The horse racing sector has expressed its dissatisfaction with Gambling Minister Baroness Twycross’ announcement that the Horserace Betting Levy will remain unchanged.

Speaking to the House of Commons, Labour Minister Ian Murray relayed the decision on behalf of the Baroness, emphasising that it was driven by a shared view that racing is a significant contributor to the British economy and sporting landscape.

As such, horse racing is the only sport to receive a levy mandated by the government, equal to 10% of the annual gross profits of bookmakers that manage to generate more than £500,000 from bets on British horse racing.

This is managed and collected by the Horserace Betting Levy Board (HBLB), which then uses the funds to improve the sport – be it for horse breeding, science advancements and veterinary education. In 2025, the levy yield reached £108m, surpassing the total £105m in 2024.

Aside from the accumulated increase, Baroness Twycross listed two core reasons as to why the racing levy will remain on the same level – the first one being the wider gambling tax changes introduced with the 2025 Autumn Budget.

Back in November, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves announced that the Remote Gaming Duty will be going up from 21% to 40% starting this April, while the General Betting Duty (GBD) will increase from 15% to 25% beginning April 2027.

While naturally this will significantly affect all operators with an online offer, it is important to note that UK horse racing will be exempt from the GBD rise, leaving it at the current 15% base while also being supported by the 10% levy on UK racing bets.

Furthermore, Baroness Twycross stated that the government is against extending the Horserace Betting Levy to international competitions, essentially maintaining the current structure that encompasses bets only made on British racing.

The government justified its reasoning for this by claiming that coupled with the existing levy, the relationship between racing and betting in Great Britain is sufficiently prospective with the added aspect of commercial opportunities.

It is important to note that the speech directly quoted the conclusions of the previous government’s review of the Horseracing Levy, which had a deadline of 24 April 2024.

“The Government is steadfast in its support for racing. We welcome initiatives to improve the governance structure within the sport, modernise the fixture list and improve horse welfare. “We will continue to support the BHA and wider racing stakeholders to achieve these aims,” Baroness Twycross concluded.

BHA not on board

The BHA refers to the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), which is the regulator of horse racing in Britain. And contrary to Baroness Twycross’ words, the body is not in the slightest happy with the decision.

Brant Dunshea, Chief Executive Officer of the BHA, lambasted both the prolongation and the outcome of the review: “It is disappointing that it has taken almost three years to determine there should be no change in the Levy rate.”

“Throughout protracted negotiations British horse racing engaged with the Government in good faith, including providing clear evidence of a substantial – and growing – gap between our costs of providing the sport and the return we receive from betting.”

Dunshea further hinted at the government being hypocritical, with the Department of Culture, Media and Sports (DCMS) – of which Baroness Twycross is the Under-Secretary of State – deviated from its pre-Budget stance just months after it was delivered.

“In its pre-Budget advice to the Treasury, the DCMS also warned that ‘unless a carve-out for racing was accompanied by an increase in the Horserace Betting Levy…racing would be unlikely to feel any benefit.’

“Today’s WMS leaves unexplained why, only a few months after the Budget, the DCMS now believes there is no need to change the Levy rate.”

On top of the lost audience that the sport has struggled to recover ever since the COVID-19 pandemic, and the levy base remaining the same, horse racing is also facing a new wave of affordability checks as recommended in the Gambling Act Review White Paper, which Dunshea alerted that combined could spell trouble for the industry going forward.

He concluded: “The Government would be genuinely congratulated if it took this moment to recognise the impact that no increase in the Levy will have on horse racing’s finances and stopped the introduction of affordability checks which threaten the sport’s future.”

The BHA also maintains a contradictory figure to the government. Although the levy rate is 10% of operator profits on horse racing, the BHA argues that the sport only gets “less than 3%” return from the gambling industry.

“British horseracing already gets a significantly lower return from the gambling industry compared to our nearest rival jurisdictions,” Dunshea said. “While French and Irish horseracing gets 7.7% and 8.4% respectively, we receive less than 3%”.

The BHA’s disappointment at the levy outcome could further complicate the already strained relationship between horse racing and betting. The historic, symbiotic relationship between the two was tested during the debate around taxes last year, though the BHA continues to work very closely with the likes of Flutter Entertainment.

Tensions are also building up within the sport itself, according to some reports, with key stakeholders including the BHA, the Jockey Club, Arena Racecourse Company (ARC), Racecourse Association (RCA), having different outlooks on the sport’s future.