Techme101.com

The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) has published a consultation document in error that shows a proposed 30% increase in the gambling license fee.
The information was published on the GOV.UK site on January 27, 2026, followed by a message stating that this was a mistake and the proposal was swiftly removed.
Gambling fee hike info posted in error
“Without an uplift in October 2026, the Commission’s reserves are expected to be completely exhausted during the 2026 to 2027 financial year,” the DCMS stated starkly in the document that was pulled.
The document is now live following a turbulent morning, with the fee information titled “Proposed changes to Gambling Commission fees” available for open consultation.

Labour attacked our pubs, tourism, and hospitality with National Insurance and Business Rates hikes and now they’re hitting gambling with higher license fees.
I know Labour MPs are a generally miserable lot, but what is it they’ve got against everyone else having a bit of fun?… pic.twitter.com/buaISjB7Qz
— Nigel Huddleston MP (@HuddlestonNigel) January 28, 2026

Despite the error, the content is unaltered from the reportedly premature posting, and there is no indication that these proposals will be withdrawn.
The key facts centre on potential changes to existing gambling fee legislation and will remain open until March 29, 2026, but they foreshadow a rise in gambling licenses in the UK.
Key facts in the consultation
The proposal affects every Gambling Commission license in Great Britain, across both remote and land-based gambling sectors that are subject to the landmark 30% change.
We reported on the budgetary implications for gambling operators in Great Britain and how they were bracing for change in the November 2025 budget.
This DCMS post is now better aligned with operators’ broader gambling business concerns, and their fears could resurface following the proposals, with remote casino’s in the firing line of the changes.

There have been a whole range of gambling regulations (and now tax) making the regulated market more uncompetitive than the illegal market.Now it proposed the regulated market operators pay to try the ‘tackle’ the illegal market instead of deregulation.https://t.co/giH38vgc9m pic.twitter.com/7Jge4nXNmr
— Chris Fawcett (@chrisgambler247) January 28, 2026

“Under each of the consultation options, there would be significant fee increases for remote casino licensees… where many of the Commission’s strategic commitments are principally aligned.”
The DCMS has stated in the publication that the “true cost” of UK gambling fees has not been covered as a result of rapid growth in the industry’s gross gambling yield (GGY).
“This consultation seeks views on proposals for changes to Gambling Commission fees… to determine the extent to which the Gambling Commission is able to recover its costs and exercise its functions.”
A telling part of the changes, according to the DCMS, is the cost of enforcement against illegal gambling and the delivery of Gambling Act Review reforms, which, in their view, have justified the decision to increase fees.
“These proposals would reset the income required per type of licence so that it more closely reflects the cost to the Commission of carrying out regulatory activities associated with that kind of operating licence.”
Although the content published by the DCMS is still a proposal and open until March 2026, there will no doubt be a reflex from the wider British gambling community, but the reach and the impact of the changes have not yet been calculated.
Featured image: Adobe Firefly
The post Consultation published in error proposes 30% UK gambling license fee hike appeared first on ReadWrite.

A judge in the Massachusetts Superior Court has published preliminary thoughts around a 30-day timeline for Kalshi to implement geofencing technology.
Geofencing is a digital barrier that functions like a map or territory, permitting or restricting access to certain content, or, in the case of Kalshi, to the prediction market’s features.
Judge Christopher K. Barry-Smith oversaw the legal battle that could have wider implications in a dispute over state-regulated jurisdictions and the legality of prediction markets operating in states without a license.
The case dates back to Fall 2025, when Kalshi was alleged to have offered illegal sports gambling without a license. State Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell presented, at the time (September 2025), that Kalshi was earning more on sports bets than state-licensed sportsbooks.
Kalshi’s defense suffered a setback when the case was demoted to the state level, further removing the federal shield from the prediction market operators’ argument. Judge Richard G. Stearns of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts made the decision and set the playing field for Judge Barry-Smith’s oversight.
Kalshi geofencing takes shape
Well-known legal and gambling commentator Daniel Wallach was on hand to highlight the key parts of Judge Barry-Smith’s preliminary thoughts on X.

Big takeaway:
– Judge leaning towards a 30-day timeline for Kalshi to implement geofencing in Massachusetts, as opposed to the 90-days requested by Kalshi (thank CFTC for that!). https://t.co/pmlvwPRuOS
— Daniel Wallach (@WALLACHLEGAL) January 27, 2026

Judge Barry-Smith’s publication balances the views of his predecessors on the case and has given Kalshi an opportunity to continue. The company would have to incorporate the technology to prevent users in Massachusetts from entering into sports event contracts, but Kalshi could do so without the company holding a state gambling licence.
Wallach pointed out that “Given Kalshi’s ‘nationwide business,’ Kalshi must use ‘technological controls’ to ensure that sports event contracts are not offered ‘directly or indirectly’ to persons in Massachusetts.”
The judge also dismissed Kalshi’s plea for a 90-day compliance window, saying that the company will have 30 days to implement these controls. The court noted that Kalshi has had months to anticipate this requirement, referencing regulatory signals including the CFTC’s September 30, 2025, notice.
Wallach also noted that notifications to users about Kalshi’s features will include a flag when an account holder attempts to place a prohibited sports-related contract.
The preliminary thoughts concluded that the parties’ proposed preliminary injunction order is due by February 4, 2026, but the “Court anticipates deciding Kalshi’s emergency request for a stay of the injunction pending appeal on the same timeline.”
Featured image: Kalshi / Canva
The post Judge leaning towards a 30-day timeline for Kalshi to implement geofencing in Massachusetts appeared first on ReadWrite.