections underscore a central thesis: consistent, proportionate regulation prevents the very normalisation of gambling that fuels both political backlash and public health concerns.

Changing Times in European Regulation

Falque-Pierrotin highlights the growing professional legitimacy of European regulators during her time as chair of the Gaming Regulators’ European Forum (GREF) until last year. She states: “There is no legal harmonisation at EU level, but the network of regulators is converging in terms of best practice and analysis of issues. Their cooperation is becoming increasingly operational, and I am very proud to have been part of this process.”

This convergence matters. While legal frameworks remain national, shared operational practices and data exchange strengthen oversight without requiring top-down EU mandates. From an industry perspective, such alignment reduces compliance friction for operators active across multiple jurisdictions.

On the operator side, she acknowledges measurable progress. “The tone has changed; operators seem to have realised that ensuring player protection is essential and in their own interests” and, ultimately, “the environment has improved significantly since 2020.” Advertising compliance stands out as a particular area of advancement.

Yet she also flags a less positive development: the commoditisation of gambling. “Gambling has become a thoroughly commoditised product, relying on a well-established ecosystem of direct notifications, influencers and affiliates; all of whom are driving customer acquisition.” In her view, this ecosystem has embedded gambling into everyday life and especially into young people’s digital culture.

The Tax Burden and Its Limits

The latest tax increase affecting French operators came into force last July. Falque-Pierrotin made clear to lawmakers “that it would not be advisable to consider further increases this year.” She describes the 15% tax increase on marketing as “hard to swallow,” noting the burden falls particularly heavily on smaller operators. As part of the July 2025 changes, online sports betting operators saw their taxes rise from 10.6% to 15% of GGR.

Her position in 2025 is different from the one she expressed in 2024. Context matters here. As regulator, the ANJ cannot openly oppose government decisions already taken. Her subsequent discussions with parliamentarians in the run-up to the 2026 Budget signal a more cautious stance on additional fiscal pressure.

For client-partners operating in France or watching similar debates elsewhere, this illustrates a recurring tension. Excessive taxation risks pushing marginal players toward unregulated channels while squeezing smaller licensed operators. The structural shift Falque-Pierrotin oversaw was intended to create balanced oversight across verticals; repeated tax hikes threaten to undermine that balance.

Taming Marketing Noise Without Overreach

France has taken a more permissive approach to advertising than the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy or Spain. A full whistle-to-whistle ban remains under discussion but unconfirmed. Instead, the government introduced a 15% tax on media expenditure last year, exempting sports sponsorship because gambling sponsors provide vital funding for clubs.

Falque-Pierrotin notes the linkage: “But we must be cautious, as marketing and sponsorship are closely linked. If marketing (such as affiliate partnerships and advertising, ed.) is taxed at 15%, but sponsorship is not, operators will turn to sponsorship, thereby increasing their visibility at sporting events, but is that really what we want?”

She adds that operators advertising promotes legal offerings as opposed to illegal ones which must be combated. Early in her tenure, advertising was everywhere with few guidelines. She opposed an outright ban, citing Italy’s experience where operators found multiple ways to circumvent restrictions.

This section of her interview reveals a pragmatic regulatory instinct. Advertising serves as a channel to steer players toward licensed, supervised offerings. Over-taxing or over-restricting it may simply shift spend into unregulated visibility or reduce the competitive edge of the regulated market.

The Unique Political Position of Gambling

The interview directly addresses whether the online sector lacks political champions compared with land-based casinos and horse racing. Falque-Pierrotin replies: “Gambling is in a unique position: it is a sector that is prohibited, unless an exemption is granted. In other words, it is an exceptional sector. For MPs, there is no doubt it’s not easy to deal with.”

She does not see unfair treatment. Casinos and horse racing benefit from strong local representation. Yet she believes the proliferation of providers requires greater industry reflection on social responsibility. “It’s not our job to decide whether the sector is good or bad, or whether it is treated fairly or not. Our role is to ensure that the market develops under acceptable conditions and does not put players at risk.”

One risk here is regulatory over-correction. If policymakers view gambling solely through the lens of exceptionality and risk, they may default to ever-tighter rules without weighing commercial viability or the displacement effect on illegal markets. Falque-Pierrotin’s emphasis on consistency offers a counterweight: steady, predictable oversight allows operators to invest in compliance and player safeguards rather than constantly adapting to new shocks.

The Bottom Line

Falque-Pierrotin’s core message is that regulatory consistency counters the normalisation of gambling by maintaining clear boundaries while allowing a supervised market to function. Her tenure demonstrates that unifying oversight across verticals, advancing best-practice cooperation in Europe, and calibrating taxes and advertising rules can improve compliance and player protection without destroying commercial incentives. For gaming executives and client-partners, the lesson is clear: treat regulation as a strategic planning input rather than an adversarial force. As France’s framework evolves post her departure, operators who align with this consistency-first approach will be best positioned to navigate the inflection point between political scrutiny and sustainable growth.