Can Sweden's credit card gambling ban avoid the UK's mistakes?
Sweden has become the latest country to prohibit the use of credit cards for gambling, following similar moves in the UK and Australia. The Swedish Gambling Authority, Spelinspektionen, said the decision was intended to “create a safer and more sustainable gambling market.” In its statement, the regulator echoed government concerns, adding that the new rules aim to “reduce the risk of over-indebtedness and protect consumers from getting into financial difficulties.”
However, the evidence from other countries suggests that while banning credit cards may help some, it is far from a silver bullet.
Britain’s experience: a mixed picture
In April 2020, Great Britain implemented a complete ban on credit card use for both online and offline gambling, with the exception of non-remote lotteries. At the time, Neil McArthur, then-chief executive of the Gambling Commission, warned that “credit card gambling can lead to significant financial harm.” He explained: “The ban that we have announced today should minimise the risks of harm to consumers from gambling with money they do not have.”
The move followed research showing that “22% of online gamblers using credit cards to gamble are problem gamblers, with even more suffering some form of gambling harm.” McArthur acknowledged the measure would inconvenience some, but insisted: “We are satisfied that reducing the risk of harm to other consumers means that action must be taken.”
A recent evaluation of the ban paints a more complicated picture. According to a report by the National Centre for Social Research, “the credit card ban was successfully implemented, however, communications about the ban did not reach all people who gamble.” The same report found that while “the ban was perceived to be a positive change by people who gamble; friends and family affected by gambling; and gambling treatment/support providers,” the increased friction “did not always result in changed patterns of gambling.”
Those at greatest risk least likely to change
Crucially, people with the most severe gambling problems appear to be the least affected. As the noted, “people experiencing no reported problems from gambling, and people experiencing low levels of problems from gambling were more likely than people experiencing moderate and high levels of problem gambling to report reduced use of credit cards to gamble and use of borrowed money to gamble post-ban.”
A highlighted similar concerns. The report stated: “Findings suggest that the credit card ban has positively impacted some, prompting debt repayment, allowing the chance to stop building debt, building awareness of gambling risks and reducing temptation for those recovering from gambling-related harms. However, findings also suggest that the ban had little impact or a potentially negative impact on others (e.g., pushing some towards riskier and less traceable borrowing methods).”
Indeed, for some, the ban may have simply led to new, less visible forms of borrowing. According to the same report: “Some individuals with credit card debt and frequent gambling reported seeking alternatives to credit cards as sources of funds for their gambling activities and shifted towards using credit cards for daily expenses.”
A cautionary tale for Sweden
Sweden appears determined to avoid those loopholes. In addition to the credit card ban, the government will prohibit licensees and gambling agents from enabling players to “enter into credit agreements with other parties when purchasing games, for example by linking to credit providers in connection with online games.”
That additional measure targets one of the key loopholes identified in Britain’s experience the ability for consumers to circumvent restrictions through indirect borrowing or third-party credit.
‘A layer of protection C but not the whole solution’
Back in the UK, McArthur was clear that banning credit cards was only one piece of the puzzle: “The ban is part of our ongoing work to reduce gambling harm. We also need to continue the work we have been doing with gambling operators and the finance industry to ensure consumers only gamble with money they can afford to spend.”
The evidence so far suggests that credit card bans can add a “layer of protection to vulnerable people to reduce gambling-related harms,” as the Greo evaluation put it. But it also warns that “the credit card ban did not always result in changed patterns of gambling.”
For Sweden, the challenge will be to learn from these lessons and ensure the ban is not just another well-meaning policy that problem gamblers easily sidestep.
