Malta MEP Peter Agius Warns EU-Wide Online Gambling Ad Ban Could Drive Players to Illegal Operators
Maltese Member of the European Parliament Peter Agius has warned that a blanket ban on online gambling advertising across the EU risks pushing players toward unregulated operators. Speaking at a recent petition hearing triggered by a Cypriot citizen’s call for prohibition, broad prohibition measures might ultimately undermine consumer protection efforts rather than enhance them.
As someone who has spent decades observing the evolution of gaming regulation, I see this as another inflection point where good intentions meet market reality. The debate highlights the tension between shielding vulnerable groups and maintaining a channelled, supervised commercial market.
MEP Questions Effectiveness of Sweeping Ad Prohibition
The petition cited the pervasive reach of gambling marketing on social media, billboards, and other channels. It stressed particular risks for young people, older adults, and those recovering from gambling addiction.
Peter Agius emphasised that protecting minors and preventing addiction must remain paramount. Yet he queried whether a total advertising ban would deliver those outcomes or simply shift activity elsewhere.
He urged policymakers to weigh whether such a prohibition would reduce harm or merely redirect demand to illicit operators lacking consumer safeguards. This is a structural shift that industry executives cannot ignore.
Agius also highlighted the division of competences in the EU. Gambling policy remains largely a national prerogative, while the EU focuses on combating misleading or aggressive advertising.
Black Market Data Underpins Agius’s Position
Peter Agius drew on a 2023 study commissioned by the French regulator l’Autorité Nationale des Jeux and conducted by Strategy& (part of PwC). The data showed a significant illegal share in online gambling markets in some member states.
He added that problematic gambling behaviour was more than three times as prevalent among illegal operator customers (66%) compared to those using regulated services (22%).
66% versus 22% makes the case stark. Effective consumer protection, Agius argued, is best achieved through a well-regulated commercial market enforcing age verification, responsible gambling, and monitoring for problematic behaviour.
From my perspective, these figures reinforce what client-partners across regulated jurisdictions have long experienced. Channelisation is not a slogan. It is the practical foundation for delivering accountability at scale.
Illegal Market Growth Cannot Be Overlooked
National approaches to gambling advertising vary widely across the EU. Some member states have tightened restrictions recently, while others retain more permissive regimes.
Dutch trade association VNLOK recently took legal action against Meta over a surge in illegal gambling advertisements on Facebook and Instagram. Unlicensed operators were estimated to account for more than 95% of gambling-related adverts in the final quarter of 2025.
The issue extends beyond the Netherlands. Across Europe, regulators and industry bodies increasingly treat channelisation and consumer protection as inseparable. Illegal operators now compete directly with licensed ones in the same digital spaces.
Industry stakeholders caution that overly stringent advertising curbs can undermine channelisation and fuel the illegal market. Germany’s strict rules drove players toward unlicensed operators. The Netherlands saw its channelisation rate fall below 50% in 2025, with the illegal market overtaking the licensed sector by revenue.
Risks of Over-Regulation and Counterarguments
Any discussion of advertising bans must confront the risk that prohibition creates unintended consequences. If regulated operators lose visibility, the vacuum is filled by entities that ignore age checks, responsible gambling tools, and behavioural monitoring.
Critics of the status quo argue that reducing exposure, especially to minors, justifies sweeping action regardless of market shifts. Yet the data Peter Agius presented suggests vulnerable players may end up in environments with even higher rates of harm.
This limitation is not theoretical. When channelisation drops, as seen in the Netherlands below 50%, the overall level of consumer protection erodes. Executives must therefore treat regulatory proposals not only as compliance exercises but as strategic variables that shape competitive positioning and customer acquisition costs.
The convergence of tighter rules in some markets and persistent illegal supply in others creates precisely the conditions where a measured, evidence-based approach matters most.
The Bottom Line
Peter Agius has spotlighted a core tension: advertising restrictions intended to protect consumers can, if poorly calibrated, expand the unregulated sector where harm is more prevalent. The 66% problematic gambling rate among illegal customers versus 22% for regulated ones is a reminder that supervision, not absence, delivers better outcomes.
For gaming executives and client-partners operating across Europe, the message is clear. Engage early with national and EU policymakers to advocate for targeted, proportionate rules that preserve channelisation. Watch how member states balance their prerogatives against cross-border digital realities in the coming months. A one-size-fits-all ban may feel decisive, but the data suggests it could prove counterproductive. The smarter path lies in regulation that keeps players visible, verifiable, and protected within licensed channels.
