Amid the extensive discussion around tax, advertising regulations and financial wellness checks, among other things, it’s been easy to forget how significant an issue loot boxes have been in the wider discussion around consumer protection – particularly of younger demographics.

A legislative development in Poland has brought this topic back to the forefront. Marek Plota, Founder and Head of the legal team at RM Legal and Gaming, an iGaming-focused law firm focusing on the Polish, EU and African markets, breaks down the proposed amendment for SBC News.

On 4 December, a draft amendment to the Gambling Act was submitted to the Polish Parliament, marking the first attempt to establish a formal regulatory framework for loot boxes in video games.

For years, loot-box mechanics, positioned between gaming and gambling, have remained outside the scope of Polish regulation despite growing concerns. The proposal now places the issue directly on the legislative agenda.

The amendment signals a meaningful shift in policy but also raises questions regarding its scope, enforceability and interaction with Poland’s gambling architecture, including the state monopoly.

It reflects growing political pressure to address digital products that increasingly resemble gambling while being widely used by younger audiences.

New category, new licence

A central element of the proposal is the introduction of “games for virtual goods”, a new legal category under which in-game loot-box mechanics would be treated as gambling games whenever they involve a paid opportunity to obtain randomised virtual items.

Companies offering loot boxes to Polish users, within video games would need an official licence and would have to comply with consumer-protection and reporting obligations. This marks a departure from the long-standing legislative reluctance to regulate gaming features, which until now have existed in a grey zone despite evidence that many loot-box mechanics share structural similarities with gambling.

Age limits challenges

The amendment introduces youth-protection measures, including the requirement that loot box mechanics classified as gambling games may only be offered to adults. In theory, this 18+ restriction is entirely justified, especially with respect to external skin-trading and loot box platforms that operate in ways similar to online casinos.

However, applying this rule to mainstream video games raises significant concerns. Many popular titles that include loot box features have predominantly underage user bases. Implementing mandatory age verification within global entertainment products may prove technically difficult, commercially disruptive and legally contentious. It could also have a profound effect on the Polish gaming market, potentially forcing publishers to redesign monetisation models or restrict access to certain features for millions of players.

At the same time, the youth-protection provisions focus on in-game mechanics, leaving largely unaddressed the broader ecosystem of third-party platforms offering paid case openings, item trading and monetisation. These services often function in a manner similar to online casinos, with paid entry, randomised rewards and influencer-driven marketing.

Regulatory uncertainty

Despite this momentum, the drafting raises concerns. Several key terms, including “games for virtual goods”, are broadly framed and could lead to inconsistent interpretation.

At the same time, regardless of the merits of the current initiative, it is worth asking whether at least some forms of loot box activity, particularly as delivered on dedicated external platforms, do not already meet the criteria of slot-type games under the existing Gambling Act. If so, the problem may lie less in the absence of legal norms and more in their interpretation and enforcement.

A further concern arises from the structure of the Polish gambling market, which reserves certain segments, such as online casino, for the state monopoly. If loot box mechanics are defined too broadly, they could be perceived as extending monopoly privileges into areas traditionally considered part of entertainment rather than gambling. This introduces political sensitivity and may complicate the legislative process.

Enforcement outlook

The practical feasibility of enforcement poses another challenge. Many case-opening and skin-gambling platforms operate outside Poland’s jurisdiction and rely on cross-border infrastructure, making them difficult to regulate. Without mechanisms that strengthen cooperation with payment providers, hosting services and major online platforms, enforcement risks remaining reactive.

Experience with illegal gambling demonstrates that payment blocking, domain restrictions and cooperation with technology companies are more effective than statutory prohibitions alone. The amendment only partially integrates these tools.

Nevertheless, the proposal is a necessary first step. By classifying paid randomised rewards as gambling, Poland aligns itself with European jurisdictions that recognise the need for oversight of loot box mechanics. Licensing obligations may also encourage greater responsibility among game developers in designing transparent and age-appropriate systems.

For the regulation to achieve its intended objectives, however, it must be refined. Effective consumer protection requires a framework capable of addressing both in-game mechanics and the external monetisation ecosystems that surround them. Clarity in drafting, technological feasibility and proportionality will be crucial.

Given the complexity of the issue, the legislative process is likely to be lengthy. The amendment opens an overdue discussion, but the substantive regulatory work still lies ahead.