As with any UK government budget, there have been a myriad of reactions to Rachel Reeves’ announcement yesterday from across various public and political spaces – and for the first time in a long while, gambling was one of them.

The budget included some widely anticipated tax increases, which although not as bad as many in the industry expected, will still impact many companies’ finances. Stocks have already taken a tumble shortly after the budget announcement, though in some notable cases they’ve already rebounded strongly.

Headline measures will see Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) on online betting and gaming rise from 21% to 40% in April 2026 while General Betting Duty (GBD) will go up from 15% to 25% from March 2027 with some key exemptions. This will place the financial pressure almost entirely on online sportsbooks and casinos, while bingo duty has been scrapped entirely.

So, what has everyone said? The reactions to the budget have been as varied as one would expect, welcomed by some, disparaged by others, meeting a mixed response from other circles, while a few have argued for the tax hikes to go further.

A big win for horse racing

Horse racing, headed up by the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), has been one of the most vocal opponents of the increases in betting tax. The sport launched a wide ranging campaign, #AxeTheRacingTax, and took unprecedented action in September with strike action and a protest in Westminster.

This campaign seemed to pay off, as it was reported earlier this month that horse racing was to be excluded from any increases in betting and gaming tax. The sport was most concerned about a potential merger of three types of gaming duty – Remote Gaming Duty of 21% and General Betting Duty and Pool Betting Duty of 15% – to a single rate of 21%.

This was ultimately not the case, and while General Betting Duty will increase from 15% to 25% in March 2027 under the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s plans, horse racing has been included in a list of exemptions.

“Today’s welcome outcome demonstrates that the Chancellor has listened to our concerns and rightly recognised that racing is a unique national asset – culturally, socially and economically – and we welcome this support,” said Brant Dunshea, BHA Acting Chief Executive.

“Betting on racing is an integral part of the enjoyment of our sport, and maintaining the rate of horserace betting duties is an important step by the Government to help preserve revenue streams and protect the 85,000 jobs supported by the racing across the country.

“Racing has been part of the British way of life for hundreds of years. It binds our communities together in shared experience, it brings joy to millions. It puts the country on the world stage. It is right that the Government has understood this and acted accordingly.

“At the same time, we recognise that the increase in general taxation on the betting industry may have trickle-down effects on racing. We will work with our partners in the betting industry to understand the implications of this, and how we can work together to ensure that British horseracing continues to thrive.”

‘Deeply disappointed’

In contrast to horse racing, three of the UK’s biggest omni-channel operators were not happy at all with HM Treasury’s plans, although Entain, Flutter Entertainment and Evoke were probably expecting this for some time.

Entain and Evoke saw stock prices fall shortly after the budget, though in the case of the former its shares rebounded well in the afternoon. Flutter, meanwhile, also saw its share prices rise – the two firms’ US assets may have helped with this.

Evoke, owner of William Hill, continues to see share prices dwindle. The firm, along with Entain, had issued dire warnings earlier in the year about the potential impact of tax hikes on William Hill betting shops, anticipating shop closures.

Per Widerström, CEO of evoke, said: “The decision today by the UK government to substantially raise taxes is highly damaging for the economy and consumers. As an industry, we have consistently warned of the significant impact on jobs, investment in the UK, and player protection that these changes would have, yet sadly the Government has chosen not to listen.

“These proposals are ill-thought-through, counterproductive, and highly damaging. It is clear these changes will significantly harm businesses, employees, and customers. We will begin immediately on executing our mitigation plans, which involve a significant reduction in investment into the UK, and, very regrettably, the likely need for thousands of jobs to be cut up and down the country.”

Evoke expects the new 40% RGD rate to have ‘substantial and far reaching consequences’ for the regulated industry, and predicts that overall tax intake will reduce as a result.

The firm highlighted its own tax and duties of £320m in 2024, equating to 60% of its British profits. The impact this may have on William Hill betting shops, which have been seeing a retail recovery according to Evoke’s financial statements this year, has not been addressed.

Marketing spend faces axe

A similar outlook has been made by Entain, which expects to see an impact of around £100m on its annual EBITDA, equating to 8% of expected 2026 EBITDA, and around £150m in 2027. Both Entain and Evoke expect to reduce marketing and promotions, with the former predicting cost reductions of around 25%.

“We are deeply disappointed by today’s decision to punitively increase UK gambling taxes, putting at risk an industry which already contributes £7bn annually to the UK economy and supports over 100,000 jobs across the country,” said Stella David, Entain CEO.

“Disproportionately increasing gambling taxes will not only have a detrimental impact on our industry but also heightens the risk for customers. As seen in other countries, punitive tax increases often lead to lower tax revenues overall, whilst also driving players to illegal, unregulated operators with no player protections. The government must now urgently tackle the black market and the consequences of today’s decision.”

Though horse racing has escaped the bulk of tax burdens, the main target of its campaigning, it may still find itself hit by the overall impact on bookmakers. The domino effect of bookmakers cutting marketing costs could see sponsorships in horse racing reduce, which the sport counts as a very important revenue stream.

Chris Daly, Chief Executive of the Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) said: “The proposed reforms to gambling taxes – with remote gaming rates rising from 21% to 40% and online betting to 25% – could pose pressure on marketing budgets across the gaming sector. As companies adjust to these increased costs, marketers will be faced with the challenge of reaching audiences effectively using fewer resources.”

“In this environment, it is more important than ever that marketing is value-led and ethically responsible. Marketers must focus on building trust, delivering clear and responsible messaging. The focus should be on fostering meaningful engagement, rather than simply chasing volume. By doing so, the sector can continue to grow while maintaining the highest standards for customer protection and corporate responsibility.”

Flutter – owner of arguably Britain’s largest online bookmaker, Sky Bet, as well as the Betfair Exchange and omnichannel brand Paddy Power, among other assets – has expressed similar sentiment, expecting wide ranging impacts to the UK market.

The NYSE group expects an impact on EBITDA of $320m in the 2026 fiscal year and $540m in 2027. As with its fellow gambling PLCs Entain and Evoke, the firm expects a 20% reduction in promotional and marketing spend over the first six months after implementation, rising to 40% after this.

Kevin Harrington, Flutter’s UKI CEO, said: “Today’s tax increases are a very disappointing outcome and will have a significant adverse impact on our industry. The Chancellor rightly wants to address harm, but these changes will hand a big win to illegal, unlicensed gambling operators who will become more competitive overnight.

“These black market operators don’t pay tax and don’t invest in safer gambling. At 40 percent, the UK’s remote gaming duty is now above countries such as the Netherlands, where a recent tax increase saw a rise in illegal gambling and a fall in Government receipts.

“Despite this impact, I am confident that through both our scale and leading position in the UK, as well as the proactive cost initiatives that we are taking, we are well placed to navigate through today’s changes.”

Retail recoveries and black market woes

There may be some light at the end of the tunnel, however, alluded to by both Flutter and Entain. In Entain’s case, the company anticipates that it will be able to gain market share as other firms bail on the UK market, something that has been seen in other markets in response to tax increases, like the Netherlands.

The company, as owner of Ladbrokes Coral, may also benefit from the exemption of in-person betting from the GBD tax raise, and theoretically so could Evoke. This could also explain why Entain’s share prices have gone up, with investors potentially seeing more value in its retail assets – and perhaps seeing value in the future sale of said retail assets.

However, operators remain steadfast in the line that the black market stands to benefit the most from the betting tax raise. This was acknowledged by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) itself, which in its leaked budgetary forecast noted that operator efforts to protect margins, like cutting odds and payouts, could push customers to illicit firms.

Flutter, Entain and Evoke have all reiterated concern that consumers will move to illicit markets, where player protections are much thinner. The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC), one of the most vocal voices in the black market, also reiterated its position.

“The Government’s Budget is a massive win for the incredibly harmful, unsafe, unregulated gambling black market, which pays no tax and offers none of the protections that exist in the regulated sector,” said Grainne Hurst, BGC CEO.

“These decisions are bad for jobs, bad for customers, bad for sports – and bad for safer gambling.”

Not everyone sees the bad side

In contrast to its PLC peers, Super Group, parent firm of Betway and Spin, has reacted much more moderately to the tax increase. Neal Menashe, Super Group CEO, said that the firm ‘supports the reasonable taxation of online gaming in the UK’.

“We rely on the government to ensure that today’s very substantial increase should be paired with robust and strict enforcement against non-paying offshore operators,” he said.

“This is essential to protect the regulated sector’s investment in jobs, technology, and responsible gaming in the UK.”

While the UK is still a reasonable market for Betway in particular, which has built up solid visibility in the country via sponsorships with the likes of West Ham United FC, Africa is by far its biggest territory and the one where it sees the most prospects, with South Africa in particular a huge market. This may explain why the firm is not overly concerned with UK tax hikes.

“Going forward, we estimate that these new tax increases will have an impact of approximately 6% to our 2026 Group Adjusted EBITDA,” explained Alinda van Wyk, Super Group Chief Financial Officer.

“However, Super Group already has several mitigation levers in motion, which are intended to offset the tax impact. Our strategy remains unchanged: sustainable growth and disciplined capital allocation. We don’t expect today’s news to alter our long-term trajectory nor our capital return priorities.”

Offering a more mixed response was Rank Group, one of the UK’s biggest casino operators as owner of the Grosvenor Casino chain. The firm is also a big bingo stakeholder as operator of Mecca Bingo, and has a reasonable online presence.

As with other omnichannel firms, Rank expects the RGD rate to hit its online business by around £46m, offset by a £6m benefit from the abolition of bingo duty. The firm’s land-based casino properties will be largely unscratched, but nonetheless it is planning ‘mitigating actions’ for its online activity, similar to Entain, Flutter and Evoke.

John O’Reilly, Rank CEO, said: “The announced increase in Remote Gaming Duty in the UK Budget represents a very significant blow to the regulated betting and gaming industry in the UK.

“Whilst we are pleased that the Government has abolished bingo duty which will help to sustain jobs and investment in the land-based sector, the far more significant impact on the Group is the hit to digital profitability.

“In the year to 30 June 2025, Rank reported a profit after tax of £44.6m and paid taxes in the UK of £188m. That burden will now increase by a further £40m and we will look to mitigate the impact where possible.”

Never enough?

And finally, reactions have also come in from lobbyists. The prospect of gaming taxes increasing attracted huge interest from various political corners, with MPs on both sides of the spectrum making their voices heard.

Gordon Brown, former Prime Minister, was a big proponent of seeing RGD and Machine Games Duty (MGD) both rise rise to 50%. This proposal was made by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) and Social Market Foundation (SMF), arguing that it could be used to pay for the scrapping of the two child cap on child poverty limits.

Reeves ultimately decided to go through with the scrapping of the two child cap, a move that is widely expected to lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty – with the UK’s childhood poverty rate estimated to stand as high as 30% according to some reports. While Reeves did not go as far as Brown’s proposal, she did explain that the gaming tax raises will go towards this anti-child poverty initiative.

Rachel Reeves has today done more to transform the lives of 450,000 of Britain’s poorest children than any of the seven previous Conservative chancellors, who, in 14 long years, did nothing but harm to the lives of vulnerable children.https://t.co/xOTRFpKUhU

— Gordon Brown (@GordonBrown) November 26, 2025

Some proponents of gambling law reforms have argued that the tax has not gone far enough, however. Peers for Gambling Reform (PGR), a cross-party group of the House of Lords, made its case shortly after the budget announcement. Lord Foster of Bath, Chair of the PGR, issued the following statement.

“While I very much welcome this increase in online gambling tax given the social ills caused by the industry, let us be clear, this is more a case of a beleaguered government in financial crisis reluctantly taxing from an industry they continue to look to protect despite the clear evidence of harm it causes, the vast profits it makes and the lengths it goes to avoid reforms or resist paying fair taxes.”

This does raise the question, will the debate around gambling reform and by extension taxation ever end? The review of the 2005 Gambling Act took two-and-a-half years between December 2020 and April 2023, and its recommendations are still being adopted.

However, calls for another look at British betting legislation continue to be raised, with various MPs calling for local councils to be given more powers against the retail sector this year, for example – calls that have been noted by Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Speaking on the iGaming Daily podcast yesterday, Dan Vaugh, Partner at strategic advisory firm Regulus Partners, observed that pressure on gambling is unlikely to ease up, sharing his view that “the concern will be that the anti-gambling campaign has sought to come back for more”.

“As a reminder, both the SMF and IPPR wanted a 50% duty on all machines in land-based premises and the IPPR wanted 66% duty on casinos at a marginal rate. So, are they suddenly satisfied and g ‘our work here is done?’ I doubt it.

“I think they’ll be back for more. With these sorts of groups it’s never really enough, anything that you do is not pure enough.”

Amidst all the lobbying that has taken place over the past six months from both sides of the camp, it may be in the industry’s interests to take a look at its core arguments and practices, and take note of what has and hasn’t worked.

The black market argument, for example, while backed up by statistics – it is estimated to account for around 10% of British betting volume – has been relied on for many years, and politicians are becoming numb. The fact that companies still find themselves on the receiving end of Gambling Commission enforcement actions for non-compliance is also not exactly great PR.

As Waugh put it on iGaming Daily yesterday: “I really think that there ought to be a process of introspection. The industry needs to take a long hard look at itself in the mirror, including land based, because although they haven’t been hit this week, that was definitely on the list of options.

“I think the whole industry really has to take a long hard look at itself – why are they in this position? Why do we keep getting into position? What’s going to break the cycle?

“I think it can be broken.This has not always been the industry’s not always been in this spot. It’s allowed itself to drift into this situation. I think it can get back to a better place, but it really requires some hard work and it requires honesty.”