Swedish court upholds AML fines against three gambling firms
The operators had argued that the Swedish gambling regulator’s sanctions were disproportionate.
Sweden.- A Swedish administrative court has upheld enforcement measures taken by the country’s gambling regulator against three licensees. It ruled that Spelinspektionen was correct in imposing fines against Betsson, Snabbare (ComeOn Group) and Spooniker (Kindred) for breaches of anti-money laundering (AML) obligations stemming from failures to carry out adequate customer due diligence.
Spelinspektionen had issued warnings and penalty fees in May 2025 following investigations into how the operators handled due diligence responsibilities, but the companies had challenged its interpretation of AML rules.
Betsson argued that the regulator had applied an excessively narrow view of how operators should verify funds and that the sanction was disproportionate, violated equal treatment and contradicted prior court practice and AML guidance. It insisted that any breaches were neither systematic nor serious.
However, after reviewing the cases, the court agreed that the companies had fallen short of the standards required under Sweden’s AML framework for monitoring and verifying customer activity. It confirmed fines of SEK 6.5m(€589,400) against Betsson, SEK 5.5m (€498,700) against Snabbare and SEK 10m (€906,700) against Spooniker.
Spelinspektionen’s investigation
The regulator’s investigation had focused on customers aged 18–29, specifically the 50 individuals with the largest cumulative deposits in the 12 months of 2023. Investigators determined that the operators had failed to properly establish the source of funds when deposits appeared inconsistent with declared taxable income.
One example involved a Betsson customer who made 163 deposits totalling SEK 491,950 between September and December 2023, despite reporting an annual net income of SEK 310,000. The regulator noted that the player’s risk classification remained low to medium throughout, and argued that Betsson had not sufficiently investigated the origin of the funds.
Operators claimed the deposits could be explained by prior gambling winnings, but Spelinspektionen rejected this argument, saying the source had not been properly verified.
