UKGC Cites High Cost to Reveal 8XBet, 6686 Owner Docs

Article Content

UKGC Withholds Ownership Data on White-Label Brands

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has withheld information regarding the ultimate owners of gambling operators 8XBet and 6686, citing the excessive cost and time required to search its records. A Freedom of Information (FOI) response published by the regulator reveals that it holds a "large number of records" relating to the two brands, which operate in the UK as white-label partners of TGP Europe.

Context: The Importance of Operator Ownership

For consumers, understanding who ultimately owns and profits from a gambling website is a key part of corporate transparency and accountability. White-label arrangements, where a brand uses the gambling licence of an established operator like TGP Europe, can sometimes make it difficult to identify the ultimate beneficial owners.

This request, dated 6 December 2023, sought to clarify this by asking for a simple count: the number of documents held by the Commission that identify the ultimate owners of 8XBet and 6686.

Details of the Refusal

Instead of providing a number, the UKGC refused the request by invoking Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act. This exemption allows public bodies to decline requests where the cost of compliance would exceed £450, which is equivalent to 18 hours of staff time.

The Commission explained its reasoning:

"In order to identify, locate and retrieve the information requested, we conducted a search relating to 8xbet and 6686 which retrieved a large number of records... we estimate that it would take in excess of 18 hours to determine appropriate material and retrieve and extract any relevant information."

Essentially, the UKGC holds so much documentation mentioning 8XBet and 6686 that manually reviewing it all to find specific ownership files would be too resource-intensive to meet the FOI requirements.

Significance: What This Reveals

While the specific information was not disclosed, the nature of the refusal is itself revealing. The existence of a "large number of records" suggests that these two white-label brands are the subject of significant documentation within the UK's regulatory body. This could encompass a range of materials, from licensing applications and compliance assessments to customer complaints and other regulatory correspondence.

The response highlights the challenge of achieving full transparency within the complex structures of the online gambling market. The fact that the regulator cannot quickly and easily retrieve fundamental information about the ultimate ownership of brands operating under a UK licence raises questions about how accessible this information is for consumers and the industry at large.

The Commission noted that a more refined, narrower request might be answerable within the cost limits, but as it stands, the ultimate ownership of these brands remains unconfirmed through this official channel.