UK Gambling Commission Releases Open Banking Analysis on Unlicensed Gambling Activity

The UK Gambling Commission has published fresh analysis drawn from open banking payment records that tracks repeated transactions to unlicensed operators. This dataset covers the period from July 2018 through July 2026 and relies on anonymized information supplied by consenting panel members. Researchers examined how individuals who send money to illegal sites behave across the broader gambling market and found that 91 percent of those making repeated payments to unlicensed operators also placed wagers on licensed UK platforms during the same window.

Study Methodology and Scope

Data collection focused on transaction patterns rather than self-reported behavior, which allowed the Commission to identify consistent payment flows to both licensed and unlicensed destinations. The sample included only those panel members who had authorized access to their banking information, and all records were stripped of personal identifiers before analysis began. Observers note that the approach provides a clearer picture of actual spending habits than surveys alone, because it captures every verified transfer without relying on memory or voluntary disclosure.

Key Overlap Between Licensed and Unlicensed Activity

One central observation shows that illegal gambling rarely operates in isolation from the regulated market. Among the group sending repeated payments to unlicensed sites, the vast majority maintained active accounts with licensed operators at the same time. This pattern suggests that illegal platforms often function as an addition to existing gambling routines rather than a complete substitute. Figures reveal that participants continued to use licensed sites for the majority of their activity even while occasionally directing funds toward unregulated operators.

Problem Gambling Indicators in the Data

The analysis also measured problem gambling severity using the Problem Gambling Severity Index. Among individuals who made repeated payments to unlicensed operators, 45 percent scored eight or higher on the PGSI scale. In contrast, the corresponding figure for the broader population of licensed gamblers stood at 6 percent. These numbers come directly from the transaction-linked responses collected during the study period. Researchers cross-referenced payment records with PGSI scores to establish the difference between the two groups without introducing external assumptions.

Timing and Regulatory Context

The Commission published the findings in November 2026, placing them within ongoing discussions about tax policy and enforcement priorities. The report titled "Illegal gambling - Findings from an open banking data analysis" supplies the primary source material for these statistics and remains available on the regulator's site. Because the data spans multiple years, it captures shifts that occurred both before and after recent licensing changes, allowing direct comparison of behavior across different regulatory environments.

Implications for Market Monitoring

Those tracking payment flows note that the 91 percent overlap figure points to a supplementary rather than replacement role for unlicensed sites. This detail matters for enforcement teams because it indicates that many individuals already hold accounts with regulated operators when they begin sending money elsewhere. The same dataset shows elevated PGSI scores concentrated among the subgroup using illegal platforms, which supplies a measurable marker for future monitoring efforts. Regulators can therefore focus resources on transaction patterns that combine both licensed and unlicensed activity instead of treating the two markets as fully separate.

Conclusion

The open banking analysis supplies concrete numbers on how a specific group of gamblers distributes activity across licensed and unlicensed channels. With 91 percent overlap recorded and problem gambling rates reaching 45 percent in the unlicensed-payment cohort versus 6 percent among licensed users only, the study offers a factual baseline for continued observation. The full report from the Gambling Commission stands as the authoritative reference for these particular findings.