What began as a fringe fiscal idea has been quietly gathering political momentum across Europe. A proposed tax on online gambling across all 27 EU member states is busy being debated on the floor of the European Parliament, with the outcome of this potentially reshaping the gambling sector across Europe.

Speaking on the iGaming Daily podcast, SBC editor-at-large Ted Menmuir joined host Charlie Horner to break down how the proposal took shape, why the Social Democrats of Europe are backing it, and what the industry should really be paying attention to.

How the Proposal Works

Romanian MEP Victor Negrescu tabled a 1% levy on online gambling income across the bloc, framing it as a self-funding contribution to the EU’s 2028–2034 budget cycle, which needs a minimum of €2 trillion to meet its spending commitments across defence, healthcare, education, environmental targets, and AI-driven workforce investment.

Online gambling with its cross-border reach and consistent revenue growth was identified as one of several sectors that could deliver instant fiscal returns without expanding the EU’s debt burden.

Wednesday’s debate is not a final vote, but it is the first serious political test of whether a bloc-wide charge on online gambling is viable.

The Double Taxation Problem

The more pressing concern is one nobody in Brussels appears to have fully answered yet: how does a unionised tax interact with the national levies operators are already paying across multiple jurisdictions?

“A lot of communication will need to be done,” Menmuir posits, “they’re still keeping their hands closed in terms of what they’re showing to Parliament”. So while the technical methodology remains closed, that opacity is itself a risk signal for any business trying to model exposure.

Bigger Than the Tax

This is the first time the EU has moved to assert any form of oversight over online gambling at a bloc level. Until now, the sector has been governed entirely at the national level, vying with a patchwork of 27 different regulatory regimes, licensing frameworks, and advertising standards, with no harmonisation and no central authority.

The fact that the first intervention is a tax, rather than a conduct framework or consumer protection standard, tells the industry something important about how it is perceived in Brussels. 

Menmuir puts it plainly: “Gambling is being looked at as an income engine, not as a sector with welfare responsibilities.”

The Bigger Picture

Menmuir is clear that online gambling is not being singled out in isolation. 

Carbon revenues, tobacco, e-waste, internet data, and crypto assets are all on the table as potential EU own resources. The bloc is looking to expand its fiscal base, and it is reaching for sectors with cross-border scale and political vulnerability.

iGaming is simply further along that curve than most. 

The question instead is whether the industry uses this moment to shape what EU harmonisation looks like, or waits until the framework is already built around it.