Finland Approves Gambling Reform Ahead of 2027 Launch
After an extended period of political hesitation and procedural debate, Finland’s long-anticipated gambling reform has finally cleared Parliament. With lawmakers having delivered their verdict, the legislation now awaits formal ratification by the President a step widely viewed as symbolic rather than uncertain. While the conclusion may appear understated, the journey to approval offers valuable insight into the pressures shaping Finland’s future gambling framework.
Originally expected to pass before the summer break, the reform instead dragged into autumn, sparking speculation that final approval could slip well into 2026. That scenario has now been avoided. Although the delay did not disrupt the overarching rollout schedule, it highlighted unresolved tensions that are likely to re-emerge as the system is implemented.
Why the Legislative Process Stalled
The slowdown was not driven by fundamental opposition to reform. Across the political spectrum, there was broad recognition that Finland’s monopoly-based gambling model had become outdated. The disagreements were largely technical, centring on constitutional considerations and the pace of implementation.
These debates reflected a familiar divide. The centre-right government prioritised commercial feasibility and market competitiveness, while left-leaning parties pressed for stronger safeguards against gambling-related harm. Two dissenting views emerged: one proposing a complete overhaul of the draft law, and another advocating for tighter consumer protections. Neither gained sufficient support.
Ultimately, Parliament endorsed the Administrative Committee’s recommendation by a decisive vote of 153 to 21, underscoring broad consensus on the reform’s direction despite earlier friction.
A Phased Transition Strategy
The approved legislation introduces a longer and more structured transition period. The law is set to take effect on January 1, 2026, with licence applications opening in March that year. However, the full shift to a licence-based system will not occur until July 1, 2027 six months later than initially planned. Licensing requirements for B2B suppliers have been postponed even further, until July 2028.
Regulatory oversight will also transition gradually. The National Police Board will retain responsibility for supervision until mid-2027, after which authority will move to a newly formed Licensing and Supervision Authority under the Ministry of Finance. This overlap suggests lawmakers are keen to avoid regulatory disruption during a period of significant market change.
Commercial Appeal Remains Strong
From an industry standpoint, Finland remains one of Europe’s most attractive gambling markets, with historically high per-capita spending. The reform aims to channel approximately 90% of gambling activity into the regulated system a target that would be considered ambitious but achievable by international standards.
The framework seeks to strike a balance between allowing operators to run viable businesses and preventing an escalation in gambling harm. Early reactions from major industry stakeholders have been cautiously positive, including from the incumbent monopoly and sector associations. Smaller operators have voiced concerns, but there is little indication that the model excludes them outright.
Subtle but Meaningful Changes to Marketing Rules
One of the most notable late-stage adjustments concerns digital marketing. Under the final text, licensed operators may advertise via search engines when keywords directly reference their brand or specific products. This effectively reopens access to platforms such as Google Ads, albeit under clearly defined limitations.
Though technical in nature, this change significantly affects how operators can compete for visibility online and signals a more flexible marketing stance than initially expected.
Balancing Exposure and Public Sentiment
Beyond search marketing, the law permits relatively broad brand advertising and sponsorship activity compared to other European jurisdictions. Mandatory deposit limits will apply, but players will set their own thresholds, with no statutory maximums imposed.
These conditions are likely to trigger an initial surge in marketing once the market opens. International experience suggests such phases often attract political and public scrutiny. While public attitudes toward gambling in Finland are currently neutral to tolerant, that balance could shift rapidly if advertising intensity or harm indicators rise.
Enforcement and the Offshore Challenge
A critical test for the reform will be its ability to curb unlicensed offshore operators. Effective channelisation depends not only on rules for licensed companies but also on decisive enforcement against illegal platforms.
Sweden’s experience offers a warning: when regulators focus primarily on licensed operators, offshore sites can quietly expand. Finland’s new supervisory authority will need both robust enforcement tools and political backing to prevent a similar outcome. Failure to act decisively could undermine consumer protection and weaken the reform’s credibility.
No One-Size-Fits-All Market
Despite frequent comparisons with Sweden, Finland presents a distinct market environment. Differences in player behaviour, media consumption, payment habits and cultural attitudes mean that strategies successful elsewhere may not translate directly.
Operators entering Finland will need a localised approach, combining tailored user experiences with compliance-ready technical solutions. The reform opens the market, but it does not guarantee easy success.
From Legislation to Reality
With parliamentary approval secured, Finland’s gambling reform now moves from policy design to practical execution. On paper, it promises a competitive yet controlled market. Whether it delivers on that promise will depend on regulatory enforcement, industry conduct, and sustained public trust.
The law is settled. Its success, however, will only become clear after 2027 when Finland finds out whether it has modernised its gambling system without surrendering control.
