The warning that sparked concern
The three major UK bookmakers – Ladbrokes (part of Entain), William Hill (owned by Evvoke) and Betfred’s Fred Done – have repeatedly told ministers that heavy taxes or strict rules could push punters toward illegal offshore sites. They argue that a crackdown would hand business to operators that lack licensing, safety nets, or contributions to British racing. Their calls have been heard in parliamentary debates and media interviews, painting a picture of an industry trying to protect both its customers and the broader sporting ecosystem.
“While the UK’s biggest gambling firms have been warning about the risks of growing the illicit market if the government increases tax and regulation, the very same firms are profiting from it,” said Matt Zarb‑Cousin, a long‑time reform campaigner and director of the gambling‑blocking company Gamban. “If the gambling industry is concerned about the black market, it needs to get its own house in order by cutting all ties with it.”
A hidden partnership revealed
The arrangement came to light after the Casino Secrets leak, a cache of confidential files from Curaçao’s gambling regulator. Among the documents is a contract signed in 2022 between Sports Information Services (SIS) and the Santeda network, an offshore casino group accused of targeting vulnerable UK gamblers and fined in Spain for operating without a licence. SIS, which supplies live race and esports data, is part‑owned by the three bookmakers. The contract shows SIS agreed to provide Santeda with data and content for two years, with an automatic renewal clause, and to receive a share of the losing bets placed through Santeda’s brands.
The leaked file makes clear that the agreement does not permit the use of SIS data in the UK, yet it appears to have supplied information to multiple Santeda websites that a previous Guardian investigation found was illegally targeting UK customers, including via promotional material apparently aimed at people trying to quit. Santeda’s Curaçao licence does not allow it to operate in most leading jurisdictions that regulate gambling, such as the UK and the US.
Profits and dividends that followed
Since the SIS‑Santeda agreement was signed, the shareholders of SIS have collected at least £37 million in dividends, according to Companies House records. Ladbrokes’ parent Entain holds a 23 % stake, which translates to roughly £8.5 million in payouts over the period, with £30 million paid in 2023 alone. William Hill’s near‑20 % share has generated more than £7 million for its owners, Evoke, while Fred Done, a director of SIS, owns an 8 % share and has received close to £3 million.
A spokesperson for SIS said all of its customers agree to “only offer SIS products where it is legal to do so and where they have the necessary regulatory licences”. They added: “Customers commit that they will comply with all such laws and licences at all times. Where SIS becomes aware that these terms are not being adhered to it takes corrective action to enforce the position, up to and including suspension or termination of contracts.”
The companies maintain they were unaware of the offshore link and that SIS’s controls prevent them from seeing commercial details about rivals. Entain said it was “not a party to the commercial or customer arrangements SIS decides to strike. Now that this relationship has come to light, we take it very seriously and have raised our concerns to SIS”.
The fallout and calls for accountability
The revelation has sparked anger among licensed operators. Industry sources describe the situation as “furious” and accuse SIS of undermining the very warnings the bookmakers have been issuing. Campaigners argue that the profit flow from an illicit‑scented partnership contradicts the industry’s public stance. Matt Zarb‑Cousin urges the sector to “cut all ties with the black market”. Meanwhile, Stella David, Entain’s chief executive, has criticised football clubs for “complicity” and warned that any tax hike could inadvertently boost the underground operators the industry claims to oppose.
Even Fred Done, who is also a director of SIS, has warned the chancellor this month that higher taxes on slot machines – under consideration as part of the upcoming budget – would drive punters to illicit market sites that don’t pay tax, contribute to horse racing or exercise regulatory controls.
Why it Matters
This story exposes a glaring double standard within a powerful industry that publicly champions consumer protection while privately reaping profits from operators it denounces as rogue. The financial links uncovered could undermine trust not only in the bookmakers themselves but also in the regulatory framework meant to safeguard gamblers. If lawmakers are to design fair taxation and oversight without inadvertently feeding the black market, they must first ensure that licensed firms are not complicit in the very illicit activities they condemn. The case also highlights the urgent need for greater transparency in ownership structures and supply‑chain agreements, so that future policy decisions are based on a clear picture of who really benefits from gambling revenues.
