Magali Clavie, BGC: “We are convinced of the added value of international cooperation… We are all facing similar challenges and have a lot to learn from other countries’ experiences”

Magali Clavie, President of the Belgian Gaming Commission (BGC), spoke to Focus Gaming News about 2025’s regulatory milestones and the Commission’s priorities ahead of its planned structural reform.

Exclusive interview.- Magali Clavie, President of Belgium’s gambling regulatory body, the Kansspelcommissie, sat down with Focus Gaming News to talk about the Commission’s pivotal year, marked by sweeping regulatory changes and growing international cooperation.

During the interview, Clavie also discusses the early impact of raising the minimum gambling age, the challenges of enforcing Belgium’s strict advertising ban, and concerns over the shift of young players towards unlicensed platforms. She also outlines the Commission’s priorities as it prepares for a major structural reform in 2026, aiming to strengthen enforcement, enhance consumer protection, and modernise its regulatory framework.

We are entering the second half of 2025. What assessment can be made of what has been achieved so far this year, and which goals remain to be achieved?

2025 has been a year characterised by the implementation of new rules. For example, restrictions on advertising and sponsoring, a new minimum gambling age, and measures to split up online gaming sites. At the same time, 2025 is also a year of preparation for an important reform for us, as a regulator. The federal government has announced a reform of the Gaming Commission, with the Minister of Economy as the Government’s exclusive representative. The first steps of this reform are now being taken, and it is expected that the Gaming Commission will move to the department of the Minister of Economy in January 2026. The Minister of Economy has announced several other measures that will be taken during this legislature. For example, stepping up the fight against illegal gambling, both online and land-based. This goal aims to create a safer market and protect players from abuse. At the same time, the Gaming Commission has continued to increase its external collaboration and international presence, working intensively with regulators in other jurisdictions to combat illegal games of chance and develop player protection measures. A core pillar of this cooperation is the Gambling Regulators European Forum (GREF) of which I have the honour of being appointed vice-chair earlier this year.

“The Gaming Commission will move to the department of the Minister of Economy in January 2026.”

Magali Clavie, president of the Belgian Gaming Commission (BGC).

Belgium raised the minimum gambling age from 18 to 21 across all verticals, effective from September 2024. How are you assessing the early effects of this policy on player protection and demand?

The generalisation of the minimal age makes sense because game concepts have evolved as well.

For example, betting is traditionally considered to be a less harmful activity than other games of chance. This is why betting used to be accessible to persons starting at the age of 18. But recently, this activity has become increasingly gamified, using elements like combination bets and live betting. These elements may make the product more dangerous for players, especially young people, for whom betting is very attractive.

Having said that, it is still a little early to assess the concrete effects of this measure in terms of player protection.

Before the new regulation, we identified around 30,000 new players aged between 18 and 20 each year. This group used to be able to play, but is no longer allowed to.

The question now is what these young people are doing. Have they really stopped playing? We conducted a survey in the spring and found that nearly 40 per cent of young people under the age of 21 admitted to still playing games of chance. We fear that they have turned to illegal offerings, as the survey showed that nearly half of young people knew of at least one illegal website by name. Our surveys do indeed teach us that legal operators are losing brand recognition amongst young people, whereas illegal operators are gaining awareness within this group.

Recent data shared by the Belgian Association of Gaming Operators (BAGO) suggests that 65 per cent of male players aged 18 to 21 are turning to unlicensed gambling platforms since the minimum age was raised. How is the Belgian Gaming Commission responding to these figures and their implications for channelisation and consumer protection?

As mentioned earlier, since these very young players are no longer allowed to participate in the legal circuit, it cannot be excluded that illegal operators are now targeting them. We have no way of tracking where they are going in the meantime, but according to our study, 20 per cent of players aged 18 to 20 have participated in illegal games of chance. That is still 20 per cent too many, but lower than the 65 per cent cited by the industry.

“According to our study, 20 per cent of players aged 18 to 20 have participated in illegal games of chance.”

Magali Clavie, president of the Belgian Gaming Commission (BGC).

What measures are being considered to extend self-exclusion tools and age verification systems beyond the licensed sector?

Age restrictions and rules on self-exclusion are different in each jurisdiction. Belgian operators are required to implement our Excluded Persons Information System (EPIS), which includes age verification measures. Operators that are not licensed in Belgium are not allowed to offer their games to persons in Belgium at all. We actively seek out these platforms and try to make sure their games of chance are not available in Belgium. Unfortunately, we are not authorised to impose additional rules on these sites, which are not under our jurisdiction.

Belgium introduced a ban on most gambling advertising. The ban will be extended to gambling sponsorship in sports from January 2028. What is KSC’s current assessment of the ban’s effectiveness in achieving its public awareness objectives, and what specific, proactive strategies are being developed or implemented to significantly improve public understanding and compliance with this ban?

The general ban on advertising has been effective in reducing the presence of gambling in the streetscape, on television, and in the press.

That said, some aspects of the ban are proving difficult to enforce in practice. For example, operators are no longer allowed to send advertising e-mails to their players. However, it is not always clear whether communication sent to players (e.g. e-mails or text messages) is merely informative or meant as an implicit form of publicity. We also regret that some operators are attempting to circumvent the advertising ban by creating new derived brands and logos and using those to advertise.

It should also be noted that the ban on sports sponsoring has proven difficult to apply in an international context. Organisations established in other jurisdictions may be allowed to accept sponsorship for licensed operators, creating a disadvantageous position for operators licensed in Belgium.

Lastly, the ban goes quite far when it comes to online publicity. For example, licence holders are no longer allowed to use sponsored or promoted messages on social media. This makes the Belgian market especially attractive for illegal operators, who regularly attempt to advertise online despite the ban. We have also seen many cases where malevolent actors are misusing the brand names and logos of Belgian operators to advertise malicious websites.

The BGC recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Irish Gambling Regulatory Authority. How important are such agreements with international regulators, and what key benefits do they bring?

Agreements with other regulators are a valuable tool for the Gaming Commission’s cooperation with other actors. They help us make sure that any data we exchange is treated securely and in full compliance with the rules regarding privacy and data protection. These agreements also help us set clear expectations with our partners.

In general, we are convinced of the added value of international cooperation, whether at the multilateral level, such as the GREF, or bilaterally. We are all facing similar challenges and have a lot to learn from other countries’ experiences, even if our legislation differs.

Looking ahead, what are the Belgian Gaming Commission’s top priorities for the next years in terms of enforcement, consumer protection and regulatory innovation in Belgium?

Currently, the Gaming Commission is in real need of reform, as well as a significant increase in its staff. The current capacity of our organisation is not sufficient to accomplish our mission as a regulator. That is why there is an urgent need for the Gaming Commission to gain more independence and the autonomy to conduct its own recruitment procedures.

With a full-time equivalent of 33 persons, the number of active personnel within the Gaming Commission’s staff is lower than it was in 2010. In the meantime, the gambling sector has continued to evolve, and the regulator has taken on new tasks such as regulating betting, online games of chance and advertising. Taking on these tasks requires a strong regulator with highly specialised staff.