Swedish gambling regulator accused of prioritising punishment over dialogue
An industry-backed legal review claims Spelinspektionen’s enforcement style differs markedly from other Swedish regulators.
Key takeaways
- A legal review commissioned by BOS found Spelinspektionen takes a more punitive approach to supervision than other Swedish regulators.
- The report claims AML investigations often focus on small samples of customer accounts rather than broader compliance systems and controls.
- Of 12 AML enforcement decisions reviewed since 2021, 11 reportedly relied primarily on examinations of between five and 15 customer files.
- The study found seven of nine AML sanctions issued between 2022 and 2025 amounted to at least 50% of the maximum available penalty.
- BOS argues the licensed gambling market would benefit from a more collaborative regulatory approach, while the debate comes amid continued enforcement action against operators.
Sweden’s gambling industry is challenging the enforcement methods of Spelinspektionen after a legal review concluded that the regulator imposes harsher sanctions and adopts a less collaborative supervisory style than other Swedish authorities. The findings add fuel to an ongoing debate over whether strict enforcement is the most effective way to improve compliance in the country’s regulated gambling market.
Sweden.- Sweden’s gambling regulator Spelinspektionen is taking a tougher and more punitive approach to supervision than other Swedish authorities. That’s according to a legal review commissioned by the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS), which argues that the current model is placing excessive emphasis on sanctions rather than regulatory dialogue.
BOS’s report suggests that Spelinspektionen could learn from the approaches taken by the Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (FI), the Schools Inspectorate (SSI, and Stockholm County Administrative Board.
The report, prepared by law firm Nordic Legal, examined how Spelinspektionen conducts supervision compared with the other Swedish regulators, which oversee compliance and anti-money laundering (AML) requirements. It compared sanction levels and suitability assessments for owners and senior management and found notable differences in enforcement practices, particularly in AML investigations, the scale of financial penalties and assessments of operators’ suitability.
According to the report, both FI and the Stockholm County Administrative Board generally apply a risk-based, system-wide approach when examining AML compliance. Regulators typically assess an organisation’s overall risk framework, policies and internal controls before using samples of customer records to test whether those systems are operating effectively.
Nordic Legal found that Spelinspektionen often takes a different approach, with AML investigations centred on small samples of customer accounts. Reviewing 12 AML-related enforcement decisions issued since 2021, the report found that 11 relied primarily on examinations of between five and 15 customer files. It also claimed that the authority frequently did not take operators’ broader risk assessments and AML policies into account during reviews.
The report further argued that Spelinspektionen imposes comparatively high financial penalties when breaches are identified. Among nine AML enforcement decisions examined between 2022 and 2025, seven resulted in sanctions amounting to at least 50 per cent of the maximum penalty available under the law. Two cases reportedly resulted in penalties equivalent to approximately 91 per cent and 100 per cent of the statutory maximum.
By comparison, Nordic Legal found that AML fines imposed by Sweden’s Financial Supervisory Authority in major banking cases generally represented between 20 per cent and 27 per cent of the regulator’s maximum available sanction, while penalties issued by the Stockholm County Administrative Board tended to be lower, aside from particularly serious violations.
Spelinspektionen continues to pursue high-profile compliance actions against gambling operators. Earlier this month, bet365 lost its appeal against a combined SEK40m (€3.5m) in fines issued for systematic breaches of duty of care rules and deposit limit requirements between 2019 and 2022.
Gustaf Hoffstedt, Secretary General of BOS, said: “We believe the licensed gambling market in Sweden would benefit if the Swedish Gambling Authority were to adopt working methods more closely aligned with those of other Swedish government agencies”
FAQs
What did the BOS-commissioned review find about Spelinspektionen?
The report concluded that Sweden’s gambling regulator adopts a tougher enforcement approach than several other public authorities, particularly in AML supervision, sanction levels and suitability assessments.
How does the report say Spelinspektionen handles AML investigations?
According to the review, the regulator frequently focuses on a limited number of customer accounts when assessing compliance, rather than evaluating an operator’s overall AML framework and controls.
Why is the level of financial penalties being questioned?
The report claims that sanctions imposed by Spelinspektionen are often close to the legal maximum, while comparable penalties issued by other Swedish regulators tend to represent a smaller proportion of available sanctions.
Who commissioned the review and why?
The Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) commissioned the study because of concerns that Spelinspektionen’s supervisory methods are more aggressive and less focused on dialogue than those used by other Swedish authorities.
What could this mean for gambling operators in Sweden?
The findings are likely to intensify industry discussions about regulatory proportionality, compliance expectations and whether a more cooperative supervisory model could better support the licensed gambling sector while maintaining standards.
