The Swedish Gambling Authority (Spelinspektionen) has adopted a notably stricter approach in its regulatory supervision, particularly in anti-money laundering (AML) efforts, as compared to other Swedish regulatory bodies. This finding comes from a report commissioned by the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) and conducted by the law firm Nordic Legal.
The report highlights significant discrepancies in how Spelinspektionen operates compared to other Swedish regulators that have similar responsibilities. According to BOS Secretary General Gustaf Hoffstedt, the authority’s methods differ from established practices typical of Swedish public agencies. "In our view, the SGA is more heavy-handed and less focused on dialogue or collaborative problem-solving compared to other Swedish authorities," Hoffstedt stated in an interview with iGB.
Hoffstedt believes that aligning the Swedish Gambling Authority’s practices more closely with those of other government agencies could benefit the country’s licensed gambling market.
The comparative analysis presented by Nordic Legal evaluated three key areas: AML supervision, the frequency and level of sanction fees, and the assessment of the suitability of owners and senior management. Spelinspektionen’s approach was contrasted with that of the Financial Supervisory Authority (FI), the Stockholm County Administrative Board (Lst Stockholm), and the Swedish Schools Inspectorate.
While both FI and Lst Stockholm utilize a risk-based approach to AML supervision, focusing on entities' comprehensive risk assessments and validating their systems through sample checks, Spelinspektionen has been identified as more reliant on sample-based and case-specific supervision. An examination of 12 AML-related decisions since 2021 revealed that the majority (11 out of 12) were based on reviewing small sample sizes of customer files, typically ranging from five to 15.
Interestingly, Spelinspektionen often omitted consideration of the overall risk assessments and policies of the operators during its reviews.
When it comes to sanctions, the report shows that Spelinspektionen tends to impose higher fees, particularly in AML cases, often approaching the statutory maximum. Out of nine reviewed decisions from 2022 to 2025, seven were at or above 50% of the maximum fee, with two cases reaching as high as 91% and 100%. In comparison, AML sanctions imposed by FI in large banking cases typically ranged from 20% to 27% of the maximum, while Lst Stockholm's penalties were generally less severe except in cases of significant violations.
Earlier this month, Spelinspektionen issued warnings and financial sanctions totaling SEK4 million ($401,010) against the gaming division and SEK40 million against the sports betting segment of Hillside Group. When contacted regarding the report, Spelinspektionen chose not to provide any comment.
