23 January 2026: Update on the GSC Draft Legislative Reforms
The Journey So Far
As noted in the Gambling Supervision Commission consultation response document published in October 2025, the GSC is providing an update regarding the progress of its proposed draft legislative reforms (“GSC Bill”). In 2025, the GSC sought views from key stakeholders via a public consultation, which ran for six weeks during July and August. The consultation covered a package of draft legislative reforms to the following acts:
- Gambling (Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism) Act 2018
- Gambling Supervision Act 2010
- Gambling (Amendment) Act 2006
- Online Gambling Regulation Act 2001
- Casino Act 1986
- Gaming, Betting and Lotteries Act 1988
- The Gaming (Amendment) Act 1984
The sentiment of responses received regarding the various acts was generally positive and highlighted that the approach to apply a set of standardised inspection and investigation tools across the relevant Gambling Acts was favourable. Where concerns were raised, they were addressed via a consultation response document. Following the consultation, the draft bill was progressed to the House of Keys for first reading on 28th October 2025.
Recent Updates to the Bill
Please see the summary below of amendments made following feedback provided via Treasury, to which the GSC responded with Government amendments.
Feedback:
Within the changes to Inspections and Investigations, the definition of “associate” is very broad. Legally, this term can have different meanings depending on its context; however […] the inclusion in (a)(iv) and (b)(vi) of the term “any person with whom the individual is known to have a close relationship” seems to be all-inclusive but also very difficult to define and could be perceived as oppressive.
Response:
We were unable to narrow this definition because investigations into risk and alleged criminality have demonstrated that informal relationships and familial relationships can be material to risk and/or alleged criminality.
This approach is also consistent with the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Guidance on Beneficial Ownership of Legal Persons which recognises that control over a legal person may be exercised through informal means and without written contracts, where a family member, friend, employee, or other associate stands in for the nominator, who may be the beneficial owner.
The GSC supervises using a risk-based approach. As such, this power will only be used where necessary as part of the proportionate and fair use of its powers of supervision.
Feedback:
The introduction of the concept of a “fit and proper person” makes sense but is followed by the wording “may, after consulting the Treasury, issue written guidance”. The sector would like the certainty that this guidance will be available. Is it possible that “may” is changed to “must”. This is especially relevant as Clause 50 inserts criteria for a designated official to be a “fit and proper person” and new subsection (3A) specifies that the commission “shall, after consulting the treasury issue written guidance”.
Response:
We agreed and had this clause amended accordingly.
Feedback:
Clause 53 is in regards to the cancellation of a licence. Is the reference in 13(3)(b) to any “indictable offence” with respect to the expanded number of individuals covered still appropriate?
Response:
We removed the expanded list from the face of the Act and made it a list that would be specified in secondary legislation, giving the opportunity for future stakeholder consultation on policy without holding up the Bill, and ultimately allowing the opportunity for Tynwald to examine our subsequent proposals for their suitability.
Feedback:
Clause 5 of the Gambling Supervision Act 2010 is to be altered with respect to the GSC, having regard to a number of factors. It would be reassuring to the industry to include an objective to “have regard to the best economic interests of the Isle of Man”.
Response:
We settled on the GSC must have regard to ”the stability and sustainability of the sectors it regulates” as our restored objective. Stability allows us to have regard to arrangements that create business certainty (such as an open-door policy, a regulatory sandbox, and meaningful consultations). Sustainability allows us to have regard to the factors that benefit or adversely affect the sector’s regulatory environment and to make changes in favour of continued prosperity where our core objectives are not impacted. It also allows us to act in the best interests of the sector when there are threats.
The OECD Best Practice Principles for the Governance of Regulators (2014) notes that regulators act as the “referees” of markets, ensuring fair, efficient, and trustworthy systems by acting objectively and without bias or undue influence.
Because they operate at the interface of government, industry, and the public, clear boundaries are essential to prevent “grey areas” where policy‑setting responsibilities become mixed with regulatory decisions that must remain independent. The report acknowledges that independence is not about isolation. Regulators must still engage with government, parliament, industry, and citizens, but in such a way that does not compromise impartiality.
For these reasons, a regulator’s role is not to promote or market the sector it oversees. Maintaining role clarity and a degree of independence in line with international best practice safeguards the integrity of regulatory decisions.
The GSC works constructively with other Isle of Man Government agencies, including the Department for Enterprise, to ensure an appropriate balance between supporting sector development and maintaining robust, independent oversight.
The Chief Minister commented only last week that:
[The Government] ‘…will continue to work across industry and all agencies to ensure the Isle of Man remains a secure, stable and trusted jurisdiction for high quality and well-regulated iGaming businesses.’
Feedback:
Clause 90 imposes civil penalties on a person but deletes the references to an operator. Should it not read “and operator and/or person”?
Response:
The word “person” in law means both a natural and a legal person (section 35 of the Interpretation Act).
Feedback:
Subsection (6A)(b) of this clause could be more specific with reference to FATF recommendation 21 regarding tipping-off and confidentiality. Whilst the clause specifies that the GSC must publish a “statement” regarding the civil penalties and take into account aggravating and mitigating factors, there is uncertainty about the legal status of a “statement”. The maximum levels of any penalty should be set out in a schedule of an order rather than a statement. Jersey has done this in their Financial Services Commission (Financial penalties) Order 201,5 with attached clear methodology for determining the amount. A commitment in the legislation to do the same in the Isle of Man would be very reassuring for the iGaming sector and possibly the wider financial services industry.
Response:
We agreed and asked for this amendment to specify that the process and parameters would be stated in secondary legislation.
In Summary:
The GSC would like to thank all respondents for their comments. Where possible, feedback from stakeholders is considered and amendments made accordingly. The GSC is committed to supporting a stable, reputable and sustainable industry on the Island and as such, continues to have an “open door” policy on feedback from industry.
Should you have any further questions, please contact the GSC via the contact form on our website or contact Mark Rutherford directly via email at mark.rutherford@gov.im.