Changes to information requirements in the LCCP, regulatory returns, official statistics, and related matters
- Changes to information requirements in the LCCP, regulatory returns, official statistics, and related matters
- Executive Summary
- Part 1: Summary of responses - Changes to information requirements for licensees: Consultation Response
- Part 2: Summary of responses - Changes to information requirements for licensees: Consultation Response
- Annex - Summary of changes to licence conditions and codes of practice
Proposal 1: Reduce the amount of data we collect
We proposed to remove certain data from regulatory returns to focus on the data we require to fulfil our statutory duties. Areas where we are proposing significant reductions are.
For remote sector financial information, we intend to only ask for non-Great Britain (GB) data at an aggregated activity level, no longer requiring it at sport and game category level (for example ‘betting real events’ replaces splits for football, dogs, horses, etc.)
B2C revenue share
We proposed that Business to Consumer (B2C) revenue share Gross Gambling Yield (GGY) is reported combined with proprietary GGY (formerly labelled ‘General’) across all Remote Casino, Betting and Bingo (RCBB) sport and game categories. Also, that B2C revenue share turnover is reported combined with proprietary turnover in the same manner. This will simplify reporting of GGY and turnover for B2C licensees.
Gaming Machine Technical
We will no longer ask for the number of units sold, software sales, gross value of software sales, instead just requiring total value of sales. We will remove the requirement for reporting numbers of machines leased, sold, profit share, by venue type. Also, we will remove the number of machines purchased or scrapped, by second-hand (legacy), second-hand (non-legacy), and new.
Other proposed removals included.
We will no longer ask for turnover to be split between participation fees and sales.
Research, Education and Treatment (RET)1
We proposed to exchange the current seven questions with two new questions: ‘Contributions made to approved beneficiaries in the period covered by this return (name of beneficiary, £ (pound) value of contribution)’.
We proposed to stop asking for workforce numbers, as we recognise that there are inherent data quality issues with workforce reporting (for example, apportioning an operator’s employees against different licensed activities, or across Great Britain (GB) and non-GB operations). Instead we will use the annual Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Sectors Economic Estimates: Employment (PDF) (opens in new tab) as a proxy to measure employment in the regulated gambling industry.
In addition, we proposed to amend numerous questions to better align terminology used within regulatory returns (for example Profit or Trading Results to be replaced with the term ‘GGY’). Also, to reword questions to provide clarity and consistency across multiple activities.
Question 2.1. Do you agree with the proposals?
Overall, respondents welcomed the reduction in data points and commented that streamlining our data requirements would improve operational efficiency for licensees. Some respondents agreed with the approach but observed that the impact of reporting of Gross Gambling Yield (GGY) without a revenue share deduction may have a direct implication on licence bandings for Business to Consumer (B2C) operators.
We were also asked whether host licence reporting could be more closely aligned with the gambling software return; or for us to remove the need for a gambling software return if an operator has a host licence where all software is hosted.
Some respondents commented that the changes would reduce our knowledge and understanding of the industry and of particular sports or casinos. One respondent queried whether the new data points would enable us to obtain accurate gaming machine data. Another respondent expressed concern over our proposal to stop collecting non-Great Britain data at sport and game category level for remote gambling, which they considered beneficial for sports betting integrity purposes.
This proposal to reduce the quantity of data collected via regulatory returns is consistent with our objective to reduce regulatory burden wherever possible.
Having reviewed our data needs, we consider that the removal of these data points will have negligible impact on our understanding of the gambling industry.
We note the concerns about us not collecting non-Great Britain (GB) data at sport and game category level from remote licence holders who are reliant on their Gambling Commission licence to offer gambling services to other jurisdictions. We will still collect non-Great Britain Gross Gambling Yield (GGY) at an aggregate level (for example betting real events), as this will give us an awareness of what proportion of a licensee’s GGY is being generated from overseas customers. We do not consider that the lack of non-GB data at sport and game category level will adversely impact our work to maintain the integrity of sports. Non-GB GGY can be used to support the assessment of betting integrity risks, but there are many other components to these assessments.
With respect to Gaming Machine Technical returns, we are satisfied that we collect sufficient detail on gaming machine numbers operated by non-remote licensees in arcades, betting, bingo and casino premises, that we no longer require the current level of detail on machines from gaming machine suppliers.
On the comments that our proposal to merge the ‘B2C’ and ‘Proprietary’ GGY fields for remote licensee reporting may affect fee categorisation; we clarify that this is not our intent and we will design the changes to ensure this does not happen, while reducing the reporting requirement where we are able to.
We also note the concerns about reporting arrangements for host licence data on regulatory returns. We want to minimise reporting requirements where possible. We will therefore seek to resolve this issue during the design of the new regulatory returns digital service.
Due to technical constraints, the removal of these data fields from regulatory returns cannot be implemented until we redesign our eServices system. Work on this is scheduled to commence in late financial year 2020 to 2021.
1 Now known as Research, Prevention and Treatment.
Proposal 2: Remove the requirement for licensees to report premise acquisitions and disposals
Last updated: 16 March 2023
Show updates to this content
No changes to show.