Spelinspektionen, Sweden's gambling regulatory agency, is taking a notably tougher stance in its oversight, particularly regarding anti-money laundering (AML) measures, according to a recent report. This report was commissioned by the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) and produced by the law firm Nordic Legal.
The findings highlight stark contrasts in the supervisory methods employed by Spelinspektionen compared to other Swedish regulatory bodies. BOS Secretary General Gustaf Hoffstedt expressed concerns about the agency's approach, stating that Spelinspektionen deviates from the typical standards and practices found in other Swedish public authorities.
Hoffstedt explained to iGB, "In our view, the SGA is more heavy-handed and less focused on dialogue or collaborative problem-solving compared to other Swedish authorities." He acknowledged the independence of Nordic Legal in conducting the analysis, despite them being the clients who commissioned it.
Hoffstedt asserts that the regulated gambling market in Sweden would benefit from the Swedish Gambling Authority adopting methods more in line with those of other government agencies.
The comparative analysis by Nordic Legal focused on three key areas for cross-authority supervision: AML oversight, the application and level of sanction fees, and evaluations of the suitability of owners and senior management.
In its examination, Nordic Legal compared Spelinspektionen with the Financial Supervisory Authority (FI), the Stockholm County Administrative Board (Lst Stockholm), and the Swedish Schools Inspectorate. Both FI and Lst Stockholm were found to implement a system-level, risk-based approach to AML enforcement. This involved a review of comprehensive risk assessments, procedures, and controls, followed by sample checks of customer files to determine the effectiveness of these systems.
In contrast, Spelinspektionen primarily adopted a sample-based, customer-case driven approach in its AML supervision. The report analyzed twelve AML-related decisions made since 2021, discovering that eleven were predominantly based on small samples, typically consisting of just five to 15 customer files. Notably, the regulator often excluded the operator's overall risk assessment and policies from their review.
When it comes to sanctions, the report found that Spelinspektionen tended to impose fees close to the maximum allowed by law. Of the nine AML decisions reviewed from 2022 to 2025, seven resulted in penalties at or above 50% of the maximum limit, with two cases reaching approximately 91% and 100% of the statutory maximum.
In comparison, the FI typically imposed AML sanctions ranging from 20% to 27% of its maximum in large banking cases, while Lst Stockholm also issued lower fees, with higher penalties being reserved for serious infractions.
Earlier this month, Spelinspektionen reaffirmed its strict stances by imposing financial penalties of SEK4 million ($401,010) on Hillside Group's gaming segment and SEK40 million on its sports betting operations.
When approached for comment regarding the report, Spelinspektionen declined to provide a response.
