The Swedish Gambling Authority, known as Spelinspektionen, is increasingly adopting a strict stance in its regulatory oversight, especially regarding anti-money laundering (AML) processes. This was highlighted in a report commissioned by the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) and prepared by Nordic Legal, a law firm.
The report indicates notable differences in the way Spelinspektionen supervises compared to other Swedish regulatory bodies that have similar responsibilities.
Gustaf Hoffstedt, the secretary general of BOS, commented on the rationale behind commissioning the report. He emphasized that Spelinspektionen strays from the typical standards and procedures observed among Swedish public authorities. "In our view, the SGA is more heavy-handed and less focused on dialogue or collaborative problem-solving compared to other Swedish authorities," said Hoffstedt.
He believes that the Swedish gambling market would see improvements if the Gambling Authority adopted practices similar to those of other governmental entities.
The analysis conducted by Nordic Legal specifically examined three areas for comparison: AML oversight, the imposition of sanction fees, and the evaluations of ownership and senior management suitability. The findings compared Spelinspektionen against the Financial Supervisory Authority (FI), the Stockholm County Administrative Board (Lst Stockholm), and the Swedish Schools Inspectorate.
Both FI and Lst Stockholm employ a comprehensive, risk-based approach to AML supervision, reviewing an entity's full risk assessments, procedures, and controls. They utilize samples from customer files to verify the effectiveness of these systems. In stark contrast, Spelinspektionen's AML reviews often relied on limited samples of five to 15 customer cases. Notably, the authority frequently ignored the broader risk assessment and policies of the operators involved.
The report also assessed the sanction fees imposed by each authority relative to their legal maxima to reflect differences in fee structures and organizational sizes. For instance, Spelinspektionen has consistently levied penalties near the upper legal limits. Of the nine AML decisions reviewed for the period between 2022 and 2025, seven involved sanctions at or exceeding 50% of the maximum possible, with two approaching 91% and 100% of the maximum fines.
In contrast, the AML sanctions enforced by FI in significant banking cases typically ranged from 20% to 27% of their maximum possible fines, and Lst Stockholm's penalties tended to be a smaller fraction, though they have imposed higher fines for serious violations on occasion.
Earlier in the month, Spelinspektionen reiterated its enforcement approach by imposing financial penalties of SEK4 million ($401,010) on the gaming division and SEK40 million on the sports betting segment of the Hillside Group.
When asked for a comment regarding the report, Spelinspektionen declined.
