On 7 November 2025, Svenska Spel and ATG, Sweden’s prominent gambling monopolies, submitted a joint op-ed to the Svenska Dagbladet newspaper advocating for a nationwide ban on online gambling bonuses. They argue this move would help combat gambling addiction, particularly among young people, citing statistics from the Swedish Association for Alcohol and Drug Education. This data revealed a rise in gambling among high school boys from 27% to 43% over five years, indicating a growing concern over youth gambling habits.
Despite the intentions outlined by Svenska Spel’s Anna Johnson and Hasse Lord Skarplöth of ATG, the proposal has sparked significant controversy. The Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) has strongly criticized the proposed ban, suggesting it’s a strategic attempt by these monopolies to consolidate their influence over the Swedish iGaming market.
BOS Secretary General Gustaf Hoffstedt has expressed skepticism about the direct link between bonuses and gambling problems among young people. He acknowledges the issue of underage gambling but argues that bonuses primarily target adults. He believes the focus should instead be on other factors contributing to gambling habits among the youth, such as the use of “skins” and “loot boxes” in video games. According to Hoffstedt, these elements, rather than bonuses, are more directly responsible for fostering gambling behaviors in young people.
Hoffstedt further contends that the proposed bonus ban would primarily serve to benefit Svenska Spel and ATG. He argues that reducing the legal market’s breadth would push more players towards these monopolistic giants, which already hold significant market shares following Sweden’s 2019 gambling market re-regulation. Hoffstedt noted that competitors who started with zero customers would be unfairly disadvantaged if prohibited from offering signup bonuses, a common tool to attract new users.
In his view, this approach undermines market competition and consumer choice. He believes Svenska Spel and ATG missed an opportunity to work collaboratively with other market stakeholders to enhance consumer protection and ensure the sustainable growth of the gambling industry. Instead, they pursue policies that could shrink the licensed market, potentially harming consumer interests in the long run.
Another critical aspect Hoffstedt raised is the risk of driving players to unregulated, black-market gambling operators. These operators might offer appealing bonuses without adhering to the stringent consumer protection measures enforced by licensed brands. This shift could undermine the integrity of Sweden’s regulatory framework, ultimately reducing government oversight and consumer safety.
Hoffstedt advocates for balanced gambling regulations that protect consumers while maintaining the enjoyment that attracts them to legal platforms. He warns that without this balance, the proportion of users engaging with licensed gambling operators could decline, threatening the stability of the entire system. “A high proportion of legally licensed gambling is achieved through striking a balance between consumer protection and gambling pleasure,” he emphasized.
In contrast, proponents of the bonus ban argue that it could play a crucial role in mitigating gambling-related harm. They point to the success of similar measures in other jurisdictions, where bonus restrictions have correlated with reduced gambling addiction rates. They insist that such regulations are necessary to curb the aggressive marketing tactics often employed by online gambling operators, which can lure vulnerable individuals into problematic gambling behaviors.
As Sweden continues to refine its gambling regulations, it faces the challenge of addressing both the legal market’s needs and the persistent threat of unregulated operators. The Swedish government has been actively working to strengthen its regulatory framework, as evidenced by the Ministry of Finance’s recent publication of Marcus Isgren’s report. This document proposes amendments designed to close loopholes and enhance enforcement against illegal gambling activities.
While these efforts represent a significant step forward, Hoffstedt remains skeptical about their potential to resolve the market’s deeper issues. He suggests that the focus should be on addressing the root causes of illegal gambling proliferation and creating an environment where consumers willingly choose licensed operators.
Ultimately, the debate over Sweden’s proposed bonus ban underscores the complex interplay between consumer protection, market competition, and regulatory effectiveness. As stakeholders continue to vie for influence over the future of Sweden’s gambling market, the outcome of these discussions will likely shape the industry for years to come. Only time will tell whether the proposed measures will foster a more responsible and sustainable gambling environment or inadvertently bolster the existing monopolies at the expense of consumer choice.
4/5
