Gambling Treaty 2026 Changes: Evaluation, Network Blocks & Reform Scenarios

The Gambling Treaty 2026 changes revolve around the legally mandated review of the GlüStV 2021 and the introduction of technical blocking measures such as IP blocking. The goal is clear: to increase the market diversion rate by more strictly sanctioning the black market and adjusting deposit limits. The Second Amendment to the Interstate Gambling Treaty provides the legal basis for these stricter measures. At the same time, the Joint Gaming Authority of the States (GGL) is intensifying its oversight of the OASIS and LUGAS systems.

The Legal Framework: Why 2026 is a Turning Point

The 2026 amendments adapt the GlüStV 2021 to new technical and legal conditions. While the Gambling Treaty 2021 opened the market, the current adjustments aim to close regulatory gaps through the Second Amendment to the Interstate Gambling Treaty. In parallel, the 2026 evaluation assesses how effective the existing measures truly are. The Conference of Ministers of State serves as the central body for political coordination here. The Court of Justice of the European Union continuously exerts pressure to ensure the coherence of German regulations with EU law.

The Evaluation of the GlüStV 2021: Status Quo and Deficiencies

The focus of the current reform efforts lies primarily on implementing the Second Amendment to the Interstate Gambling Treaty. This serves as a necessary "minor adjustment" to address urgent enforcement deficiencies before the major evaluation is completed. Specifically, technical measures such as IP blocking against unlicensed providers are to be tightened, requiring closer cooperation with internet service providers. The Gambling Treaty 2026 changes are thus closely linked to this preliminary stage, as they will be based on the findings of the 2026 evaluation. This evaluation examines whether the current model of the Joint Gaming Authority of the States is achieving the diversion targets or if the black market continues to grow. Without these preliminary technical corrections, the subsequent comprehensive reform would hardly be implementable effectively.

The Second Amendment to the Interstate Gambling Treaty as a Preliminary Step

German gambling policy is under constant observation by the Court of Justice of the European Union. Ongoing proceedings examine whether the national rules are compatible with EU freedom to provide services. The Court of Justice has previously criticized German regulatory approaches as potentially incoherent, which limits the scope for political action. This case law directly influences the Gambling Treaty 2026 changes, as a negative ruling could force further liberalizations. The 2026 evaluation must strictly take these European legal requirements into account to create legally secure structures. If Germany ignores the Court of Justice's requirements, the state risks high damage claims and a destabilization of the legal market.

Timeline: When Do New Rules Take Effect?

The timeline for the Gambling Treaty 2026 changes is tightly scheduled. The draft of the Second Amendment to the Interstate Gambling Treaty was notified to the European Commission in 2025. The goal is ratification by the state parliaments in spring 2026 to enable a take-effect date in May 2026. This occurs in parallel with the ongoing 2026 evaluation, which must be completed by December 31, 2026. The Conference of Ministers of State must sign the final draft before the 16 state parliaments can approve it. A fully reformed treaty (potentially as GlüStV 2027 or 2028) would therefore become effective no earlier than 12 to 24 months after the completion of the evaluation.

Technical Enforcement: IP Blocking and the Power of the GGL

The planned Gambling Treaty 2026 changes primarily aim for stricter technical enforcement to increase the market diversion rate in the German market. From May 2026, internet service providers will be legally required to block access to unlicensed gambling offerings via IP blocking and DNS blocks. This measure shifts regulatory responsibility directly to infrastructure operators and aims to significantly reduce the attractiveness of the black market by making illegal platforms hardly accessible to German users.

How Do Network Blocks (IP Blocking & DNS) Work from 2026?

The Second Amendment to the Interstate Gambling Treaty significantly expands the legal basis for network blocks. In the future, not only the content providers themselves, but explicitly also internet service providers such as Telekom, Vodafone, or 1&1, can be held accountable. These providers must implement technical measures that block traffic to listed, unlicensed domains. Both complete IP blocks and selective DNS filters will be used.

Critics, however, point out technical limitations: DNS blocks can often be bypassed using VPN services, and there is a risk of "overblocking," where legitimate content is incorrectly blocked. Nevertheless, politics expects that this additional hurdle will effectively deter players from switching to the unregulated black market. Enforcement occurs regardless of whether the providers are responsible for the content, establishing a new level of liability in the German gambling market.

The Role of the Joint Gaming Authority of the States

The Joint Gaming Authority of the States (GGL) acts as the central supervisory authority and drives technical monitoring forward. Since 2023, the authority has been fully responsible for regulating the online gambling industry and uses advanced systems such as LUGAS for this purpose. LUGAS enables the Joint Gaming Authority of the States to conduct Echtzeit-Kontrolle der Spieleraktivitäten and ensures that deposit limits and other protective measures are complied with.

Despite these instruments, the GGL registered tens of thousands of reports of illegal offerings in 2024 alone, underscoring the necessity of the new blocking measures. The authority faces the challenge of keeping the regulated market attractive while simultaneously increasing pressure on illegal operators. The Gambling Treaty 2026 changes are intended to help the GGL strike this balance through stricter technical enforcement tools.

Integration of OASIS into the Blocking Infrastructure

The central blocking system OASIS remains a cornerstone of player protection and is enforced more effectively through the GGL's new technical measures. OASIS serves as a nationwide database where Spieler selbst sperren lassen to control risky gambling behavior. The Joint Gaming Authority of the States is working to optimize the Schnittstellen zwischen OASIS, LUGAS and the providers to reduce latency times and improve data consistency.

Linking IP blocking and OASIS closes the gap between external blocks and internal player blocks. The goal is to prevent players who in OASIS gesperrt sind from switching to alternative, illegal platforms, as these are increasingly becoming inaccessible through network blocks. This integrated approach is intended to sustainably strengthen the protective effect of the Gambling Treaty.

Player Protection and Regulatory Limits in Focus

The discussion surrounding the Gambling Treaty 2026 changes focuses primarily on balancing effective addiction prevention with market acceptance. While the flat deposit limit of €1,000 and the 5-second rule remain as core player protection instruments, current evaluations point to necessary technical adjustments to stop the exodus into the unregulated sector.

How Does the Gambling Treaty 2026 Affect Players?

Players in the regulated German market remain protected by strict regulations, with addiction prevention taking center stage in regulatory measures. The central element here is the deposit limit, a regulatory cap that restricts monthly deposits to €1,000. This limit directly serves player protection by preventing financial excesses, but particularly affects high rollers, who often leave the legal market due to these restrictions.

In parallel, the 5-second rule significantly shapes the product design of online slots. This regulation mandates a minimum game duration of five seconds between two bets and simultaneously prohibits the use of autoplay functions. This slowdown is intended to reduce the intensity of the game and prevent impulsive behavior. Although these measures follow a protective rationale, the combination of limits and slowed gameplay leads many users to perceive licensed offerings as less attractive compared to international platforms without such restrictions.

Criticism of the Deposit Limit and the 5-Second Rule

Critics from the industry and politics argue that rigid instruments such as the deposit limit and the autoplay ban are counterproductive and drive players into the black market. The 5-second rule is often viewed as technically outdated, as it severely impacts the gaming experience without demonstrably reaching addicted individuals effectively.

The concern is that an overly restrictive approach lowers the diversion rate. If legal providers become unattractive due to high taxes and strict limits like the deposit limit, players resort to unregulated foreign offerings where neither player protection nor addiction prevention applies. In particular, the autoplay ban is criticized as an infringement on product freedom that weakens the competitiveness of German licenses in a European comparison.

Role of the Federal Centre for Health Education and Check-dein-Spiel.de

The BZgA coordinates national addiction prevention and provides the data basis for the evaluation. As a public institution, the BZgA collects and analyzes data on addiction prevalence, which directly feeds into the evaluation of the Gambling Treaty. Its campaigns, such as the slogan "Gambling can be addictive," aim to raise awareness of risks and make support services known. In addition, the platform Check-dein-Spiel.de offers concrete self-tests and counseling services, which are increasingly linked in public perception with state measures.

The findings of the Federal Centre for Health Education are crucial for the political assessment of current protective measures. If the data shows that the addiction problem is increasing despite the deposit limit and 5-second rule, this could trigger scenario 3 of the reform: further restrictive tightening of the regulations. Conversely, positive developments in addiction statistics could serve as an argument for more market-friendly adjustments to increase the attractiveness of the legal market.

Market Dynamics: Diversion Rate and Black Market

The Gambling Treaty 2026 changes primarily aim to significantly increase the diversion rate and stop the exodus into the black market. Current data shows that despite strict regulation, a considerable portion of market volume remains with unregulated providers. The upcoming evaluation must therefore recalibrate the tension between rigid player protection measures and the competitiveness of the legal market to achieve the state's fiscal and security policy goals.

Strategies for Combating the Black Market

The black market in German gambling is not a niche phenomenon but a structural problem that reportedly generates revenues of considerable magnitude annually. This illegal activity stands in direct contradiction to the targeted diversion rate, which is supposed to be 80% according to the goal, but currently stagnates at only 50 to 70% depending on the game type. To close this gap, politics relies on technical measures such as IP blocking and stricter controls by the GGL.

Yet these restrictions have a paradoxical effect: the stricter the national requirements for licensed providers are, the more attractive the foreign offerings become for certain player groups. In particular, high rollers, who are heavily restricted by the flat €1,000 monthly deposit limit, frequently resort to the black market where such limits do not apply. This exodus undermines player protection, as these users have no access to the OASIS blocking system. A pure tightening of rules without adjusting the limits could therefore further lower the diversion rate instead of increasing it.

Impact of the Sports Betting Tax on the Market

The fiscal burden on the legal market is a central driver of market distortions. The current sports betting tax as well as the stake tax on slots are viewed by critics as distorting competition, as they lead to lower payout rates. In comparison, illegal providers often offer better odds and no tax-related restrictions, increasing their attractiveness for high rollers and casual players.

The market volume in Germany is considerable, with a significant portion taking place in the illegal segment. This discrepancy shows that the current tax burden negatively affects the diversion rate. If licensed providers can offer less attractive products due to the tax burden, they lose market share to the black market. A reform of the tax base may therefore be necessary to restore the competitiveness of the legal market and secure tax revenues in the long term.

Position of Industry Associations on the Reform

Industry representatives have long called for more market-friendly adjustments to strengthen diversion. The German Sports Betting Association argues that current regulations do not adequately protect sports integrity, as they drive players into the unregulated sector where manipulation risks are higher. The association advocates for the liberalization of advertising and product rules to make licensed providers more visible.

The Association of the Slot Machine Industry also criticizes technical restrictions such as the 5-second rule and the autoplay ban. These measures lead to lower user acceptance and encourage exodus. Both associations warn that further tightening without simultaneous flexibility in limits jeopardizes the diversion rate. Instead, they advocate for a model that combats the black market through more attractive legal offerings rather than addressing it solely through bans. Only in this way can the goal of a safe and controlled market in Germany be achieved.

About This Article - Editorial & Responsibility

Author: Sarah Weber - Casino Tester & Bonus Analyst Peer-reviewed by: Dr. Markus Hoffmann - Senior iGaming Compliance Analyst Last Updated: 2026-07-20.

This article on "Gambling Treaty 2026 Changes" was written by Sarah Weber and peer-reviewed by Dr. Markus Hoffmann. Both regularly update the content regarding regulatory changes, license availability and bonus terms. All statements regarding licenses, authorities and legal frameworks refer to publicly accessible sources (GGL (Joint Gaming Authority of the States), Gambling Treaty 2021 (GlüStV 2021)).

About the Author

8+ years of casino reviews, 200+ personally tested platforms in the EU and internationally. Former member of the eCOGRA Player Advocacy Program (2018-2022). Specialization: wagering requirements, payout workflows, customer support evaluation.

About the Reviewer

12+ years in the iGaming industry, including 5 years as a compliance consultant for licensed operators under the Gambling Treaty 2021. PhD in Business Mathematics. Research focus: bonus mathematics, wager analysis, player protection systems (OASIS).

Responsible Gambling

Gambling can be addictive. If you feel you are losing control over your gambling behavior, please contact the BZgA gambling addiction helpline, Check-dein-Spiel.de, or use the central blocking system (OASIS (central player blocking system)). Set personal deposit and loss limits before playing with real money. Breaks and cooldown functions offered by providers are not a sign of weakness - they are a tool for sustainable enjoyment of the game.

Legal Disclaimer

The information in this article serves exclusively editorial and comparison purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. The legal assessment of online gambling without a German license is a gray area and is subject to ongoing adjustments by the GGL (Joint Gaming Authority of the States). Players are solely responsible for complying with local regulations.