Casinos Austria: End of a Monopoly?

For almost 60 years, Casinos Austria has sat at the helm of gaming operations in Austria, boasting exclusive rights to its casino industry. As modernization swept across Europe, the alpine nation has been one of just two EU countries alongside Poland to stubbornly cling to its monopoly system.

With key licenses up for renewal in 2027, however, the industry now faces a rare opportunity. As of January, the government was thrashing out a framework for a new system, with all three political parties—the center-right People’s Party, liberal Neos, and center-left Social Democrats—believed to be open to reform of some kind.

Top of the industry’s wish list is a multi-license system, opening the market to international competitors.

Advocates for change argue that reform could deliver tangible benefits: stronger player protection, improved channelization away from unregulated operators and hundreds of millions of euros in additional tax revenue. Yet any shift will have to confront a system deeply embedded in Austria’s political architecture—and an incumbent that, as one legal paper put it, for many years “had nothing to fear” from competitors.

Austria’s Unique Gambling Model

Casinos Austria currently holds licenses for all 12 of the country’s land-based casinos, including six urban venues in state capitals such as Vienna and Bregenz, and six in major tourist regions including Kitzbühel and Zell am See.

Through its subsidiary Austrian Lotteries, the group also holds the sole national lottery license, which is coupled with exclusive rights to offer online casino games and slots via the Win2day brand.

Though the system is often described as a “state monopoly,” the Austrian government doesn’t directly operate any gambling venues or brands. However, it does control a 33 percent stake in Casinos Austria via its state holding company ÖBAG, and it benefits from significant voting rights and influence on its board.

“Austria’s current monopoly model increasingly stands out on the European regulatory map as something of a relic,” explains Arthur Stadler, founder of the Stadler Partner law firm in Vienna. “It is one of the few remaining jurisdictions that maintains a monopoly, particularly in the online gambling sector, where national borders have become functionally irrelevant and competition for consumers is only a click away.”

Many parts of Austria’s current system are indeed relics from another age: Since 1933, for example, the Finance Ministry has held sweeping powers to license, regulate, oversee and tax “games of chance” (covering gaming and lottery products, but not sports betting, which is characterized as a “game of skill” and is currently regulated at the state level).

This dual financial and regulatory role has long raised eyebrows among legal experts, with critics claiming the system fuels conflicts of interest.

Casinos Austria itself originated as a postwar government initiative. Founded in 1968 as Österreichische Spielbanken AG, the company consolidated all existing casino licenses and has remained the sole operator ever since.

Today, Casino Austria International—the umbrella group collating Casinos Austria and Austrian lotteries—runs vast operations spanning Europe and beyond, with around 3,223 staff members active both domestically and worldwide. According to ÖBAG’s latest report, Casinos Austria’s consolidated gross gaming revenue reached almost $1.87 billion in 2024, with net income of $225 million.

‘Conflicts of Interest’

The tight-knit relationship between Casinos Austria and the Finance Ministry has not escaped criticism. In their paper on the topic, legal analysts Andreas Schloenhardt and Johannes Kramml mused that the system “appears to be set up for conflicts of interest to arise.”

Until recently, the ministry was not only responsible for licensing, regulating and taxing the industry, but also held stakes directly in Casinos Austria through ÖBAG. Control over the holding company was moved to the Ministry of Economics last year.

The Social Democratic Party (SPÖ), which heads up the current Ministry of Finance, still maintains strong links to the monopolist. Casinos Austria’s supervisory board is dominated by Social Democrats, as well as union representatives with strong links to the party.

Perhaps most controversially, the last license tender in 2012 was widely seen as weighted in favor of Casinos Austria. Critically, the ministry bundled the primary casino concessions into two packages of six—the regional Landpaket and urban Stadtpaket—effectively icing out smaller competitors.

Casino Austria emerged as the only bidder for the six regional casinos. Two bidders, Novomatic and Casinos Austria, competed for the more lucrative urban casinos, but the latter’s existing infrastructure ultimately proved decisive. Three further licenses that were initially granted to other companies were rapidly revoked over transparency issues.

Within the industry, the SPÖ is still perceived to be fighting in Casinos Austria’s corner. In December 2025, a leaked draft of proposed “reforms” from the Finance Ministry appeared to support the status quo. In it, the ministry set out plans for a continuation of the monopoly, coupled with an aggressive crackdown on “illegal” online operators. Proposed measures included payment blocking, domain blocking, undercover “test plays” by regulators and tighter restrictions on advertising by foreign casinos.

Following widespread criticism, however, the ministry quickly rolled back its plans, claiming that the leaked draft would be changed. With a return to the drawing board, negotiations among the three parties were under way in January to find a final compromise.

Legal Tensions

Speaking to Global Gaming Business, a spokesperson for Casinos Austria describes the monopoly as a “sound” regulatory system. “In terms of player protection, the current situation offers optimum quality,” he adds. “There is therefore no legal or regulatory need for major changes.”

To proponents of the monopoly, the system offers better oversight and a reduction in overall harm to the public, an argument previously upheld in Austrian and EU courts. However, as legal analyst Arthur Stadler points out, Austria’s protectionist system is still “among those most frequently litigated before the CJEU” (Court of Justice of the European Union).

While EU law permits gambling monopolies in principle, the European Court of Justice has made clear they must genuinely serve the public interest, particularly through effective channelization and harm reduction. A recent Regulus Partners study suggested Austria is falling short: Unlicensed operators account for around 71 percent of the online market, generating up to $719 million in annual revenues. This share is expected to grow in coming years.

“The current monopoly is leading to an ever-growing black market where players enjoy no protection whatsoever,” says Monika Racek, CEO of Austrian operator Admiral. “There are no player bans, no limits and no control. The state turns a blind eye and loses not only tax revenue but, above all, control over player protection.”

Pointing to the wave of market openings across Europe, Racek calls for Austria’s “backward” system to be replaced by a multiple-license system. “The solution is obvious,” she adds. “A sustainable and competitive framework means opening up the market to several licensed providers under clear and strict conditions.”

An Opportune Moment

Against this backdrop, the political stars seem to be aligning in favor of modernization. With the online lotteries and casino license and the Stadtpaket of urban casino licenses due to expire in September 2027, the government has a unique opportunity to pivot toward a more liberal market.

Though gambling remains a thorny topic in Austrian politics, the country’s dire economic state—including spiraling post-pandemic debts and high inflation—has created a strong imperative. Indeed, the coalition has already signaled its intent to use the industry as a cash cow: Immediately after entering office, the government hiked the online gambling tax from 40 percent to 45 percent and the sports betting levy from 2 percent to 5 percent.

Though the new tax rates are far from ideal for the industry, the Austrian Gaming and Betting Association (OVWG) believes the financial situation has given operators extra leverage. According to the association’s research, opening the market could raise an extra $234 million per year for the government during their term.

“Our strongest argument was—and still is—the additional tax income for the federal state with an open licensing system and a better channelization rate,” OVWG President Simon Priglinger-Simader explains. “Without a licensing system, it is simply not possible to reach the additional €200 million per year that the government itself has referred to.”

The association president says all three parties have been “positive” about potential liberalization in recent discussions. However, with the Neos firmly in favor and the SPÖ believed to be more aligned with the monopolist, the position of the center-right People’s Party will be a crucial deciding factor.

Online Crackdown

When contacted by Global Gaming Business, the Austrian Finance Ministry was tight-lipped about potential plans to end the monopoly model. However, a spokesperson confirmed that the ministry was working on a draft law that would form the basis for the new tender in the coming months.

The draft sets out “uniform player protection standards” across online and land-based operators, “age-dependent loss-limits” and the creation of an independent gambling authority, the spokesperson said. It also details plans to crack down on unlicensed operators through payment blocking, domain blocking and large financial penalties.

Though international operators say they would welcome improved player protections, the key question is whether a crackdown on unlicensed operators would be part of—or instead of—a future multiple-license model. Depending on party negotiations, the outcomes could range from a clear “worst-case” to a “best-case” scenario.

A worst-case scenario for the industry would look much like the one initially sketched out in the Finance Ministry’s leaked December draft: a continued monopoly paired with much tougher enforcement measures against black- and gray-market operators.

However, as Priglinger-Simader points out, a move like this could decimate the very tax revenues the government is so desperate to increase. “Payment blocking should only come after licensing,” he says. “Otherwise, you don’t get what you need from a budget perspective.”

In the best-case scenario for the industry—an unrestricted market opening—the OVWG expects the makeup of the market to look similar to Germany’s, with around 30 licensees. These would be regulated by an independent gambling authority, which the government is aiming to set up by 2029.

A Potential Middle Ground

Though the industry has pinned its hopes on a full liberalization of the market, the reform options on the table are likely to be more nuanced.

Moving away from the desired Denmark- or Finland-style “uncapped-license” model, industry analysts believe politicians may try to take a compromise position by limiting the number of concessions available. However, this would risk setting them up for a barrage of legal challenges.

“A limited number of licenses would not be an ideal scenario—we saw in Germany what happens when you do that,” says Priglinger-Simader, pointing to the issues that plagued Germany regulators after they attempted to cap sports betting licenses in 2012.

A more likely middle ground would be to tie online licenses to existing land-based casino licenses in Austria, which would initially see the number of licenses restricted to six. This would address a key argument made by Casinos Austria in defense of the monopoly: that a thriving online sector would force them to close struggling regional casinos.

In a strategic counterattack, major European-facing brands have reportedly signaled their willingness to take these licenses out of the hands of the monopolist, running them as omnichannel ventures. Though discussions are ongoing, the Finance Ministry is said to be wary that the move could turn resorts into “alibi casinos” that aren’t run beneficially for regions.

If this option were to come to fruition, Casinos Austria would likely be among the companies competing for the tenders. “We have always made it clear that we will apply for all licenses that are put out to tender,” the company told GGB. Malta licensees currently active in the region—and key local players like Tipico-owned Admiral—could also enter the fray.

Next Steps

With the expiration date for the key online license and multiple land-based licenses just a year and a half away, the government is racing against the clock to decide on a path forward.

In order to meet key deadlines for notifying the EU and passing legislation, a draft of the new plans will likely need to be finalized by the end of March. This could then come into effect in late summer or early fall, marking the start of the new tender process—for either a single or multiple casino licenses.

Given the tight timeline, it’s possible the government may make use of a clause that allows it to extend the existing licenses by a single year. This would be an unpopular decision, but it would provide additional time to set up the independent gambling authority.

Despite the uncertainties, global operators have high hopes that change is afoot. “We believe it is in the best interests of all parties—most importantly for customers and the general public—that Austria adopts an open licensing system,” international operator Entain told GGB in a statement. Meanwhile, the European Gaming and Betting Association has a clear message for the government: “The time to act is now.”

As the industry lobbies hard for a market opening, Casinos Austria will be fighting just as hard for its own interests. But with the window of opportunity opening after 15 long years, the government could decide to take a bold step that would shape the face of Austria’s gaming industry for decades.