The evolution of international gaming regulation since the 1990s

Online gaming regulation has followed the technology it's trying to regulate. In the 1990s, the main issue was whether an operator could even lawfully take bets online, but today the regulatory and commercial world is looking at a completely different and much more complex picture. Where are the customers? How do the payments work? Who owns and controls the business? How are the players' funds protected? And can the operator prove it has effective control?

That shift is obviously going to be very important to any founder thinking about where they're going to operate. Licensing is just one component of the operating model and its value is going to be determined by the markets you're targeting, the products you're offering and whether your corporate, payment and compliance arrangements are going to be able to cope with the level of scrutiny.

From early experiments to formal frameworks
The initial wave of online operators were operating in a market that had very few rules at all specifically relating to online gambling. A number of jurisdictions did get around to establishing a regulatory regime quite early on: Kahnawàke introduced its Interactive Gaming Regulations in July 1999, the Isle of Man introduced its Online Gambling Regulation Act in 2001, while Malta was the first to start building a remote gaming regime in the early 2000s and became the first EU member state to introduce detailed online gambling regulations in 2004.

These early regimes did at least go some way toward establishing the principle that a defined jurisdiction could license and regulate an online operator. Each of them came up with its own model. Malta and the Isle of Man became established as regulatory jurisdictions with international recognition, so-called ‘tier 1’ or ‘gold standard’ jurisdictions. Kahnawake developed a model based on its own legal and governmental framework, while Curacao on the other hand, was known for having a very straightforward route to licensing, and that proved to be a major attraction at a time when the industry was expanding so rapidly.

Costa Rica took a different approach compared to Curacao.

Costa Rica took a different approach. It's a country well known for having online gaming businesses but has never had a specific online gaming licensing regime in the way that Malta or the Isle of Man have. Its legal and regulatory regime is therefore not to be confused with a gaming license, and while you can operate iGaming platforms from the country, operators have to look at the local rules in Costa Rica and the rules of each market they're targeting.

Expansion brought scrutiny
As internet access has improved and smartphones have made gaming available 24/7, the industry has grown enormously beyond its original niche. One market estimate puts global online gambling revenue at $115 billion in 2026, with further growth anticipated. The exact figure will depend on how you define the market, but the general trend is very much in evidence: more customers, more products and more cross-border activity.

Regulation expanded on the back of this and there was a much greater focus on player protection, AML controls, responsible gambling tools, technical testing and the suitability of the owners and key personnel. More markets introduced their own licensing regimes and banks, payment providers and software suppliers all became much more cautious about who they would be doing business with.

Curacao’s transition
Curacao is a good example of how a jurisdiction's regulatory model can evolve. For a long time it operated on a model of master licenses and sub-licenses which supported a very large number of international operators. There was pressure over the years to tighten the regulatory regime and to be clearer about who was responsible. The new National Ordinance on Games of Chance (LOK) came into force on 24 December 2024. The Curacao Gaming Control Board describes the framework as one that will provide for direct online gaming licenses and supplier licenses, with applicants required to have a legal entity in Curacao.

It is a move towards a more direct relationship between the regulator and the license holders, but it has not been hugely popular. A number of operators have left the jurisdiction because the new rules and increased costs have not brought additional benefits or value for money. This has created a gap in the market, both for lower cost jurisdictions that abide by international standards and are a step up from the ‘old guard’ off offshore iGaming locations, and premium jurisdiction with a slightly more accessible entry point.

New entrants and different models
The map is still evolving. The Anjouan Computer Gaming Licensing Act goes back to 2005, but recently underwent a large reform, bolstering standards and bringing it in line with international best practices. It facilitates work with both business-to-consumer and business-to-business licenses. It’s price point is at the lower end of the scale and set up times are quick, making it a great option for operators looking to enter the market fast and on a budget.

Nevis is a bit more recent. Their Online Gaming Ordinance was passed in 2025, which established a dedicated authority and a framework for the issuance of online gaming licenses. It is a top-tier license that is much more accessible than many of its peers, creating a great option for ambitious entrepreneurs that value security and high standards. That legislation is indicative of a wider trend in that jurisdictions are looking to attract gaming businesses, whilst at the same time wanting to make it clear that licensing is not a free-for-all and that there are indeed obligations and a level of supervision.

These developments do not make jurisdictions interchangeable. A newer regime may offer a different cost structure or application process, while a more established one may carry greater recognition among certain counterparties. These are commercial considerations, but operators must weigh them against their target markets, product mix, funding needs and compliance capacity.

New products test old rules
The product offering in the industry has broadened considerably. You now have sportsbooks and casino platforms alongside esports betting, fantasy products, live gaming and crypto-enabled services. Each of those, in turn, raises issues which a simple 'online gaming' label would effectively hide. Esports betting, for instance, will have issues around event integrity, age controls and the rules of the games themselves. A skill-based or fantasy product may be very different in nature from a traditional casino game and be subject to different rules.

Crypto gaming adds another layer of complexity because accepting digital assets has implications for KYC, transaction monitoring, custody, source of funds checks and the ability to serve customers in certain restricted markets.

The figures in the regulated markets do a good job of illustrating the evolution of the product mix. In its 2025 activity report, the European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA) reported that esports accounted for 1% of the online gambling gross gaming revenue of its covered operators, up 16% year on year. That's a small slice of the pie, but the growth is indicative of why regulators are so keen to monitor products that were once on the fringes of the industry.

Regulation as part of the business plan
The history of international gaming regulation is not a simple journey from unregulated to regulated. Different jurisdictions have developed very different systems, and those systems are still evolving. The operator's real job is to work out what each one allows, what it demands and whether it's appropriate to the business you're building.

That assessment should be done prior to incorporation. The founders need to work out their target customer markets, their products, their ownership structure, their payment flows and their growth plans. They then need to assess how well the proposed jurisdiction fits with the banking, payment processing, software suppliers and local licensing requirements. In a market where you need your own authorization, you may find an offshore licensee is not sufficient.

In an industry shaped by rising demand and closer scrutiny, the license, company and operating model need to align. If the process of deciding which is the best jurisdiction for you seems daunting or you want help in getting the ball rolling, Fast Offshore are here to help. Our team of international advisory specialists are on hand to guide you through the entire process, from research and evaluating the options, right through to getting your license in hand. Contact us today.