Entain has urged the Independent Football Regulator (IFR) to take action against English football clubs that accept sponsorship and advertising revenue from gambling operators lacking UK licenses. This appeal was made in response to the IFR's second licensing consultation, CP 2/26, which is seeking feedback on a new licensing framework for the top five tiers of English men's football, ranging from the Premier League to the National League.
The IFR's draft licensing code currently prohibits clubs from receiving income associated with serious criminal activities. Entain, which owns Ladbrokes and Coral, is requesting that the regulator clarify in its guidelines that this rule also applies to gambling companies operating in the UK without a license.
According to section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005, operators without a UK license commit a criminal offense if they accept bets from British consumers. Entain asserts that the IFR does not require additional powers or legislation to enforce this, as the proposed licensing code already provides a foundation for addressing the issue.
Stella David, Chief Executive of Entain, stated, “Premier League clubs are receiving sponsorship from criminal gambling firms. The Independent Football Regulator can put an end to this immediately by recognizing that unlicensed gambling companies targeting UK customers through English football are violating the law.”
David emphasized that the IFR does not need new powers or rules to act, as the necessary provisions have already been drafted and should be defined and enforced before the next season begins. She pointed out that this situation highlights a governance failure that the IFR was established to rectify.
This season, several Premier League clubs, including Everton, Sunderland, Fulham, Bournemouth, and Burnley, have shirt sponsorship agreements with gambling companies that are not licensed in the UK, such as Stake, W88, SBOTOP, bj88, and 96.com, according to local media reports.
The problem extends beyond shirt sponsorships. Eighteen out of twenty Premier League clubs have displayed advertisements for illegal operators on LED boards at their stadiums this season.
Next season, the Premier League plans to implement a voluntary ban on front-of-shirt sponsorships by gambling companies, but this measure does not tackle the broader issue of unregulated markets. Several clubs are expected to shift existing front-of-shirt deals to kit sleeves, including Everton's partnership with Stake.
Stake was licensed in the UK until last year when it surrendered its license during a review by the Gambling Commission following a promotional video featuring adult film actress Bonnie Blue.
Entain has also reached out to Premier League Chief Executive Richard Masters, advocating for an immediate voluntary ban on sponsorship and advertising from unlicensed operators ahead of the 2026/27 season. In February, David wrote to Masters suggesting a meeting, which has yet to occur.
In that correspondence, David expressed concerns regarding the connection between sports piracy and unlicensed gambling. The Premier League's total television rights deals are valued at approximately £12 billion ($16.35 billion), with £6.7 billion ($9.13 billion) coming from the UK.
The Campaign for Fairer Gambling's national report for 2024-25 revealed that 89% of illegal streams in the UK feature advertisements for bookmakers that lack UK licenses. Over the past three years, illegal streams in the UK have more than doubled, reaching 3.6 billion.
Research conducted by Frontier Economics, commissioned by the Betting and Gaming Council, found that 1.5 million Britons wagered £4.3 billion ($5.86 billion) last year on unlicensed sites, representing a 9% market share, up from 2% four years ago. Yield Sec estimates that around 420,000 British schoolchildren are gambling with unlicensed operators.
Last year, the Gambling Commission discovered that 67% of GamStop users, who have opted out of licensed gambling, were targeted by advertising from unlicensed operators. Entain noted that these unlicensed operators do not conduct affordability checks, provide self-exclusion tools, or report to any regulatory body.