UKGC Urges Better Transparency After Reviewing Player Restrictions

The UK Gambling Commission has pulled back the curtain on how online betting companies apply restrictions to player accounts—and the numbers speak volumes. After analyzing data from nearly 15 million accounts in 2024, the regulator found that a little over 4% of accounts had some form of restriction in place.

The research sheds light on how operators manage commercial risk and which customers get flagged most often. Although the Commission does not regulate this part of the business directly, it is clearly watching closely—and urging companies to start being upfront with players.

Good to know

• 4.31% of gambling accounts had restrictions applied in 2024.
• Over 61% of those restricted accounts were subject to stake factor limits.
• Nearly half of all restricted accounts were profitable, compared to just one in four overall.

Stake factor limits stood out as the most commonly used restriction. Operators often use them to limit how much a player can bet, with percentages set relative to the maximum allowable stake. In fact, 36.22% of restricted accounts were limited to just 1–9% of the max stake, while nearly 30% were limited at 10–49%. Only 6% had limits close to the full maximum (90–100%).

Some companies take it a step further by assigning a stake factor of 0.00, which blocks users from placing any bets at all. According to the data, 0.83% of all active accounts were hit with this kind of restriction, and it affected 19.15% of all restricted users.

Beyond stake limits, more than half of the restricted accounts were eventually closed by the operators. The UKGC noted that account closures are often tied to earlier restrictions, suggesting that a limitation is sometimes just the first step toward a full shutdown.

Interestingly, the profitability data showed a strong contrast. While only 25.42% of all active accounts ended up in profit, that number jumped to 46.78% among restricted users. That gap might explain why some bettors feel they are being penalized for success. On the flip side, 72.54% of active accounts posted losses over the year, while just over 51% of restricted accounts ended up in the red.

Another method operators used, though less frequently, was to limit betting to specific types of markets like horse racing. That kind of targeting showed up in only 5.72% of restricted cases, and many firms reported not using it at all.

The UKGC emphasized that while it does not control how businesses handle these account measures, it believes greater transparency is needed. A spokesperson for the Commission said:

“If this is a feature of an operator’s business model, then it is something that they should inform consumers about.”

The regulator warned that unclear restrictions could push some customers toward unregulated websites or lead them to create multiple accounts to avoid limits. It stated that operators should explain restrictions clearly, both when a customer joins and throughout the relationship—especially before any bets are placed or money is deposited.

At this point, though, the Commission has no plans to force those changes through formal regulation. Instead, it is leaving the door open for the industry to step up on its own.

The post UKGC Urges Better Transparency After Reviewing Player Restrictions appeared first on iGaming.org.