Canada's Battle Against Offshore Gambling: A Complex Endeavor

Canada, a country of vast expanse and a vibrant population, has emerged as a global heavyweight in online gambling. With an estimated Customer Equity Brand (CEB) value of 10.25 billion USD over the past twelve months, Canada ranks as the fourth-largest iGaming market worldwide, trailing only the US, the UK, and Turkey. Yet, behind these impressive figures lies an ongoing and complex challenge: the battle against offshore gambling. While some provinces have made regulatory strides, the majority of the country remains firmly in the hands of unlicensed operators. The situation, as the Blask report shows, is far from easy to resolve, requiring more than just the introduction of a single regulation. The rapid expansion of Canada's digital gaming sector even surpasses the growth rates of other top 5 markets. This underscores the enormous economic potential, which, however, is not fully realized due to the dominance of offshore operators. Recent developments in Alberta, where a licensed iGaming market was introduced on July 13, 2026, highlight the difficulties in reclaiming market share from unregulated providers. Blask emphasizes that this is a lengthy process requiring careful adjustments over several years. Blask's analysis, based on global tracking data from 135 countries, indicates that the sheer size of the market does not guarantee high channelization of players into the regulated market. Outside of Ontario's open-market framework, most Canadian provinces still rely on state-controlled monopoly models. These so-called monopoly models are, according to Blask, unable to satisfy a significant portion of active consumer demand. This leads players to continue using offshore providers. The result is a market fragmentation that complicates access for regulated operators and continues to open doors for unregulated providers.

Numbers and facts

The latest Blask report reveals that Canada's iGaming market reached approximately 9.5 billion USD in CEB in 2025, making it the third-largest globally. This contrasts with the earlier source, which quoted 10.25 billion USD for the last 12 months – there appears to be a slight discrepancy in timelines or calculation methods. What is clear, however, is that the growth rate is the highest among the top five. Blask's analysis for the period from July 2025 to June 2026 shows a clear regional divide. Ontario remains the only province where the regulated sector is genuinely successful. Here, only 19% of the market stays with offshore providers, while regulated brands account for 81% of CEB. This is a remarkable success, as Ontario's model allowed for a smooth transition of grey market operators into the regulated space. According to Denis Skorobogatko, Data Journalist at Blask:

"Provinces transitioning to an open market are set to solve a channelisation problem that monopoly regulation never did." - Denis Skorobogatko, Data Journalist at Blask

Outside of Ontario, however, the reality looks bleak: unregulated brands dominate an impressive 64.5% of the market in the rest of the country. In monopoly provinces such as British Columbia and Quebec, the regulated market share is only 35% and 17.3% respectively. These figures highlight the inefficiency of closed monopoly models. Alberta, the second province to open its market, started from an even more challenging position. Prior to its launch on July 13, offshore operators held a staggering 89.2% of the province's 1.88 billion USD CEB market. The only legal option, PlayAlberta, secured only 10.8% of market demand. Between July 2025 and June 2026, regulated CEB share even dropped by 10.9%, while offshore demand surged by 16.2%. Unlicensed giants like Stake, Rainbet, and Roobet, which already capture a substantial portion of local demand, did not apply for early licenses and remain active in the unregulated space. The top 2 brands by CEB in all of Canada are Stake and Roobet, both unregulated. This poses a massive hurdle for the Canadian government as it attempts to gain control over its gambling market.

Background

Canadian gambling regulation – similar to Germany – is organized at the provincial level. Each province can set its own rules. This federal system leads to a patchwork of regulations and an inconsistent market landscape. While Ontario has established an open, competitive model where private operators can obtain licenses, most other provinces adhere to a state-controlled monopoly. In these monopoly models, there is often only a single, state-run online gambling platform. The idea behind this is to maintain control and use revenues for public services. However, reality shows that these models often cannot compete with the variety and attractiveness of unregulated offshore offerings. The problem of channelization, i.e., the ability to direct players from the unregulated to the regulated market, is not solved but exacerbated by these monopolies. Players often seek a wider selection of games, better bonuses, or simply platforms they already know and trust – and then find these with offshore providers. The Québec government, for example, estimates a tax loss of over 300 million USD due to offshore gambling. Blask critically points out that official government statistics, often based on turnover estimates, underestimate actual consumer demand. Their own method, Customer Equity Brand (CEB), which considers search queries and online visibility, reveals the true dominance of unregulated providers. Without a unified approach and a willingness to learn from successful models like Ontario's, Canada will continue to lose a significant portion of its iGaming revenues to offshore operators.

Why it matters for German Players

The experiences from Canada are highly relevant for German players and the local gambling market. With the GlüStV 2021 (German State Treaty on Gambling 2021), Germany has also attempted to regulate the online gambling market and channel players into licensed offerings. A central role is played by the Joint Gambling Authority of the Federal States (GGL), which is responsible for issuing licenses and supervision. Similar to the Canadian monopoly provinces, the German market was confronted with strict requirements, such as the 1-euro stake limit per spin on slot machines and a monthly deposit limit of 1,000 euros, which is controlled via the central monitoring system LUGAS. These measures are intended to ensure player protection, but also lead many players to continue resorting to non-licensed providers who do not have these restrictions. The incentive to adhere to the strict rules is low when offshore casinos offer far greater freedom without players having to fear consequences. German regulation must ask itself whether it actually achieves effective channelization or whether it – similar to the Canadian monopolies – leads to an outflow of players into the unregulated space. The GGL faces the challenge of curbing the black market while simultaneously ensuring an attractive and safe offering that convinces players to remain within the legal framework. A look at Ontario, where regulation enabled a smooth transition of grey market operators into the regulated sector, could provide valuable insights. The key is to find a balance between player protection and the attractiveness of the offering to sustainably dry up the black market in the long run.

What it means for GGL-licensed casinos

For GGL-licensed casinos, the Canadian findings confirm that market channelization is not a foregone conclusion. German licensees must be aware that strict requirements intended to promote player protection, without offering a competitive product range, can drive players into the arms of the black market. With the 1-euro stake limit and the 1,000-euro deposit limit, German providers are already heavily restricted. This is accompanied by the risk that they will find it difficult to compete with the diverse and often bonus-rich offerings of offshore providers, who continue to operate with MGA or Curacao licenses. The Canadian situation shows that overly restrictive regulation can be counterproductive if the goal is to curb the unregulated market. GGL casinos must therefore try to retain their players with innovative solutions and excellent service, even if product restrictions make this difficult. An adjustment of the regulation that allows licensed providers to act more competitively and, for example, offer more tailored bonuses, could be an important step. Only in this way can it be prevented that a large part of German players – similar to many Canadian provinces – continues to prefer offshore sites. The GGL is challenged to learn from the experiences of other countries and to design the regulated market in such a way that it is both safe and attractive. Otherwise, we risk fighting a similar battle against unregulated providers in Germany as is currently raging in Canada, with the result that players ultimately migrate to the black market.