for early access to the latest igaming videos!
and get the latest igaming news first!
South Africa’s National Treasury has recently put a heavyweight idea on the table: a 20% national tax on online gambling gross gambling revenue, layered on top of existing provincial levies. The proposal, published for public comment in late November, was said to be a response to the rapid growth of online wagering and the social harm linked to problem gambling.
Treasury’s own public note says online gambling has expanded with better connectivity and technology, making gambling available “almost anywhere and at any time,” and argues that the social costs of harmful gambling justify stronger policy tools.
But the approach may be landing in a noisy fight over who regulates gambling in South Africa, and whether Treasury is trying to solve harm, raise revenue, or both.
A tax rate that would sit above provinces
Under the discussion now in front of stakeholders, the 20% national charge would be imposed on the same core base used for provincial gambling taxes, which Moneyweb notes typically range between 6% and 9% for gambling operators’ gross gambling revenue.
Treasury acknowledges the number is big. The consultation paper cited by Business Day says the levy could translate into more than R10 billion in additional national revenue at current levels, while stressing that the main aim is to discourage “problem and pathological gambling and their ill effects.”
The underlying policy pitch is also blunt to everyone. Treasury argues brick-and-mortar casinos deliver employment and infrastructure benefits, while online gambling delivers few comparable spillovers, part of the rationale for a higher online rate.
“Unconstitutional”, and a consultation fight
The Free Market Foundation (FMF) has called the plan “a naked revenue grab,” and FMF intern Ayanda Zulu argues a national tax clashes with a system where gambling regulation largely sits with provinces.
Zulu’s bottom line is jurisdiction. In reports, he writes that a national levy would be unconstitutional because it centralises fiscal responsibility and ignores the limits placed on national government.
The illegal-market wrinkle nobody can ignore
Industry-linked voices are also focused on a different flashpoint: the proposal’s approach to interactive gambling, which remains legally contested in South Africa.
Reports points out that while licensed online betting is permitted, most forms of interactive gambling (including online casinos) are still technically illegal, with the 2008 Amendment Act never brought into force.
And yet, critics say Treasury’s plan would still pull that activity into the tax net. Zulu calls that an inversion of rule-of-law logic: tax first, decide legality later.
SABA CEO Sean Coleman, takes a similar view from the industry side, calling it “unthinkable” to tax revenue generated by conduct the state itself labels unlawful.
Next date to watch: Jan. 30
Treasury has opened a formal comment window. In its media statement, it directed stakeholders to submit written feedback by close of business on 30 January 2026.
Whether the proposal becomes a harm-reduction tool, a fiscal lever, or a legal battle may depend on what comes back in that comment period, and how Treasury responds.
Source: MoneyWeb
