Norway’s Opposition Party Calls for End to Gambling Monopoly as Finland Prepares Liberalization
Norway’s long-standing monopoly on gambling faces fresh political pressure. Himanshu Gulati, a senior member of the Progress Party (FRP), labeled the current regime “contrary to all common sense” during a speech at the annual conference of the Norwegian Trade Association of Online Gambling (NBO). With the Progress Party now polling around 30% after a surge in popularity, Gulati called for a licensing model and a more fact-based national debate on gaming policy.
This push comes as Europe continues to shift away from state monopolies. Finland voted to liberalise its market starting in 2027, which would leave Norway as the only country on the continent maintaining a full monopoly over all types of gambling. The timing raises strategic questions for operators and investors watching for the next opening in Northern Europe.
The Case for a Licensing Model
Gulati made clear his position. “I want us to establish a licensing model,” he said. Norwegian gaming policy has been closely linked to the income of sports, voluntary teams and associations; the current setup requires reassessment on whether it will generate the most money for the purpose given low channeling rates.
He pointed to low channeling rates under the monopoly operated by Norsk Tipping. “We must be able to have a fact-based debate on whether the model we have had for all these years is still the model that will generate the most money for the purpose, given that the channeling is as low as it is when so many people play on gaming sites anyway.”
Gulati questioned whether the existing framework reliably supports sports funding. He suggested the monopoly model’s effectiveness requires honest reassessment given real-world player behavior.
Harms, Match-Fixing and Experience Gap
The Progress Party representative highlighted a critical gap. By excluding companies with decades of experience in player protection, Norway is losing control over gambling harms.
The same logic applies to anti-match-fixing efforts. Established operators bring proven mechanisms that the monopoly system cannot replicate internally.
“Some of the rules and restrictions we have are, in my opinion, contrary to all common sense. I have said within my party for many years that when there is a change [to form a] government, the licensing model in the gaming sector must be the most important cultural policy issue for the FRP.” He has advocated within his party for years that a licensing model must become a priority cultural policy issue once the Progress Party gains governmental influence.
This critique aligns with broader European trends. Most gambling markets on the continent already operate on a licensed basis. Partial state monopolies persist in some jurisdictions, but the direction of travel favors regulated competition.
Post-Finland European Liberalization Macro
Finland’s decision to open its betting market in 2027 marks a significant inflection point. Once that change takes effect, Norway would stand alone with its comprehensive monopoly.
The contrast creates a natural policy laboratory. Operators can observe how Finland’s licensing regime performs on channeling, tax revenue, player protection and sports funding. Those outcomes will inform any Norwegian debate.
From a capital-markets perspective, clarity on Norway’s direction would unlock investment. A credible path to licensing would signal a new addressable market with high disposable income and strong digital adoption. International operators with Nordic experience would likely accelerate market-entry planning.
Risks and Counterarguments
Any liberalization carries risks that must be acknowledged. Critics of licensing models often cite potential increases in overall gambling participation and related harms. A shift could also fragment funding streams for sports and voluntary organizations if new operators do not replicate Norsk Tipping’s contributions at equivalent levels.
Gulati himself called for a debate grounded in facts rather than attitudes. “We need a debate about gaming policy that is more fact- and knowledge-based. Even though we have different attitudes and positions in this country about monopoly or licensing models, we must be able to form a common factual basis and realities to relate to.”
Political delivery remains uncertain. While the Progress Party has gained ground, forming a government and prioritizing licensing would require coalition support and sustained momentum. Regulatory design choices around tax rates, player protections and channeling obligations would determine whether the market attracts responsible operators or simply displaces activity.
The Bottom Line
Norway sits at a structural crossroads. Gulati’s intervention, delivered with the Progress Party polling strongly at around 30%, injects fresh momentum into a licensing conversation that can no longer be deferred. As Finland prepares its 2027 opening, the competitive and regulatory map of Northern Europe is being redrawn. Operators and investors should track polling data, coalition negotiations and any pilot proposals closely. A well-designed licensing regime could improve channeling, strengthen player safeguards and modernize sports funding mechanisms. The coming months will reveal whether Norway seizes this inflection point or remains the last holdout for a monopoly model that Gulati believes has outlived its logic.
