gambling in the eu
The Commission is taking enforcement action against a number of Member States which do not allow sports betting. Firms which offer sports betting services are complaining that these Member States in fact allow gambling domestically through state lotteries and that they are discriminating against the foreign service providers (euractiv story here). The Commission says:
The Commission decision to inquire into the compatibility of the measures in question is based on complaints made by a number of service providers and on information gathered by the Commission Services. The complaints concern restrictions on the provision of sports betting services, including the requirement for a State concession or licence (even where a provider is lawfully licensed in another Member State). In some cases, restrictions also extend to the promotion or advertising of the services and to the participation of nationals in the Member State in question in the games.
The European Court of Justice has previously stated that any restrictions which seek to protect general interest objectives, such as the protection of consumers, must be “consistent and systematic” in how they seek to limit betting activities. A Member State cannot invoke the need to restrict its citizens’ access to betting services if at the same time it incites and encourages them to participate in state lotteries, games of chance or betting which benefits the state’s Finances.
The issue is similar to issues we have thought about before. It seems to me that if a Member State were to prevent a state lottery from another Member State offering tickets across borders while encouraging people to buy tickets in the home lottery that would be a real problem. But I’m not sure that sports betting operations are really the same sort of thing. If a member State allowed domestic sports betting operations to provide services and banned foreign competitors that would be a problem too. But is having a domestic lottery and banning foreign sports betting the same issue or not? It assumes that all gambling is equally bad or good. Does it make a difference that lotteries may be used for socially beneficial purposes?
Gambling is a tricky subject, because a lot of people see it as morally degrading, while others view it as mere fun. Poor people see hope; rich people see greed. I think the biggest concern with gambling are the bets that lead to violence…gambling with bookies…betters may not take the bet seriously, and default on payment, thus angering bookies. I think the danger factor of betting could be seriously eliminated with the restrictions that licensing imposes. As long as sport gambling has license regulations, and state lotteries also require licenses, the regulation should be “systematic,” and both are acceptable to the extent that gambling is acceptable. The fact that lottery is used for state benefit is irrelevant…the state shouldn’t be allowed to morally degrade if sports companies cannot do the same.