The UK Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) has taken aim at former Prime Minister Gordon Brown for supporting proposals to hike gambling tax to raise funds to address child poverty.
Brown spoke out publicly to back a report from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), as the think tank urged the current British Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, to commit to a significant policy change that would reportedly raise around £3 billion ($4 billion) per year.
Those claims from the IPPR have been shot down by the BGC, which described the suggestions as “anything but thoughtful.”
The industry body outlined that the figures being used were incorrect. It was said that the sector raises £2.5 billion in tax per year, but the figure was corrected as £4 billion.
Crucially for the betting industry, the commentary from BGC chief executive Grainne Hurst, went on to detail the key policy decision implemented by Brown, as Chancellor, more than two decades ago.
It described his position taken last week as “a vast departure from Brown’s own solutions on betting and gaming taxes when he was in charge of the public’s finances.
“Long since hailed as a masterstroke, his interventions raised more tax, secured more jobs, and created one of this country’s global business success stories.”
That is a reference to the decision to axe the practice of applying tax to punters’ bets, which had a direct impact on the behavior of bettors. Once tax was no longer being added to stakes, gamblers began to bet more.
“Too many politicians take a snobbish objection to people who enjoy a bet,” writes BGC CEO Grainne Hurst in today’s @Telegraph. But with 22.5 million adults in Britain betting each month – overwhelmingly safely – it’s time they started listening to them.https://t.co/SYmBaGOYPX pic.twitter.com/yWYlKfduog
— Betting and Gaming Council (@BetGameCouncil) August 12, 2025
Naive tax plans and political grandstanding won’t help
The BGC states the amounts increased from £27 billion ($37 billion) to almost £53 billion ($72 billion), with a significant direct benefit of collecting more tax, overall.
They went on to aim a stinging attack at “think tanks for hire, like the Social Market Foundation and IPPR, (which) are in bed with anti-gambling prohibitionists who simply don’t like our industry.”
Then the BGC pointed to a contradiction with the organizations wanting to see fewer people gambling, but basing their research and report recommendations on existing numbers still gambling.
“How can you reduce the number of people betting and increase taxes simultaneously?”, posed the Council.
The response finished with pointed political questions directed at the current UK government and a defense of the betting industry. The BGC insisted that it wants to play its part to help stimulate economic growth, but “naive tax plans and political grandstanding won’t help with any of that.”
Image credit: BGC
