New Zealand’s progress toward licensing online casinos came after an 83–39 parliamentary vote supporting an online casino bill. This is relatively significant for other countries’ regulators to pay attention.
New Zealand’s gamblers “lost” NZ$2.79 billion across the country’s main gambling products in 2023/2024. This figure is close to all-time highs, even after considering the absence of a local online casino market. Now, alongside the previously mentioned vote, Parliament has also proposed issuing 15 licenses for the online casino market with a target of 2026 launch.
This article outlines the vote, the mechanics under consideration, and the potential ripple effects for regulators across the world.
Background on the 83 vs 89 vote
The headline number doing the rounds is slightly off. The ballot was not a Gambling Commission decision but a first-reading conscience vote in Parliament, passing 83 to 39 and moving the bill to the Governance and Administration Committee. Public submissions are open until 11:59 pm on 17 August 2025. The bill would set up a licensing regime, ban unlicensed operators and advertising, and embed consumer-protection requirements. As drafted, up to 15 licences could be issued in the first regulatory period starting in 2026.
The context is a market where offshore sites currently service New Zealand players. Government papers and recent health strategy documents note the growth of online gambling and the need to fund harm-prevention.
The legislation arrives alongside a refreshed problem-gambling levy for 2025/26–2027/28, coordinated by the Ministry of Health and the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA).
How the decision could influence international licensing trends
A capped-licence model with a defined start date mirrors choices by several jurisdictions that sought structure rather than open-ended market entry. Ontario launched a regulated market in 2022 and have reported CA$3.20 billion in online gambling revenue in 2025, up 32% year-on-year—figures that have become touchstones for policymakers weighing channelisation against consumer risk.
New Zealand’s “up to 15” ceiling, competitive allocation, and advertising restrictions will be examined against Ontario’s experience of rapid operator onboarding, tax take, and compliance outcomes.
For the UK, where the Gambling Commission reports £15.6 billion in total gross gambling yield for 2023/24, the New Zealand model offers a smaller-scale case study in refreshing rules for the online era while tightening consumer safeguards. Any move by Wellington to require robust harm-management plans, identity checks and data reporting will be read alongside Great Britain’s post-White Paper reforms.
Australia provides a different comparison: rather than licensing online casinos, the federal regulator has leaned on enforcement. Since late 2019, the Australian Communications and Media Authority has asked ISPs to block 1,296 illegal gambling and affiliate sites. If New Zealand can show that licensing plus enforcement raises on-shore participation and standards, Canberra may face renewed questions about whether blocking alone achieves the desired outcomes.
Potential impact on online gambling markets worldwide
Markets respond to clear rules. A New Zealand framework could redirect local spend from offshore to domestically regulated sites, altering operator strategies in the Asia-Pacific. DIA’s published expenditure shows steady growth in overall gambling losses to NZ$2.79 billion in 2023/24; even modest online channelisation could be material for tax and levy receipts, while testing harm-reduction settings in a compact, data-rich market.
For operators, a 15-licence cap and 2026 timeline forces prioritisation: which brands seek entry, at what cost of compliance and local presence, and how marketing is managed if unlicensed advertising is prohibited. Legal analysts have already warned that gaps in the bill’s detail could slow implementation—raising execution risk for firms pencilling in a 2026 go-live.
That uncertainty will be priced into business plans just as other regions, including parts of the United States, post strong monthly iCasino growth.
For regulators, the outcome offers a fresh datapoint on balancing consumer protection with channelisation. Ontario’s year-three results are frequently cited by policymakers because they combine revenue growth with a large share of play migrating to the legal market.
If New Zealand’s select committee strengthens data-reporting, affordability tools and advertising limits, it could produce evidence that smaller jurisdictions can move from an offshore-dominated status quo to a monitored system without a surge in harm—an inference other regulators will scrutinise carefully.
The role of New Zealand in shaping global gambling regulations
New Zealand’s method of parliamentary oversight, public submissions, and a defined health-led harm reduction approach makes the country a useful example for others considering older gambling legislation. Within the select-committee phase, there is an invitation for comments concerning licence distribution, audit processes, and penalties for unlawful advertising. These issues have plagued newer markets.
Alongside market architecture, the government has flagged harm minimisation as a core focus, and more recent publications from the Ministry of Health highlight budgeting for prevention and treatment.
The two aforementioned indicators will assess Wellington’s international influence. The first is whether the law maintains the 2026 deadline and provides enough operational detail for procurement, technical certification, and dispute resolution.
The second is concerning the intersection of enforcement towards unlicensed operators and the new framework. Australia’s ISP blocking experience demonstrates that sustained enforcement is possible, and New Zealand will be expected to pair licensing with mechanisms to eliminate unlawful supply and advertising.
What to watch next
The Governance and Administration Committee will receive submissions until 17 August 2025, after which the committee will reconvene to propose modifications.
Operator interest and public health outcomes will be shaped by the terms of the licence fees, the advertising standards, and the harm mitigation criteria, as well as the advertising standards and data disclosure.
Regulators from other countries will be watching to see if New Zealand’s capped-licence model enables better channelisation without increasing harm—something which is still a hot topic in the UK, Canada, and Australia.
Source: https://kiwislots.nz/
