Australia’s advertising ban on gambling likely to have limited impact on gambling spend

(AsiaGameHub) –   A new report from the Office of Impact Analysis (OIA) suggests that a partial ban on gambling advertisements in Australia is anticipated to decrease annual wagering amounts by only AU$62.7 million (£32.8 million).

Earlier this month, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced that the Labor government would implement “strong and decisive actions” to reduce gambling advertisements, a measure he stated was intended to safeguard young and vulnerable individuals.

However, the OIA’s latest report indicates that the proposed partial ban would result in a mere 0.8% annual reduction in the amount wagered by bettors.

The OIA’s analysis also examined the potential impact of a complete prohibition on gambling advertising.

The report stated: “AGRC’s research found that total yearly wagering expenditure would decline by $109.5m (1.4%) if a full ban was implemented. The department is not able to estimate the decline in state and territory revenue at this time.”

The impact analysis further elaborated that a complete ban would offer a “higher net benefit” for Australians, but this would be counterbalanced by “a significant financial burden on industry which would impact Australia’s grassroots sport and media industry”.

It’s been a long time coming 

Prime Minister Albanese has been considering further restrictions on gambling advertisements for a considerable period. This latest crackdown has garnered cross-party support and the endorsement of various community groups across Australia.

A parliamentary report released in 2023, commonly referred to as the Murphy report after the late MP Peta Murphy who authored it, put forth 31 recommendations for regulatory reform in Australia. A key recommendation was a ban on gambling advertising. However, the government’s slow progress in implementing these and other Murphy report measures has been a source of frustration for backbench MPs.

“It’s been a point of criticism for Albanese and his management of Labor ranks,” commented Ted Menmuir, SBC Media’s Editor-at-Large, on the iGaming Daily podcast this week.

“I think in 2026 it was make or break in terms of which direction he would take, and how he would stamp his resolutions on gambling advertising. We saw it come out this weekend.”

The government’s new set of restrictions fall short of a complete ban. Instead, the measures proposed by Albanese will focus on five key restrictions: limits on broadcast television, a blackout during live sports, a watershed for radio, digital controls, and bans in sporting environments.

Restrictions will also be imposed on the use of celebrities and professional athletes in gambling promotions, as well as the use of “odds-style” advertisements.

In a speech delivered at the National Press Club earlier this month, Albanese explained that the new restrictions are part of the government’s commitment to “getting the balance right” regarding gambling advertisements.

He added: “Letting adults have a punt if they want to, but making sure our children don’t see betting ads everywhere they look.”

On the surface, the OIA report supports this need for balance, indicating that the changes are expected to “deliver a meaningful reduction in wagering advertising exposure” throughout Australia.

A wide-reaching effect

While a partial ban was not unexpected, the decision has faced some opposition from industry stakeholders. At the time, Responsible Wagering Australia (RWA), a trade association, described the advertising curbs as “draconian” and warned of the government setting a “dangerous precedent”.

“This announcement, with no heads-up and no genuine consultation, is a real kick in the guts for the industry,” stated RWA Chief Executive, Kai Cantwell, at the time of the announcement last week.

“This sets a dangerous precedent. Today it’s gambling advertising, tomorrow it’s alcohol, then it’s sugary drinks, fast food, critical minerals and who knows what else comes next.”

The latest OIA report confirmed that the advertising restrictions will affect 2,461 industry members, including betting companies, broadcasters, podcasters, and streaming services.

A ripple effect is also anticipated for the third sector, with the report noting that “if wagering activity does decline as a result of this option, there may also be a reduced demand for government expenditure on support services”.

From a socio-economic standpoint, the OIA estimates the socio-economic benefit for Australians to be between $117.6 billion and $182.2 billion for a partial ban.

However, this figure increases to $332.1 billion for a complete ban, which includes a $109.5 million reduction in annual wagering expenditure.

The report further stated: “Similar to Option 2 [of partial restrictions], this option is likely to see a significant reduction in moderate and high-risk wagering activity which will also be partially offset by an increase in low and no-risk wagering. 

“Moderate and high-risk wagering expenditure is estimated to reduce by $136.8m, while low and no-risk wagering may increase by $27.3m (with 93% of this increase in the no-risk wagering category).”

Nevertheless, many advocates for gambling reform in Australia believe the Albanese government has been slow to act on banning gambling ads and implementing the remaining recommendations from the Murphy report, as previously mentioned.

While the advertising aspect now appears to be settled, reform advocates still have numerous other objectives. Notable recommendations from the Murphy report include the establishment of a national, dedicated regulator for the gambling sector, a role currently de facto held by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) and, in the view of many, the Northern Territory Wagering Commission (NTWC).

“I don’t think this has pleased any of the camps,” Menmuir remarked, discussing the advertising restrictions during his podcast appearance this week. “There’s still divisions across the board as to how the matter will proceed, but at least we’re at a point of settlement.”