The new draft of the Austrian Gambling Act reverses a decades-old line: the monopoly on online gambling is to fall, and from 2029 several operators are to be able to obtain an Austrian licence. The decisive point for anyone who has lost money in online casinos is in the fine print. Operators that previously operated illegally without a concession and now want a licence must first satisfy the judgments from player claims. A practitioner’s perspective.
What it is about, and why now
The Austrian Gambling Act has been the subject of long behind-the-scenes negotiations. At the end of May 2026 the Ministry of Finance submitted a draft that serves as the basis for negotiations with the coalition partners. An important caveat upfront: this is a draft, not law in force. Over the summer the bill is to go through formal review, including at EU level, with a vote scheduled for the autumn. Details may still shift considerably until then.
Nonetheless the draft marks a turning point. Until now the political line was that the online monopoly stays in place and is to be enforced more strictly against illegal operators. The draft now on the table goes the opposite way.
The draft reverses course on the online monopoly
Under the draft, the end of the online gambling monopoly held by Win2Day, a subsidiary of Casinos Austria, is sealed. In future several online licences are to be available. The newly created Gambling Supervisory Authority is to be empowered to award an unlimited number of concessions for the operation of online games. Awards are scheduled for 2029, with the call for tenders expected after the summer. Initial licences are to run for five years, renewals for ten.
This is precisely the step that experts have been calling for for years. A single licensed operator cannot cover the entire domestic online demand. As long as the legal offer is restricted to a single platform, players prone to gambling migrate to unlicensed operators based in Malta, Curacao or other third countries. These do not comply with Austrian player-protection rules and evade domestic supervision. An open licensing system, by contrast, brings operators into the Austrian regulatory framework, from technical oversight to loss limits. The Anton Proksch Institute has supported this path in an open letter to the Minister of Finance, and a study by Branchenradar projects a channelling rate of up to 85.5 percent and additional tax revenue of up to 1.88 billion euros per year.
The decisive lever: anyone who wants a licence must satisfy player judgments
For those affected, the most important sentence is not in the headline but in the detail of the draft. Many international operators are likely to push into the opened market, including those that have so far operated in Austria without a concession, often out of Malta. Under the draft these operators are to be able to buy themselves in. The condition is significant: they must pay outstanding levies in arrears, and they must comply with the judgments arising from player claims.
In plain terms, an operator seeking an Austrian licence can no longer ignore existing restitution judgments. What many operators have kept at arm’s length in the past through foreign seats and enforcement hurdles becomes a condition of entry to the lucrative Austrian market. If you want a licence, you have to settle your player judgments.
This shifts the negotiating position. An enforced or titled claim is no longer just a title that has to be laboriously enforced abroad. It becomes an item that the operator has to clear in order to continue operating legally in Austria. That increases operators’ incentive to settle outstanding claims swiftly rather than to sit them out.
Player protection is significantly tightened
In parallel with the market opening, the draft significantly tightens player protection. Strict limits are envisaged for machine gambling outside the casinos. Deposits of gaming credit are limited to 250 euros per week for those under 26 and to a maximum of 1,680 euros for older players. The stake per game is not to exceed two euros, where previously ten or five euros were possible. The possible win is to be no more than 2,000 euros, where previously it was 10,000 or 5,000 euros. Jackpots are to be banned. After 90 minutes of play a cooling-off phase of 15 minutes is required.
What is new is that these rules are to apply mutatis mutandis to online gambling as well. There will also be, for the first time, a supervisory authority that is free from instructions under constitutional law, and a central technical connection enabling robust ongoing monitoring of the regulated market. These are real improvements. They are subject to the specifics of implementation, but in substance they go in the direction that scientific findings have suggested for years.
The scale of the problem is illustrated by the 2025 Epidemiology and Drug Report of Gesundheit Österreich GmbH. According to it, around four percent of the population, that is roughly 300,000 people, show problematic or at least mildly pathological gambling behaviour. A quarter of those suffer from severe forms of gambling addiction.
A concern remains: overly strict conditions could feed the black market
For all its merits, the draft carries a tension. A market opening combined with very strict conditions can result in a licence being unattractive for serious operators. That in turn could play into the hands of illegal operators and depress the expected tax revenues. The value of an open licensing system stands and falls with the legal offer being attractive enough for operators and players to actually dry up the black market. This will be a topic of the next rounds of negotiations.
A long-standing gap on sports betting remains open
A second open issue concerns sports betting. In Austria, sports bets are historically classified not as gambling but as games of skill, and thus fall within the competence of the nine federal states. This is unique in an EU comparison. Online sports betting therefore fragments into nine state regulations and effectively escapes supervision once there is no physical anchor in Austria. A federal-level regulation in a separate licensing system, cleanly separated from casino regulation, would be appropriate. The simplest legal route would be to bring sports betting into the Gambling Act, as has already been done for poker. This step is not contained in the current draft.
Further ahead lies the wave of political and societal betting on international prediction markets such as Polymarket or Kalshi. There, bets are placed on elections, economic data or cultural events, often in cryptocurrencies, often on decentralised platforms. The legal classification is open, the addictive potential is high, the risks for market integrity are considerable. A future-proof licensing system has to think these platforms in from the start.
What this means for affected players
The legal basis for the recovery of online casino losses does not change: gaming contracts with unlicensed operators are void, the amounts wagered can be reclaimed under unjust-enrichment law, and the limitation period under the underlying supreme-court line is thirty years. This foundation holds regardless of how the reform unfolds further.
What changes is the negotiating position. If an operator only obtains an Austrian licence on condition that it satisfies the judgments from player claims, then it is precisely now worth documenting and enforcing a claim rather than letting it sit. With the draft, operators have a tangible reason to take outstanding claims seriously. Anyone who has their documents in order and has their case reviewed now sits at the longer end of the lever in this phase.
An initial assessment can be made quickly through an enquiry to our law firm. We review your case and tell you what chances of success we see. Anyone who has suffered losses in recent years with an online casino without an Austrian concession should have those losses reviewed now. To begin, we only need two pieces of information: at which online casino did you suffer losses, and roughly how high do you estimate those losses to be?
Frequently asked questions
Is the online gambling monopoly really falling under the reform?
Under the current draft of the Ministry of Finance, yes. An unlimited number of online concessions is envisaged, with awards scheduled for 2029. The draft, however, has not yet been adopted. Formal review runs over the summer, with a vote scheduled for the autumn. Changes are possible until then.
What does the condition that operators must satisfy player judgments mean?
The draft provides that operators previously active illegally can buy themselves in by paying outstanding levies in arrears and complying with the judgments from player claims. An operator seeking an Austrian licence can therefore no longer ignore existing restitution judgments. This strengthens the position of players with outstanding claims.
Do I have to act quickly?
The limitation period for restitution is thirty years, so there is in most cases no time pressure from limitation. The practical advantage lies in the window of time before the licences are awarded: operators wanting to return to the Austrian market now have an interest in settling outstanding claims. Anyone who has had their claim reviewed and documented during this phase is in a better position. An initial assessment is possible via the contact form.
Does the reform change anything in ongoing restitution proceedings?
No. The legal basis for restitution is the nullity of the gaming contracts with unlicensed operators. The reform does not change that, and ongoing proceedings continue unchanged. The planned licence condition comes on top as an additional lever, it does not replace the proceedings.
Which new player-protection rules are planned?
Among other things, a deposit limit of 250 euros per week for those under 26 and a maximum of 1,680 euros for older players, a maximum stake of two euros per game, a maximum win of 2,000 euros, a ban on jackpots and a cooling-off phase of 15 minutes after 90 minutes of play. These rules are also to apply mutatis mutandis to online gambling.
Where can I find more information on reclaiming online casino losses?
A compact overview of the supreme-court line and the practical requirements can be found in the article on Austrian Supreme Court case law and the article on limitation periods.