Is Curaçao finally getting Serious about Crypto Gambling Regulation?

[Nwada001]

Was this risk scoring never part of the licensing requirements before now? And now players need to take their AML checking seriously before sending money directly to any casino as it could be flagged and I did not see return policy included in their the risk of losing a flagged coin is high even if the person is asked to pass KYC AND they did that won’t still guarantee a refund.

[danherbias07]

It's nice to see. But is it real or just on paper?

C'mon, we all know how corrupt the world is. The use of money can create a new agreement that would offer a license even without hitting those requirements. It will be great if they implement this strictly, but looking at how many online gambling sites are coming out, I highly doubt they are being strict about it.

Also, let's say an online casino passed all those requirements, how are they sure nothing will be changed afterwards? Will they monitor these online casinos and revoke their license once proven changes have been made? I doubt that. Because no one is paying to do it.
The payment before the license is good, but afterwards, meh.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Can you point to anywhere that compulsory KYC is mentioned? Maybe I was fast in reading it, but I did not see anywhere that mention compulsory KYC.

It's pretty obvious when you look at the new requirements. They don't necessarily have to mention KYC verification, but how do you expect them to tighten their AML policies without tightening KYC?

Also, do you know any crypto gambling platform that has a valid license but has no mention of KYC/AML policies in their terms of service?

[STT]

It might be in their own best interests to assume the role of some regulation to this license, reason being this sports gambling especially is going mainstream.  It will be on demand by via various regulated jurisdictions.  Having no standard at all puts themselves out of business and someone else will do the job of vetting operations instead.

[salad daging]

Anjouan Gaming - This license as of now may not be too strict, fees are cheap, the process is quite fast there could be leeway in terms of KYC, I see many crypto casinos using license providers from Anjouan Gaming.

You can read the article.
https://ggrsoft.com/blog/anjouan-igaming-license/

Gambling platforms will simply move to another licensor if Curacao makes the process difficult and expensive. Most gamblers don't care about the worth of the license; they just want quality services. I am also seeing an increase in the use of Kahnawake licenses. Operators could easily get the license within eight weeks and offer no corporate tax on gambling income.

The gambling industry requires effective regulation, and licensors have important roles to play. If Curaçao is restructuring the process of acquiring its license for effective regulations, then it's a welcome development. 

I don't know if switching from license A to B is easy, or if casinos that already have a Curaçao license, for example, still have to comply with the rules by continuing to upgrade, unless the casino is new, then it will choose an easier license.

Kahnawake? Is this a new license? I haven't seen this license, most of the casinos I know in this forum don't use this license unless I missed some casinos, do you think Kahnawake is not too strict?

We as players really don't care where the license is from, the important thing is that the license already means the casino is legal under hukung, about quality service that is what gambling players expect.

[Sandra_hakeem]

Curacao license might not be the easiest access anymore for many casinos that want to start an online casino, as just recently there was news that they are strengthening their regulations and that includes the following

Taken from the news

https://igamingbusiness.com/legal-compliance/cga-curacao-crypto-gambling-regulations-mid-2027-deadline/

Key requirements for iGaming operators include:

Role restriction: Licensees may only accept crypto for gambling, not as exchanges, custodians or VASPs.
Blockchain analytics capability: Mandatory wallet screening, risk-scoring and transaction monitoring at deposit and withdrawal.
Asset controls: Fiat-backed stablecoins preferred; privacy coins, meme coins and wrapped tokens of unclear origin require assessment or exclusion.

It's more unsettling to learn that both of these rules were not applied alongside the first set of regulations/ prior to the first and second adjustments. What then was on the list of regulations if not these, especially for the warning of not accepting crypto as VASPs? Below are other rules, like the strict no-KYC restrictions--- Was any casino under the curacao licensing authorities offering services without them before now?

Can you point to anywhere that compulsory KYC is mentioned? Maybe I was fast in reading it, but I did not see anywhere that mention compulsory KYC.

It's pretty obvious when you look at the new requirements. They don't necessarily have to mention KYC verification, but how do you expect them to tighten their AML policies without tightening KYC?

It's either he read too fast like he said, or he just wasn't able to decipher what the new terms carry.

[JeffBrad12]

I thought that the point of this licese is just to make the gambling site sounds official and authorized. It's because they have 0 standard rules before. However, Curacao regulator seems change their mind because so many gambling platforms are using this Curacao license.
They're now even ordering to screen all of wallets involved in the crypto gambling that used their license and they're also starting to ban anything related to the mixer 2027. So this may be pushing the gambling operator not to use their license anymore.

What do you think, can casinos still find another license provider that has lax implementation like the old Curacao? Because definitely not all of them can pass these requirements, especially those that offer no KYC or anonymous gambling

Casino can find another license that lets them operate however they wish. There are some licenses such as Malta and Anjouan. It most probably many of gambling operators will migrate to those licenses.

[Hispo]

It's nice to see. But is it real or just on paper?

C'mon, we all know how corrupt the world is. The use of money can create a new agreement that would offer a license even without hitting those requirements. It will be great if they implement this strictly, but looking at how many online gambling sites are coming out, I highly doubt they are being strict about it.

Also, let's say an online casino passed all those requirements, how are they sure nothing will be changed afterwards? Will they monitor these online casinos and revoke their license once proven changes have been made? I doubt that. Because no one is paying to do it.
The payment before the license is good, but afterwards, meh.

Perhaps there is something behind all this we are not actually taking into consideration, it could be there are regulators from the United States and the United Kingdom whom are pushing license issuers all around the world to hold some high standards, similar to the ones which are held by casinos and bookies established in Europe and inn the United States.
On paper, it sounds good and aimed to improve safeness for gamblers and bettors, but I keeping in mind of lax Curaçao has been through all these years, it would take some actual pressure from other governments for Curaçao to start to assign time and money in order to keep an eye on casinos and bookies under those licenses they have issued and guarantee they continuously have those KYC/AML and Blockchain analysis features that got mentioned on their document.

Time will tell.

[Cointxz]

What do you think, can casinos still find another license provider that has lax implementation like the old Curacao? Because definitely not all of them can pass these requirements, especially those that offer no KYC or anonymous gambling

There’s Anjouan and Costa Rica. I believe there’s still more will arise in case there will be a demand for an alternative to Curacao.

I think this might be the reason why many new casino seek Anjouan license instead of Curacao license. Even some well established casino do changed from Curacao to Anjouan.

This is good update for Curacao but I doubt casino will stick if there’s an alternative while players doesn’t care much about the license.

[suzanne5223]

I believe they have been pushing this movement since lst yer nd ccording to what I read, they are planning to restrict master license holders while the gambling platform that wants to acquire their license must do it directly from the board member. However, it is too early to know maybe they will make some amendments in the future.
Having said that, what is bout to happen won't make it hard for gambling platforms that want to have their license; they're just strengthening their license while prevent mnipultion nd ny form of abuse

[davis196]

What do you think, can casinos still find another license provider that has lax implementation like the old Curacao? Because definitely not all of them can pass these requirements, especially those that offer no KYC or anonymous gambling

The world is full of small island countries, that are searching for an easy revenue source. Maybe Curacao is about to be replaced as the main jurisdiction, where crypto casinos get their gambling licenses. I appreciate the effort of the authorities at Curacao to finally strengthen their gambling regulation and ban all suspicious wallets, that are connected to mixers, sanctioned individuals and companies.
I have the feeling that the non-KYC gambling providers have absolutely no desire to pass any requirements whatsoever. The shady and unregulated part of the online crypto gambling industry will remain as it is: shady and unregulated.

[Sanitough]

I believe they have been pushing this movement since lst yer nd ccording to what I read, they are planning to restrict master license holders while the gambling platform that wants to acquire their license must do it directly from the board member. However, it is too early to know maybe they will make some amendments in the future.
Having said that, what is bout to happen won't make it hard for gambling platforms that want to have their license; they're just strengthening their license while prevent mnipultion nd ny form of abuse

The main point I see here is that they want to strengthen the monitoring against money laundering. Regulators believe that casinos are one of the best places for money launderers, so with lax regulation, it can easily be abused.

And because of that, even us who are not planning to do any money laundering will still be affected, because stricter rules will apply to all of us. But the good news is that even though this news came out, currently I am still enjoying no KYC on the casino I am using, so it seems we are still fine for now.

[X-ray]

I guess Curacao finally realized how big potential they can get from exploring their regulation. That's why they tightening the regulation to get their license. So this will push all of casinos to migrate to the another license.

The non KYC casino and anon casino have no chance other than find another place to go. I won't be surprised if most of casinos will use Anjouan license in the future.

This may be a blunder by Curacao, but since their reason to prevent money laundering. They're not doing it wrong.

[Maslate]

I guess Curacao finally realized how big potential they can get from exploring their regulation. That's why they tightening the regulation to get their license. So this will push all of casinos to migrate to the another license.

It is more about compliance, I guess, than revenue opportunity, because these changes will significantly affect their revenue. Casinos will always find license providers where the regulations are not too strict. So like you said, they would probably go to an Anjouan license, since there are already many casinos using this license. But eventually, maybe after a year or two, they will also become more compliant, just like Curaçao.

And yes, when it comes to compliance with the law, I think they are doing the right thing that way.

[Lida93]

Currently, do we even have an absolute no KYC online casinos?! Because I usually argue about that notion that some casinos are no KYC just because they said so and do not also request for immediate KYC on registration. But with time you'll find same casino creating reasons to rationalize why they would like you to pass a KYC. Only time reveals all of that. As fn the part of lax implementation, it makes much vulnerability on players which shouldn't be.