BGC chair argues proposed statutory levy would be a backwards step

Brigid Simmonds, chair of the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC), has argued that a levy on the gambling industry wouldn’t help reduce problem gambling rates.

The new levy proposed by reformers would see operators charged a 1% tax on gross gambling yield (GGY), which the charity said would raise around £140m a year.

Writing for Conservative Home, Simmonds dismissed the proposal, instead pointing towards the success operators have delivered in helping treat and prevent gambling-related harm.

She referenced the 15 new treatment centres that the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) promised to help those suffering from gambling, noting that five are already open and three more are due to be open later in 2022.

Simmonds also stated how the rate of problem gambling in the UK (0.3%) is much lower than in many other European countries.

She said: “Far too often emotion, instead of evidence, drives the debate around betting and gaming in the UK. We believe the current system is making good progress, and in any event, a blanket levy would not raise materially more money for RET. But it would disproportionately hammer casinos and bingo halls, where a one per cent hit on turnover equates to a 10 per cent hit on profits.”
Simmons said that under current arrangements, firms are expected to make a voluntary contribution of 0.1% of turnover. In the year 2019/2020 this was £10m with the majority going to GambleAware.

Simmonds discussed how such a levy would also affect the existing work of charities and impact ongoing treatment processes.

She said: “ A statutory levy would risk funding models by potentially taking cash out of coffers, and putting it into the NHS, which is not set up to deliver these services.
“Furthermore, this clumsy one-size-fits-all approach would have a disproportionate effect on land-based operators including casinos, betting shops and bingo halls, which are only just recovering from the pandemic.
“In truth it would be catastrophic as they, like the rest of the hospitality sector, have so many fixed costs including staff, business rates, taxes and licences,” she added.

Simmonds went on to question the need for a 1% levy, arguing the lower rates of gambling harm in the UK compared to the size of contribution demanded.

In her summation, Simmonds wrote: “Any statutory levy will not boost funding for research, education and treatment (RET); the money is already in the system with a bigger, broader commitment going forward.”