With B2C licensing scheduled to begin in January 2026 and B2B permissions already active, operators are watching closely. But is the regulatory regime as balanced and futureproof as it looks on paper?
People have met Finland’s model with cautious optimism. It avoids some of the rigidity seen in neighbouring markets, and early dialogue between operators and regulators has been collaborative. Compared to Sweden’s rollout, this one feels more open for now.
But optimism doesn’t mean certainty. While there’s broad appreciation for the process so far, industry confidence depends on what comes next, particularly around technical guidance and regulatory interpretation. As it stands, some of the language remains too vague to be reliably actionable. That vagueness creates friction, even in a system intended to be smooth.
Finland’s new licensing regime has landed with a more liberal tone than many feared, but it’s far from frictionless. Early collaboration between regulators and industry is encouraging, but execution still falls short where it counts.
Its willingness to start open sets the framework apart, at least for now. The B2B licensing process is already active, signalling intent to establish a functioning white market well ahead of the B2C rollout. The dialogue so far has been relatively structured and responsive. However, many in the industry feel that clarity is still lacking in where it matters most.
Operators are facing what some describe as “regulation by suggestion.” Critical concepts such as “moderate marketing” are undefined. Technical standards remain undisclosed and will not be released until late summer 2025. Until publication, execution remains speculative, and many are waiting.
The outright ban on affiliate marketing has become a lightning rod for criticism. Without affiliates, digital visibility becomes a privilege reserved for incumbents with vast databases and localised brand equity. Challenger brands face a bleak equation: be wildly creative, or be invisible.
The restrictions don’t stop there. Limitations on influencer activity, podcast sponsorship, and other digital outreach have effectively created a blackout for new market entrants. And in a digitally native country like Finland, that kind of opacity may do more harm than good.
What emerges is a market trying to balance openness with caution, but often leaning too far into ambiguity. With trust and timing now paramount, Finland must decide whether it wants to merely regulate its market or actively build it.
If one theme dominated the discussion, it was localisation. Finland is not a plug-and-play market. Success here won’t come from simply lifting what works in Sweden or Estonia. Finnish players are among the most digitally mature in Europe. They expect intuitive interfaces, instant payments, familiar design, and a culturally resonant tone.
Operators entering the market without deep localisation strategies are unlikely to gain traction. Everything from customer service to gameplay needs to feel native, not just translated. The bar is high, and the tolerance for generic experiences is low.
This demand goes beyond language. It’s about the texture of experience. If an operator doesn’t understand Finnish humour, payment preferences, or digital habits, they’re unlikely to keep users, no matter how compliant their platform is.
Finland’s success will ultimately depend on channelisation, the migration of players from unlicensed to licensed platforms. Early forecasts suggested a strong start, with estimates ranging from 70 to 90 percent. But optimism fades when looking beyond the launch. Some industry voices warned that without swift enforcement and smooth technical onboarding, that figure could slump to 50 percent by 2028.
The lesson from Sweden looms large: strong laws mean little if offshore sites continue to operate unchecked, and if regulated platforms become burdened by friction. Slower verification, fewer promotional tools, and limited digital reach could push players away from the very protections regulators hope to build.
Competitive imbalance is also a risk. With affiliates banned and digital marketing options restricted, legacy brands with entrenched databases are positioned to dominate. Challenger operators face an uphill battle for visibility and engagement. If the system limits competition, it risks stifling innovation, and that, in turn, threatens retention.
Including B2B licensing is intended to enhance oversight across the supply chain. But unless it’s implemented with flexibility and sector-specific understanding, it could become just another bureaucratic hoop with little impact on player experience or safety.
Finland has placed a strong rhetorical emphasis on responsible gambling. It’s a key pillar of the new system. But talk alone won’t shift behaviour. Most agree that for RG to function, it needs real-time detection, identity verification, smart limits, and, crucially, integration into the player experience.
Some fear RG is being implemented as a compliance checkbox rather than a design principle. Frictionless, engaging, and transparent player journeys don’t have to contradict RG. But without thoughtful implementation, they might.
The paradox is clear: unlicensed sites often provide faster access and fewer interruptions. If licensed platforms feel cumbersome or overly restricted, players will drift. Protection is only effective if players stay inside the system.
For RG to matter, it must be more than a policy. It must be part of the product. That means personalisation, precision, and visibility across all touchpoints. Done right, it enhances trust. Done poorly, it simply ticks a box.
Much of the groundwork was laid in Finland ends monopoly era with new iGaming licensing regime, where SiGMA News explored how political pressure and offshore migration triggered the move to multi-licensing. Finland’s transition from a gambling monopoly to a licensed market is unfolding step by step, and each phase carries regulatory and commercial weight. The draft Gambling Act was released in July 2024, followed by a consultation period and an EU review set to conclude by February 2025. If the legislative path stays on track, the Finnish Parliament will vote on the final version in spring 2025. From there, operators can apply for B2C licences from January 2026, with market entry permitted from mid-2026 onwards.
The B2B licensing process begins a year later, in January 2027, and becomes mandatory by January 2028, meaning all B2C platforms will then be required to use approved B2B suppliers. That staggered timeline gives Finland time to observe, adjust, and enforce. But it also means the real test of the system’s success in terms of channelisation, competition, and player protection won’t fully play out until at least 2028.
Finland’s framework shows promise, yet the weight of expectation is growing by the day. The following six to twelve months will be critical. Technical guidelines must land clearly. Marketing rules need fine-tuning. And regulators must remain in listening mode.
Handled right, Finland might show the rest of Europe how to reform a monopoly without triggering regulatory meltdown. But if the rollout stalls or the rules calcify, the market may default to the same grey-zone patterns seen elsewhere.
Ultimately, the goal isn’t just compliance, it’s engagement. If Finland builds a system that protects players while keeping them in, it wins. If not, it becomes another cautionary tale about regulation without realism.
Welcome to Gambling Consulting Authority (GCA) - Your Strategic Partner in Gambling Industry Advancement
