Spelinspektionen, Sweden's gambling regulatory authority, has taken a notably stringent approach to oversight, especially in anti-money laundering (AML) supervision, as highlighted in a recent report. This finding comes courtesy of a study funded by the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) and conducted by Nordic Legal, a law firm.
The report points out substantial contrasts between Spelinspektionen's methods and those of other Swedish regulatory bodies that share similar mandates.
In an interview with iGB, BOS Secretary General Gustaf Hoffstedt explained the rationale for commissioning the report, stating that Spelinspektionen operates outside the norms and practices typically observed by Swedish public authorities.
Hoffstedt commented, "In our view, the SGA is more heavy-handed and less focused on dialogue or collaborative problem-solving compared to other Swedish authorities." He added that Nordic Legal conducted this inquiry independently, despite BOS being the client, and he voiced a belief that the Swedish Gambling Authority would enhance the licensed gambling market by adopting regulatory methods akin to those of other government agencies.
The comparative analysis provided by Nordic Legal explored areas where supervision across different authorities could be meaningfully assessed. It looked at AML oversight, the extent of sanction fees, and evaluations of the suitability of owners and senior managers.
Spelinspektionen's practices were juxtaposed with those of the Financial Supervisory Authority (FI), the Stockholm County Administrative Board (Lst Stockholm), and the Swedish Schools Inspectorate.
Both FI and Lst Stockholm reportedly utilize a system-level, risk-based methodology for AML supervision. They assess an entity’s comprehensive risk frameworks, protocols, and controls, employing samples from customer files to confirm the effectiveness of those systems in real scenarios.
In contrast, Spelinspektionen's AML supervision skewed towards a sample-based, customer-case approach. Nordic Legal assessed twelve AML-related decisions made since 2021 and found that eleven predominantly relied on reviewing small sample sizes of between five and fifteen customer files, frequently omitting an operator’s overall risk assessment and policies from their evaluations.
When it comes to financial penalties, Spelinspektionen often imposes fees near the legal maximum allowed. The report reviewed nine AML decisions from 2022 to 2025, revealing that seven sanctioned amounts were at or above 50% of the maximum, with two penalties nearing an astonishing 91% and 100% of the maximum allowable.
In comparison, FI's AML sanctions for large banking matters ranged between 20% and 27% of its maximum penalty framework, while Lst Stockholm typically issued lower fees, although higher penalties were recorded for severe violations.
Earlier this month, Spelinspektionen reaffirmed its strict stance by imposing a SEK4 million ($401,010) penalty on Hillside Group's gaming division and SEK40 million on its sports betting sector. The gambling authority did not provide a response when contacted about the report.
