Why Kenya’s New Gambling Law Surprises Operators and Alarms Players

Kenya has taken far-reaching steps to overhaul gambling regulations by adopting a new law aimed at controlling the industry. Unexpected mandatory deductions from bets for social purposes have been introduced, a centralized supervisory authority has been created, and requirements for operators have been tightened. How will these changes affect players, businesses, and the functioning of the system itself? Experts are already pointing to mixed consequences, while market participants are trying to assess the new risks.

Mandatory savings for players — an innovation or an ill-conceived experiment?

One of the most widely discussed provisions of the new law is the idea of mandatory “savings” deducted from every bet. From now on, part of the amount a player spends on betting or lotteries will be allocated to healthcare needs or a pension fund. At first glance, gambling appears to be taking on a social function, but critics note that the mechanism of forced accumulation is defined in extremely vague terms.

So far, it has not been determined which body will manage these funds, who will oversee the correctness of the deductions, or whether players themselves will be able to influence this process. Legal advisers describe this as a “blind experiment,” since neither the governance structure nor the reporting system has been explained (source: TechCabal, 2024). “This is an attempt at social engineering without a transparent policy,” notes analyst Oscar Mauti. Players and operators remain in the dark about how these contributions should be properly recorded, tracked, and used.

A new regulator and tighter control — who benefits from centralization?

However, questions are being raised not only by players but also by operators facing the creation of a new supervisory body — the Gambling Regulatory Authority (GRA). This institution has been granted exclusive powers, including licensing, unannounced inspections, investigations, and the introduction of a centralized electronic system to track all transactions.

Every bet, win, and withdrawal is now recorded and analyzed in real time under the supervision of the GRA, which gives rise to justified concerns about privacy and the volume of data being collected. Lawyers emphasize that when such broad powers are concentrated in a single authority, the risk of regulatory arbitrariness and abuse emerges (TechCabal). Some experts compare the situation to the emergence of “total surveillance” over citizens’ private lives.

Financial and structural barriers — who is shut out of the market

What consequences can the market expect under such restrictions? The law has imposed strict requirements on operators: at least 30% of ownership must remain in Kenyan hands, and all funds must be held exclusively in local banks. In addition, substantial financial barriers to entry have been established. Online platforms and national lotteries are required to post guarantee deposits of up to 100 million shillings ($774,000), while casinos must deposit no less than 20 million shillings ($155,000).

For small companies and foreign investors, these amounts are virtually unattainable, effectively shutting them out of the market. Lawyers refer to such requirements as an “exclusionary clause,” where formally everyone is allowed to participate, but in practice only large, well-capitalized players can do so. Meanwhile, according to PwC estimates, Kenya’s gambling market attracts more than 10 million active users and provides the state with over 13 billion rubles in tax revenues in August 2025 alone.

Penalties and advertising bans — new risks for companies

The market has felt not only financial but also reputational threats. The law предусматривает severe penalties, including heavy fines and even prison sentences of up to 20 years for operating without a license, reporting violations, or providing false information. Particular attention is paid to advertising: the use of celebrities, athletes, and any imagery linking gambling to success or prestige in promotional materials is prohibited.

Until recently, football stars and media personalities were actively involved in promoting betting brands. These campaigns have now been discontinued. One marketer at a major advertising agency in Nairobi stated anonymously: “Without celebrities and motivational imagery, advertising effectiveness declines and the market loses momentum.” All advertisements must include at least 20% warning messages about gambling risks, which, according to specialists, makes promotion economically unviable.

Nevertheless, even amid tighter regulation, offshore casinos continue to find ways to maintain a presence in the market, primarily through the internet. Advertising activity is shifting to digital channels, where regulatory oversight is significantly more difficult. Moreover, even when websites are blocked, players often retain access to platforms through mobile solutions — many operators have proactively focused on proprietary applications that can be installed directly. A typical example is the 1win app, which allows users to bypass web restrictions and continue using the service.

As a result, the fight against illegal advertising and unregulated operators is turning into a protracted process, where bans on traditional promotional channels do not always produce the expected effect. For regulators, this means the need to seek new approaches, while for the market it signals a further shift toward mobile and less controllable forms of presence.

Restrictions on regional autonomy — what local authorities are losing

Unlike foreign markets where local authorities participate in regulation, the new Kenyan law strips regions of their former powers. Licensing and oversight of operators are now fully centralized. Regional administrations are limited to issuing commercial permits for physical outlets but are required to coordinate all decisions with the GRA.

Local officials fear that the loss of autonomy will reduce transparency and slow responses to local violations. Some experts note that an overly rigid centralized approach limits the ability to adapt to regional market specifics and reduces the effectiveness of oversight.

Full registration and tracking of players — where is the line of acceptable control?

What does this change for the average player? Every gambling participant is now required to undergo verification, open an account with an approved bank, and comply with minimum betting thresholds set by the regulator. The provision of bonuses, credit, and other forms of incentives is prohibited, altering familiar customer engagement models.

All information on deposits and withdrawals, player activity, and behavior is stored in a single GRA database. After five years, inactive balances are transferred to the account of the national agency for unclaimed assets. Despite declarations about personal data protection, cybersecurity experts warn that the volume of collected information is unprecedented, and the risks of leaks or misuse are increasing. In comparison with the European Union, where access to data is limited by transparent procedures, Kenyan regulators have been granted virtually unrestricted powers.

Expert arguments and alternative solutions — is there another path?

Professional communities and analysts continue to debate the controversial aspects of the law. The main criticism concerns the lack of a clear policy: tax and social functions are being conflated, and the mechanism of mandatory “savings” lacks transparency. As specialists note, in most countries similar initiatives are implemented through targeted taxes on operators’ profits rather than deductions from every bet.

Experts suggest considering alternatives, including the creation of a transparent tax system, the launch of voluntary savings programs, and the promotion of financial literacy among players. The experience of other countries shows that incentives, rather than coercion, are more effective in achieving long-term market stabilization.

As a result, the new rules raise more questions than answers. Many provisions remain controversial and require substantial refinement to balance the interests of the state, businesses, and players themselves.