Rethinking Poland’s iGaming Monopoly: Is Liberalisation Inevitable?

Across Europe, gambling regulation has entered a more defensive phase. Governments are tightening advertising rules, revising tax models and responding to concerns about offshore operators. In Poland, however, the debate is different: whether the state monopoly over online casino remains the most effective model.

Poland’s Hybrid Gambling Structure

Poland’s current framework is based on the Gambling Act of 19 November 2009. The Act introduced a restrictive regulatory structure and laid the foundation for state control over selected gambling segments.

Under the existing model:

• Land-based casinos and slot halls operate under licences.

• Online sports betting is open to private operators.

• Online casino games are reserved for a state monopoly operated by Totalizator Sportowy.

This structure is confirmed in legal overviews such as the ICLG – Gambling Laws and Regulations: Poland, which notes that most online casino games are legally restricted to the state operator.

The broader regulatory approach and licensing structure are also detailed in the CMS Expert Guide to Gambling Laws in CEE – Poland chapter, confirming the hybrid nature of the Polish system.

Channelisation and Market Share

Channelisation — the proportion of gambling activity captured within the regulated market — is central to the current debate.

Industry representatives estimate that:

While sports betting operates under a competitive licensing model, online casino remains monopolised. Critics argue that if approximately 40% of online casino activity still occurs outside the regulated platform, the monopoly may have reached structural limits.

Across Europe, industry bodies such as the European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA) have highlighted the ongoing challenge of offshore gambling and the importance of effective channelisation in regulated markets. Although EGBA does not publish official Polish government figures, its market analyses illustrate broader regional patterns relevant to the Polish case.

Taxation and Structural Constraints

Poland applies a 12% turnover tax on sports betting — a structure that differs from Gross Gaming Revenue (GGR) taxation used in many other European jurisdictions. Legal summaries from both ICLG and CMS confirm the turnover-based model and its regulatory implications.

Operators argue that turnover taxation reduces pricing flexibility and can indirectly support offshore competition, particularly in segments such as live betting or higher payout markets.

Political Sensitivity and Reform Outlook

The restrictive architecture of Poland’s gambling framework reflects longstanding political caution. Since the adoption of the 2009 Act, legislative change in gambling has been incremental rather than structural.

Currently, there is no broad political consensus supporting liberalisation of the online casino monopoly. While some policy commentators argue that a competitive licensing system could improve channelisation, others point to Western European markets where liberalisation has coincided with renewed offshore pressure.

Conclusion

Poland’s iGaming model combines competitive licensing in sports betting with a state monopoly in online casino. The system has reduced illegal participation compared to earlier stages of market development, yet offshore activity remains significant.

The central policy question is whether a competitive licensing model for online casino would increase channelisation beyond its current estimated level — or whether the monopoly structure remains the politically safer option.

For now, the status quo appears stable. But as the market continues to expand, the debate over liberalisation is unlikely to disappear.