Victorian regulator weighs unprecedented intervention in AFL’s fight with bookmakers over gambling revenue
Exclusive: Industry sources say decision could be highly consequential and limit AFL’s dependence on gambling
The Victorian gambling regulator is considering whether to make an unprecedented intervention in a dispute between the AFL and bookmakers, which could set a limit on the league’s revenue from wagering.
Earlier this year, the AFL proposed a significant increase to the amount of money it receives from each bet placed on a match. The league also proposed a minimum $20,000 annual fee for all bookmakers, including small operators who focus on racing.
Leaked documents seen by Guardian Australia revealed the cash grab was justified as a way to address what AFL executives termed an “unprecedented” increase in “integrity risks” posed by the wagering industry, which has exploded in popularity in recent years.
The documents outlined concerns the AFL’s integrity system was seriously deficient and struggled to identify whether players, coaches and staff were using inside information to manipulate betting markets, in breach of their contracts.
Bookmakers opposed to the increase were told they needed accept it before the season began, or be banned from taking bets on the sport. By law, all bookmakers must have an agreement with a sport’s governing body.
When the increase was first proposed, several gambling companies described it as “unsustainable” and said it could cripple smaller operators willing to pay their “fair share” to support integrity measures.
Some bookmakers have told Guardian Australia they increased financial inducements – such as bonus bets or bet-matching – to encourage people to spend more money, despite knowing this could increase harm. In June 2023, a parliamentary inquiry into online gambling called for financial inducements to be banned.
The Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission (VGCCC) has confirmed it is assessing an application to intervene in the dispute and make a determination about the AFL’s conduct and the reasonableness of its fees. The application was made by an unnamed bookmaker.
Before making a decision to intervene, the regulator must assess whether both parties have engaged in genuine negotiations. It must also assess whether a resolution is possible without the regulator’s involvement. It has been assessing the application for more than two months.
The regulator has the power to ask for information from the AFL, recover costs for any investigation, and make compulsory determinations to settle the dispute.
“Previous applications received by the VGCCC did not meet the criteria for a determination as outlined in legislation,” a spokesperson for the regulator said.
Two sources at established bookmakers who were not authorised to comment publicly said a determination could set a limit on how much money the AFL could make from gambling. They said a determination could also impact future negotiations.
Lachlan Gepp, an expert gambling and sports rights lawyer at Addisons, which has represented bookmakers, said product fees had become “uncommercial and unreasonable” in recent years. The fees were introduced in the early 2000s.
“It should be remembered that the laws requiring betting integrity agreements were introduced in Victorian and New South Wales betting legislation to coincide with the blow-up of corporate online bookmaking and to provide funds to the AFL to administer an integrity concern that otherwise did not exist,” Gepp said.
“Make no mistake: in 2025, product fees have been morphed into a tax strategy designed to play catchup to the NRL and positioned by AFL spin doctors to solve an invisible growth in betting integrity issues.”
The AFL has argued the integrity challenges are real and serious. Its correspondence outlining the increase to bookmakers did not mention commercial objectives.
“If the VGCCC determines that the product fee rate sought by the AFL is unreasonable or an overreach in terms of what the law is designed to do, then that outcome has been a long time coming for the online wagering industry,” Gepp said.
The AFL declined to comment.
One relatively small bookmaker, who declined to be named because of the commercial sensitivity of the issue, and so that they could speak freely, said they had increased inducements in response to the AFL’s proposal.
“We will need to introduce additional incentives, not because we want to, but because the market demands it. Without them, we may not be able to keep the business running,” the bookmaker said.
• In Australia, Gambling Help Online is available on 1800 858 858. The National Debt Helpline is at 1800 007 007