EUROMAT Challenges Croatia’s Gambling Reforms

Could Croatia’s new gambling law spark a major EU showdown? EUROMAT, the continent-wide gambling trade body, warns of legal chaos if Croatia bypasses EU notification rules. You want a stable and fair market, free from sudden reforms that ignore industry realities. Read on to uncover how this conflict might reshape the entire European gambling landscape.

EUROMAT’s Standoff with Croatia: Will Unnotified Gambling Reforms Break EU Law?

3 Key Points

• EUROMAT insists Croatia must notify the EU Commission about sweeping gambling amendments.
• Lithuania’s unnotified gambling law was struck down, raising concerns for Croatia’s similar oversight.
• Critics fear increased taxation, mandatory registration, and new restrictions may burden local operators.

The European Gambling and Amusement Federation (EUROMAT) has voiced a serious objection to Croatia’s recent gambling reforms. On 1 April, the organization lodged its complaint with the European Commission, claiming Croatia failed to notify these changes through the Technical Regulation Information System (TRIS).

Croatia’s new legislative package proposes several far-reaching rules. These include mandatory player registration for casino entry, the establishment of a national self-exclusion list, restrictive advertising measures, and heightened taxes for operators. Additionally, the law would limit gambling venues’ placement, potentially impacting urban entertainment districts.

EUROMAT argues these reforms qualify as “technical regulations” under Directive (EU) 2015/1535. Member States must inform the European Commission of all such regulations before enactment. Failing to comply could force the suspension of the law or even trigger infringement proceedings.

This dispute follows a strikingly similar event in Lithuania. Earlier this month, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) invalidated a Lithuanian inducement measure. That law never underwent a proper TRIS notification, leading to its annulment. EUROMAT sees Croatia’s oversight as equally problematic.

Jason Frost, EUROMAT president, called upon the European Commission to intervene. He pointed out that the Commission compelled Croatia in 2014 to withdraw an unnotified gambling law. This sets a critical precedent. Frost insists that if the Commission is serious about strengthening the Single Market, it must ensure Member States abide by transparency obligations.

He also emphasized that companies need stability to invest in Europe’s gambling sector. Unilaterally introducing heavy-handed reforms disrupts the operating environment. According to Frost, ignoring TRIS obligations invites a “very concerning precedent,” as other EU Member States might follow suit.

The Croatian Gaming Association (Hrvatska Udruga Priređivača Igara na Sreću), represented by Secretary General Filip Jelavic, echoed these concerns. Jelavic finds it “inconceivable” that a European country can enact disruptive legal changes without proper procedure. He called on the Croatian Government to uphold its EU obligations and avoid passing reforms that risk shuttering up to 70% of local gaming venues.

Moreover, critics warn the measure targets problem gambling but may produce unintended results. Excessive red tape, high taxes, and location restrictions could push operators out of business. This could also nurture black-market options, undermining the original intent to protect vulnerable gamblers. EUROMAT insists that lawful, transparent measures stand a better chance of success, especially if local and international stakeholders collaborate during the legislation phase.

Further complicating matters, Croatia did notify the Commission about a separate 2023 law concerning the amusement sector. However, its failure to do so for these recent reforms suggests inconsistency in governmental processes. Observers believe the Commission might pursue legal remedies if Croatia doesn’t comply. In that case, the new gambling law could be suspended or forced to undergo amendments.

EUROMAT’s official statement highlights the significance of TRIS compliance. It notes that any departure from established procedures may jeopardize the principle of equal market access. While the Commission has not responded publicly yet, trade associations throughout Europe are watching closely. The ultimate outcome will likely influence future decisions on gambling law in multiple Member States.

Given the recent CJEU ruling against Lithuania, many experts predict the Commission will adopt a firm stance. If Croatia’s government ignores the notice and proceeds, it risks a lengthy and expensive legal battle. Operators, meanwhile, seek clarity and a predictable legal framework. They argue that sudden shifts, not grounded in EU law, can erode confidence and hamper investment.

EUROMAT’s challenge exposes a major conflict between Croatia’s proposed gambling reforms and the EU’s transparency requirements. Whether the Commission intervenes now or later remains to be seen. However, the broader message rings loud: Member States must notify sweeping gaming regulations or risk the wrath of European law.