Spelinspektionen, the Swedish government agency overseeing gambling, has adopted a more punitive approach to regulatory oversight, especially in terms of anti-money-laundering (AML) supervision, than other Swedish regulatory bodies. This assessment comes from a report commissioned by the Swedish Trade Association for Online Gambling (BOS) and prepared by the law firm Nordic Legal.
The report highlights the notable divergence in supervisory tactics between Spelinspektionen and its counterparts with similar responsibilities, indicating that the gambling regulator is perceived as more stringent.
Gustaf Hoffstedt, the secretary general of BOS, spoke with iGB about the rationale behind commissioning the report. He articulated concerns that Spelinspektionen's practices do not conform to the standards typically expected of 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," he stated. He stressed the potential benefits for Sweden's licensed gambling market should the Swedish Gambling Authority align its practices more closely with those of other government agencies.
The analysis by Nordic Legal examines three key areas suitable for cross-authority comparison: AML oversight, the application and scale of sanction fees, and evaluations of the suitability of owners and senior managers.
The report compares the Gambling Authority with the Financial Supervisory Authority (FI), the Stockholm County Administrative Board (Lst Stockholm), and the Swedish Schools Inspectorate. Both FI and Lst Stockholm implement a system-level, risk-based method for AML supervision. They scrutinize an organization’s comprehensive risk assessments, procedures, and controls, using samples from customer files to assess the effectiveness of these systems in practice.
In stark contrast, Spelinspektionen's AML supervision tends to be sample-based and driven by customer case reviews. A study of 12 AML-related decisions from 2021 revealed that 11 primarily depended on small samples of between five to 15 customer files, often disregarding the overall risk assessment and policies of the operator in the evaluation process.
The report also explored the imposition of sanctions relative to each authority’s statutory maximums to reflect differences in the fee structures and entity sizes. It noted that Spelinspektionen frequently levies fines close to the legal maximum. Out of nine decisions reviewed for AML sanctions between 2022 and 2025, seven imposed penalties at or above 50% of the maximum, with two fines reaching approximately 91% and 100% of the maximum allowable.
Conversely, FI’s AML sanctions in significant banking cases have varied from 20% to 27% of its maximum, while Lst Stockholm generally imposes smaller fines, though higher penalties can be assessed for serious violations.
Earlier this month, Spelinspektionen reiterated its warnings and imposed substantial fines totaling SEK4 million ($401,010) on the gaming segment and SEK40 million on Hillside Group's sports betting operations.
When approached for comment on the report, Spelinspektionen declined to provide a response.
