UKGC Warns Operators Over Weak AML Measures, Financial Thresholds Mainly
The recent review of AML compliance published by the UKGC examined how British licensees handle the AML and CTF responsibilities. Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures are a must for all UK online casinos, bookmakers and poker sites. Some of the operators fall short of the proper level. Among the key concerns stressed was the too heavy emphasis placed on financial limits. Also, the regulator pointed out additional actions for player protection to be implemented.
What’s The Problem With Transaction Limits?
A number of the UK-licensed gambling operators initiate KYC and other checks only after the user reaches a specific deposit or withdrawal limit. The UKGC was deeply concerned with the disregard of other risk factors, not directly related to finance. Some casino users show suspicious behaviour before engaging in any financial activities. But due to the wrong implementation of AML policies, operators fail to notice it.
Another mistake of the licensees was setting the financial limits too high. It allowed the risky categories of gamblers to be active on the site until the threshold was reached. The key point of this statement was to strike the necessity of balance between different risk factors and count them equally. When one overweights, it leads to the failure of the whole system. In this case, it refers to “over-reliance on financial threshold controls.”
Other Weak Spots Highlighted
The latest casework published by the Gambling Commission also indicated a set of other weaknesses. These are the following:
- Insufficient risk profiling. Casinos didn’t follow the official guidelines. The customers' risk profiles were compiled insufficiently. Operators must properly assess the risk factors of each customer and initiate the due diligence procedure level according to them.
- Gaps in document verification. UKGC identified that operators verified bank statements with obvious risk factors, including a mismatch between income and outgoing payments, fake documents, etc.
- Poor staff training. The outcomes above arise from the insufficient qualifications of staff. Advanced training on current issues is necessary.
Of course, it was not without AI. The Commission agrees that such instruments are useful for AML control, but they must be implemented effectively to comply with the licence requirements. Some iGaming operators should probe deeper into the work of their algorithms and consider proper adjustments.
Previous Fines Imposed by the Gambling Commission
The names of the operators weren’t disclosed after the last check. But we know from earlier cases that failings in AML and CFL implementation are subject to being fined. Here’s a series of noticeable penalties levied by the UKGC earlier in 2025:
- Spreadex Limited was fined £2,022,000.
- Corbett Bookmakers Limited was charged a £686,070 penalty.
- Progress Play Limited has a £1m fine.
- AG Communications Limited has to pay £1.4m.
All these fines and fees were imposed for improper risk assessment and over-reliance on financial thresholds we discussed.
Foreign Experience In Financial Thresholds, AML, and Due Diligence
It would be good to study how regulatory requirements are implemented across other jurisdictions. Let’s take the EU, the USA, and Australia as an example.
- Financial thresholds. In the EU, the limits are set, but not considered as a sole factor to focus on. It’s the same with Australian operators (the limits differ by state); they prioritise early risk checks. The United States is about to lower the threshold and strengthen CDD in 2026.
- Risk profiling. European casinos must build profiles based on the list of high-risk countries. In Australia, risk profiling is built on the customer behaviour patterns. The United States utilises the risk-based approach considering transaction behaviour, volume and country of residence.
- Customer Due Diligence. Triggers for CDD activation in Europe involve the analysis of non-monetary behavioural factors. It’s the same with Australia, where the mere account registration may be followed by CDD. Old US practices focus on transaction thresholds, but new rules require moving away from them.
After our research on global regulations, we can state that the United Kingdom is great at providing clear regulations. Most operators initiate KYC checks before any financial transactions (deposits) can be made. Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD), like proving the source of wealth, is also normally in place. However, some operators start the procedures only when the set deposit/withdrawal barrier is reached, which is against the licence conditions. But the recent bulletin seems to map out the movement away from this practice.
