EGBA corrects gambling harm funding figure by €84.1m

The European Gaming and Betting Association has revised its members’ reported funding for gambling harm research, education and treatment in 2024 from €148.9 million to €64.8 million, a correction of €84.1 million.

The revised total appears in EGBA’s Sustainability Report 2026, released on 13 November. It provides the comparison for €98.2 million reported for 2025, which the association describes as a 52% annual increase.

EGBA told NEXT.io that a review had found contributions in the original 2024 submissions that fell outside the relevant category. The association said it had corrected those figures so that the two years were measured on the same basis.

The change substantially alters the earlier account of growth. It also gives an industry that relies on evidence to defend its social contribution a practical test of how clearly it explains revisions to that evidence.

A different history emerges from the same series

The original figure appeared in EGBA’s fifth annual sustainability report, published on 9 July 2025. That edition presented the €148.9 million contribution as a 143% increase from €61.2 million in 2023. A note attributed the increase to organic growth and an expanded membership.

The current report retains €61.2 million for 2023 and substitutes €64.8 million for 2024. Calculated from those published totals, the increase for 2024 becomes approximately 5.9%.

The reduction is approximately 56.5% of the original 2024 figure. That is the scale of the statistical correction, rather than a measure of spending withdrawn from services.

For 2025, the published increase is €33.4 million against the revised 2024 total. The resulting growth rate is approximately 51.5%, consistent with EGBA’s rounded 52%.

These calculations describe the movement in EGBA’s published series. Understanding changes in the underlying activity also requires attention to the companies covered and the categories counted.

What belongs in gambling harm funding?

The current report’s RET category includes mandatory and voluntary social levies, together with voluntary contributions outside levy systems, such as donations supporting research, education and treatment.

A footnote explains that the 2024 figures were revised following updated data sets. EGBA’s statement to NEXT.io adds the explanation that some contributions were outside the category’s scope.

That makes the definition of the category central to the story. A combined funding total can move because of voluntary spending decisions, legal obligations or the addition of reporting companies. Readers need enough detail to distinguish those effects.

A reconciliation of the original and corrected totals would make the adjustment easier to follow: the categories removed, the amounts involved and any consequences for earlier comparisons. It would also help researchers and publishers update figures they had already used.

Correcting the series is necessary work. A visible account of how the correction was made would give readers a stronger basis for relying on the next edition.

A bigger membership changes the comparison

EGBA’s membership includes major operators such as Flutter Entertainment, Entain and Betsson. Its publications aggregate members’ submissions, with the latest report principally covering their online operations in the EU and UK during 2025.

The association also expanded between the two editions. Tipico joined on 19 January 2026, after the previous sustainability report had been published. EGBA’s reporting methodology says data from new members is included from their first reporting year and asks readers to interpret annual comparisons accordingly.

This matters beyond RET. The latest report says the rise in tax contributions reflects both organic growth and the expansion of the membership.

An aggregate can therefore become larger while the population being measured also changes. Reporting the total remains useful, but a consistent group of companies provides a different comparison. Publishing both would help readers separate the scale of the association from changes within existing members.

Tipico’s arrival demonstrates why the reporting population needs to be clear. It does not identify the source of the RET error, and the association’s published explanation does not attribute that error to an individual operator.

The report’s wider message depends on trust in the detail

EGBA launched the new report ahead of European Safer Gambling Week, which runs from 16 to 22 November. Its announcement emphasised members’ economic contribution, including €4.5 billion in taxes during 2025, and growing use of player protection measures.

Pierre Tournier, the association’s interim secretary general, said members were investing in Europe, supporting public services and communities, and making their safer gambling efforts more personalised. He also argued for regulation that keeps the licensed market attractive and for stronger action against illegal operators.

That gives the data a role in a live policy argument. The figures support EGBA’s case for the value of regulated gambling, so their definitions and limitations deserve attention alongside the headline amounts.

The publication says its data is collected from member submissions and that the report has not undergone an external audit. This describes the assurance attached to the association’s aggregate report; it says nothing by itself about the audit status of individual members’ financial accounts.

There is also a distinction between the resources committed to protection and the results achieved. The release reports 16.5 million customer accounts voluntarily using safety tools. Those are accounts, with a person counted again when they hold accounts at different members. The figure measures uptake; assessing effectiveness requires evidence about what happens to customers afterwards.

Making the next figure easier to verify

In our view, the strongest response would be a reporting process that makes material changes easy to trace. That means stable definitions, clear treatment of new members and a record linking a restated total to the figure it replaces.

External assurance focused on the most consequential indicators could strengthen that process. Tax payments, levies, voluntary donations and commercial spending on sport serve different purposes. Explaining how each is classified would help readers assess the contribution being claimed.

The same discipline matters to newsrooms. A striking percentage should travel with its reporting period, comparison base and coverage. When that base changes, earlier coverage needs a clear route to the corrected number.

EGBA now reports a larger RET contribution for 2025 against a revised comparator. Making the €84.1 million adjustment as clear as the new growth figure would give that claim a more durable foundation. For an industry asking policymakers and the public to trust its approach to player protection, the quality of the reporting is part of the evidence.