Malta’s main opposition party has pledged to block any EU-level tax on online gambling if it takes power after the country’s upcoming general election, as the European Parliament debates a Socialist-led proposal to introduce a levy on large online gaming operators.
What S&D Is Proposing
The proposal comes from Victor Negrescu, Vice-President of the European Parliament and a member of Romania’s Socialists and Democrats group. Negrescu put the measure forward as part of discussions on the EU’s future Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2028–2034 — a budget cycle estimated at €2 trillion. The S&D group frames it as a new “own resource” for the EU budget, with proceeds earmarked for education, youth, and addiction prevention.
As outlined by S&D, the levy would apply at approximately 1% on the revenues or turnover of large online gambling and betting operators active across EU member states. The group estimates it could generate between €2 billion and €4 billion annually, or between €14 billion and €28 billion across the seven-year budget cycle. S&D frames the measure as complementary to existing national tax regimes, not a replacement for them.
Casa’s Response at the Plenary
David Casa, head of the PN delegation in the European Parliament, addressed the plenary during Wednesday’s debate and rejected the proposal in direct terms. He described it as legally unsound and economically damaging, arguing it would place EU-licensed operators at a competitive disadvantage against operators based outside the bloc.
“As things stand, this approach would prejudice compliant EU-based companies that already operate under robust regulatory standards and consumer protection frameworks. Rather than strengthening the European market, it risks exporting business outside the Union and pushing consumers to illegal operators who operate with impunity, pay no taxes and don’t even apply the most basic consumer safeguards.” — David Casa, MEP
Casa set Malta’s position in economic terms. The gaming sector accounts for more than 10% of Malta’s GDP, he told MEPs, supporting thousands of skilled jobs. No other member state, he argued, faces comparable economic exposure. He acknowledged that as the proposal originates from a Socialist group, he cannot speak for Malta’s current Labour government — but made clear where a future Nationalist administration would stand.
“A future Nationalist government would move quickly to veto it without hesitation.” — David Casa, MEP
Casa urged the proposal’s supporters to redirect their efforts toward alternative own resources that do not undermine compliant industries or European employment.
The Unanimity Constraint
Casa’s intervention carries institutional weight beyond its political signalling. Any new EU own resource requires unanimity among all 27 member states at Council level — the European Parliament holds no autonomous taxation powers. That constraint means Malta’s position, if formally adopted by a government rather than an opposition party, functions as a practical veto.
S&D acknowledges the unanimity requirement, framing the levy as fully respecting member state competences on gambling regulation. But operators and industry bodies have raised the same competitive displacement concern Casa articulated: a levy applied only to EU-licensed operators would incentivise relocation to third-country jurisdictions and funnel consumers toward unregulated grey markets. The argument is not new. Germany’s betting industry made an identical case in 2025 as domestic tax pressure mounted, and UK operators have pressed the same point following confirmation that online casino duty will rise to 40% and sports betting to 25%.
Malta is not the only jurisdiction with a direct stake. The MGA-licensed ecosystem is concentrated in Malta, but operators across several smaller EU member states with significant gaming sectors face analogous exposure.
Timing and Political Context
Casa’s remarks come ahead of a Maltese general election, which adds a domestic dimension to an otherwise European policy debate. The PN has consistently positioned itself as a defender of the gaming sector’s interests — a predictable stance given the sector’s weight in the national economy.
The S&D proposal, tabled in the context of the European Parliament’s April 2026 Interim Report on the next MFF, has majority support within Parliament. The path at Council is considerably steeper. Building consensus among 27 member states on a new fiscal instrument targeting a sector regulated exclusively at national level is a different undertaking. Cross-border regulatory coordination among European gambling authorities remains a work in progress, and fiscal harmonisation goes further still.
Whether the proposal advances to a formal legislative stage before the 2028 MFF cycle begins is the central open question for operators with EU licensing exposure.
Source: The Malta Independent
