Matt Zarb-Cousin, the co-founder and director of external affairs at Gamban, has urged that horse racing be exempt from the UK’s newly introduced affordability checks, arguing that the sport is being unfairly grouped with higher-risk betting activities like online casinos and slots.
Growing Tension Over Affordability Checks
The UK Gambling Commission launched its financial risk checks pilot in August, targeting player activity when monthly deposits hit £500. Starting February 2025, this threshold will tighten further, lowering to £150. These checks involve credit reference agencies and the UK’s largest gambling operators to assess financial risk and curb potential harm.
However, much of the backlash has come from the horse racing industry. Critics, including Zarb-Cousin, argue that the sector is being unfairly penalised despite its lower-risk profile compared to online casino betting. On the Barstewards Enquiry podcast this week, Zarb-Cousin outlined his belief that horse racing must distance itself from higher-risk gambling categories.
“I think horse racing needs to get as far away as possible from online casino, [which] is bringing the industry down,” he said.
His stance reflects a growing sentiment within the racing sector that the sport’s inclusion in affordability checks may be overly restrictive and economically damaging.
A Different Risk Profile for Horse Racing
Zarb-Cousin’s argument centres on risk differentiation. He believes horse racing betting should be treated independently from online casino games, both from a licensing and regulatory perspective.
“If racing was to delineate from the current online casino and slots operations, if it was a separate licence or a separate platform, we wouldn’t be having a situation where racing could be subject to affordability checks,” he said.
This separation, he argued, would align horse racing with its “completely different risk profile.” By treating the sport independently, the sector could potentially avoid the stricter regulatory measures imposed on higher-risk forms of gambling.
For the UK’s horse racing industry, the stakes are significant. The Jockey Club, a key trade body, estimates that affordability checks could cost the industry over £250 million in lost revenue over the next five years. Such projections have intensified the push for more nuanced regulations.
Gambling Commission’s Approach Under Scrutiny
The implementation of affordability checks has been one of the most divisive aspects of the ongoing Gambling Act review. Zarb-Cousin was particularly critical of the Gambling Commission, accusing it of failing to provide operators with clear guidelines.
“The Gambling Commission describes itself as an outcome-based regulator. It wants operators to prevent or reduce harm, but it’s not explaining how it expects operators to conduct these checks,” Zarb-Cousin explained.
This ambiguity has led to inconsistent practices across the industry, with operators implementing checks differently.
- One operator may ask for extensive financial information.
- Another may use a different loss threshold altogether.
Zarb-Cousin highlighted how this inconsistency creates unnecessary friction for bettors and inefficiency for operators. “It’s cumbersome. There isn’t a very streamlined technological solution, so what we’ve seen is I think the worst of all worlds,” he said.
Calls for Clearer Rules and Streamlined Solutions
Zarb-Cousin emphasised that the problem lies not in the concept of affordability checks but in their execution. He criticised the intrusive nature of current checks, which can feel excessive and invasive to bettors.
“I don’t like the way the industry conducts them, and this is why we’ve campaigned for a much more prescriptive set of rules that would govern how operators have to carry these out and the circumstances and situations in which they are expected to do so,” he explained.
The lack of streamlined, clear-cut rules, according to Zarb-Cousin, has exacerbated frustrations among bettors and further strained the relationship between operators and regulators.
“We’ve seen very, very intrusive checks that have not been effective,” he concluded, pointing to the Gambling Commission’s regulatory shortcomings as the root cause.
Economic Concerns for Horse Racing
The affordability checks have placed the UK horse racing sector in a precarious position. With a projected revenue loss of £250 million, fears are growing that stricter financial checks will discourage bettors and weaken the sport’s financial backbone.
Zarb-Cousin’s calls for a re-evaluation of horse racing’s regulatory treatment aim to safeguard the industry’s future. By establishing clearer distinctions between horse racing and higher-risk gambling forms, he argues, the sport could avoid being unfairly penalised while maintaining responsible betting standards.
For now, the debate over affordability checks—and their broader impact—shows no signs of slowing down.
