Jennings Bet MD warns of mass shop closures over UK tax hike plans

The debate over gambling taxation in the United Kingdom has reached a new critical point. Greg Knight, the managing director of independent bookmaker Jennings Bet, has issued a stark warning to the public. He makes it clear that his company's existence in its current form is at stake if plans to double the tax on gaming machines (Machine Gaming Duty, MGD) are implemented. The proposal suggests raising the tax rate from the current 20% to a massive 40%.

For Jennings Bet, a company with 212 shops primarily located in London and the South East of England, this would have devastating consequences. Knight calculates that applying the new tax rate to the figures from the last twelve months would render exactly 104 locations unprofitable. This would not only change the face of British high streets but also lead to between 400 and 450 redundancies. This represents an existential threat to one of the country's largest independent operators, which employs nearly 900 people in total.

Numbers and facts

The figures presented by Knight paint a grim picture for the retail sector. Beyond the looming 104 closures at Jennings Bet, the managing director warns that this trend could engulf the entire industry. If this ratio is applied to the whole sector, one-third of all betting shops nationwide would disappear. Paradoxically, this could result in a decrease in total tax revenue, as remaining shops cannot fill the gap left by closed businesses. Greg Knight summarized the situation to journalists:

"You can’t tax a closed shop. The problem is that the shops that remain profitable, they have to bear the cost of the closures." - Greg Knight, Managing Director at Jennings Bet

Interestingly, data from HMRC for July showed that revenue from machine gaming duty was already slightly down, falling from £108 million in the previous year to £105 million. In contrast, revenue from Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) rose by 108% year-on-year following an increase in April 2026. Knight argues, however, that online companies can absorb such burdens through marketing cuts or algorithm adjustments more easily than land-based businesses, which face fixed rents, business rates, and staff costs.

Background

The political dynamic behind these proposals is largely driven by organizations like the Social Market Foundation (SMF). They project that doubling the tax on Category B gaming machines would generate additional annual tax revenue between £275 million and £458 million. However, Knight warns that these calculations ignore the reality of retail business. In the last five years alone, the number of independent betting shops in the UK has dropped from 696 to 536, a 23% decrease. The number of businesses operating such chains has nearly halved from 145 to just 82.

Another point of contention is the unequal treatment within the industry. While independent bookmakers may soon be required to pay 0.4% of their Gross Gaming Yield (GGY) as a mandatory levy for research, prevention, and treatment, Adult Gaming Centres (AGC) are only charged 0.1%. The state-owned National Lottery pays even less, approximately 0.01%. This discrepancy is seen as unjust by operators like Jennings Bet, as they face the same economic pressures as their competitors on the high street.

Why it matters for German players

For German players, the development in the UK serves as an important warning. In Germany, the 2021 State Treaty on Gambling (GlüStV 2021) and oversight by the Joint Gambling Authority of the States (GGL) set a strict framework. While tax hikes are debated in England, German providers already struggle with tough limits, such as the 1 Euro per spin stake limit on virtual slots or the monthly deposit limit of 1,000 Euros via the LUGAS system.

High taxes and strict limits often make legal offers less attractive, driving players to the unregulated black market. German customers should therefore consistently play only with providers listed on the official GGL whitelist. Only there is it guaranteed that player protection measures are effective and winnings are securely paid out. The British crisis shows that excessive financial burdens on licensed operators can ultimately jeopardize the entire regulated system.

What it means for GGL-licensed casinos

GGL-licensed casinos must maintain economic balance. If the tax burden becomes too high, the room for bonus offers and fair payout ratios shrinks. In Germany, the taxation of stakes is already a hurdle that forces many providers to calculate their margins very tightly. The situation at Jennings Bet illustrates that retail offers and online platforms have different cost structures. While GGL-licensed online casinos have lower fixed costs for real estate, they must invest enormous sums in compliance and IT to meet LUGAS and OASIS requirements. A stable regulatory environment without sudden tax doublings is therefore essential for a functioning legal market in Germany.