Zizobet
-
-
-
-
- Neosurf
- MiFinity
- CashtoCode
-
-
-
-
- Wager
- 30–45x
- Payout
- 24h
- Min dep
- £10
- Licence
- Curaçao
Are you 18 or over?
Regulon contains information about real-money gambling. You must be 18 or over to continue.
North Korea, Iran and Myanmar are the key countries covered by Gibraltar’s FATF-linked restriction. Section 8.3 of the 2026 AML Code states that the Gambling Commissioner expects licence holders not to do business with countries on FATF’s high-risk call-for-action list. Those three countries appear in FATF’s June 2026 statement.
Advertising disclosure: we may earn commission from links below. How this works
That is the Gibraltar-specific starting point, not a complete list of every country a casino may exclude. Additional restrictions arise from the destination’s gambling laws, local licensing requirements and the operator’s own policy. For players, the reason matters: a regulatory restriction, a prohibited casino service and an unavailable regional account are different situations.
Gibraltar’s 2026 Remote AML Code, section 8.3, connects the Commissioner’s no-business expectation to FATF’s call-for-action list. AML means anti-money laundering; FATF is the Financial Action Task Force, the international standard-setting body concerned with money laundering and related financial crime.
The FATF statement of 19 June 2026 identifies:
FATF’s statement distinguishes countermeasures for North Korea and Iran from enhanced due diligence for Myanmar. Myanmar nevertheless remains on the call-for-action list. The Gibraltar expectation attaches to membership of that list; it should not be reduced to the two countries subject to FATF countermeasures.
This distinction prevents a misleading conclusion that Myanmar is merely grey-listed. It also avoids describing FATF itself as a gambling regulator issuing a worldwide casino ban. FATF identifies financial-crime risks; Gibraltar’s Code establishes the relevant expectation for its licence holders.
Section 8.3 treats countries under increased monitoring differently. Operators should incorporate the information into their risk assessment and consider enhanced due diligence. Grey-list status does not carry the same no-business expectation under that section.
FATF’s June 2026 increased-monitoring statement says grey-listing does not itself call for enhanced due diligence or cutting off entire categories of customers. Its approach is risk-based. Gibraltar’s instruction to consider additional checks should be read alongside that distinction, rather than turning both lists into one prohibited-country list.
For example, the June grey list includes Bulgaria and Monaco. Their appearance there is not evidence that section 8.3 places them in the same category as Iran. Equally, it does not establish that a particular casino may accept their residents: local rules and account exclusions still need to be considered.
FATF status is not the same as a sanctions designation. Gibraltar’s government sanctions guidance explains that sanctions can target countries, individuals, companies or economic sectors. The three-country answer above therefore should not be read as an exhaustive account of every financial restriction affecting a gambling business.
For a player receiving a sanctions-related notice, the useful question is which measure or designation the operator is applying, to the extent it can explain it. Do not infer that an entire nationality is excluded merely because an individual or company is sanctioned. Equally, absence from FATF’s call-for-action list does not resolve a separate sanctions issue.
Both FATF lists are periodically revised. This article uses the June 2026 statements available at its 2 October 2026 review; a later addition or removal should be assessed against the new statement, not an old copied list.
Country restrictions need a stated reason. The same word, “restricted,” can describe four different situations:
More than one reason can apply at once. A jurisdiction’s removal from a FATF list therefore does not automatically open every casino account to its residents. Conversely, one operator withdrawing from a country does not establish a new countrywide gambling prohibition.
The source of a restriction also tells you where to look for an explanation. A compliance notice should identify the applicable rule; a market-exit notice should explain the provider’s change. Neither should be mistaken for a complete statement of every gambling law affecting that location.
The six markets below illustrate additional destination-country rules, checked on 2 October 2026. They are separate from the FATF-linked Gibraltar restriction above. Each row concerns real-money online casino services; countries omitted from this comparison are not automatically permitted.
| Country or region | Position on online casino services | Is a Gibraltar licence alone sufficient? | Player’s next check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Great Britain | UK Gambling Commission authorisation required | No | Match the account operator and casino permission in the UKGC register |
| Spain | Spanish authorisation required | No | Check the operator and authorised website through the DGOJ |
| Netherlands | Dutch authorisation required | No | Search the Ksa register for the company, website or app |
| France | Online casino services are prohibited | No | Read ANJ guidance; distinguish casinos from authorised poker or betting |
| Australia | Providing online casino services to people in Australia is prohibited | No | Read ACMA guidance; a wagering licence does not authorise an online casino |
| Ontario, Canada | Private operators require AGCO registration and an iGaming Ontario agreement | No | Check Ontario’s regulated-site directory and the exact account website |
In Great Britain, an overseas gambling licence does not authorise an operator to supply online gambling to consumers. The UK Gambling Commission explains this requirement regardless of where the business is based. Holding a Gibraltar gambling licence does not remove that requirement. Great Britain means England, Scotland and Wales; this summary should not be extended automatically to Northern Ireland.
Guidance from Spain’s gambling regulator, the DGOJ, explains that licensed operators provide the legal online market. For a Gibraltar-connected group, the practical question is which company and website hold Spanish permission. Permission for one gambling product should not be assumed to cover every casino activity.
In the Netherlands, use the Dutch gambling authority’s Ksa licence register, which supports searches by company, website, app or licence number. Its records connect the local authorisation to the service a player can actually use.
France’s ANJ states that online casino sites are illegal in France and that an international casino licence has no recognised legal value for that activity there. This concerns casino products such as slots and roulette. It should not be misread as saying that all online gambling is prohibited: France has an authorised offer for other categories, including certain poker and betting products.
Australia’s ACMA consumer guidance identifies online slots and casino-style services, including blackjack and roulette, as illegal services. A Gibraltar licence does not make their provision to people in Australia lawful. ACMA also warns that Australian regulators cannot help recover winnings withheld by illegal providers. A site accepting Australian customers is therefore not evidence of permission.
For Ontario’s private market, operators need registration with the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) and an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. The province’s official explanation of its gambling market distinguishes these operators from OLG’s separate offering.
Check the Ontario website rather than assuming a group’s international account has equivalent status. This is a provincial example, not a statement that all of Canada has the same rules. Other provinces require their own assessment.
Use this single checklist before registering or depositing. It connects the country rule to the account you intend to open:
A real example shows why the company matters. Gibraltar’s register lists Hillside (Gibraltar) Limited within the bet365 group. The UKGC record for Hillside (UK Gaming) ENC identifies a separate company, with a Malta head-office address and British remote casino permission. The shared brand does not make those licences interchangeable.
Also distinguish a licence register from a website blocklist. ACMA’s blocking guidance concerns action against particular illegal services; absence from that list is not permission. Gibraltar’s consumer warnings document false licensing claims, making a copied logo equally unreliable. Positive evidence of the relevant authorisation carries more weight than either a badge or the absence of a warning.
Residence describes where you normally live; physical location describes where you are when using the service. A restriction may depend on either. An account accepted at home does not automatically carry permission to gamble abroad.
There is also a difference between account access and wagering. iGaming Ontario’s player guidance says players can open or access an account outside Ontario, but cannot place wagers on it from outside the province. Logging in successfully therefore does not establish permission to play.
Before a trip, use the eligibility checklist for the destination. Ask separately about viewing your account, gambling and requesting a withdrawal. A restriction on play need not answer the question of how to recover an existing balance. If a location message appears, retain it and ask what activity it affects.
A permanent move may require updated proof of address, a different regional account or closure of the existing service. Ask the operator which applies before using the account from your new address.
Clarify the treatment of your balance and pending withdrawals before agreeing to a transfer. A familiar brand does not establish that money, bonuses or account history move automatically between regional companies. Updating a payment card also does not update your recorded residence.
A VPN can change how a connection appears, but it does not change the rules where you are or make you eligible under the account contract. Access gained by masking a location cannot supply missing legal permission.
Read the operator’s location and verification terms for the consequences that apply to your account. Do not assume either that every VPN connection automatically forfeits a balance or that a successful login means the operator permits location masking.
If a location check appears wrong, give support your actual location and ask how to resolve the error through its normal process. Keep any relevant message. Accurate information lets the operator distinguish a technical problem from a genuine restriction; supplying a false address can create an additional dispute.
A market exit, a regulatory restriction and an alleged breach of account terms are different events. None should be treated as an automatic answer about the final treatment of your balance.
Request confirmation of your cash balance, pending withdrawals, affected bonus and any deadline. Ask whether you can use the cashier or need support to arrange payment. For withdrawals from a restricted account, establish whether documents are outstanding, a payment is delayed or the amount itself is disputed. Retain the notice and transaction history.
Complain first to the account operator, identifying the amount, dates and remedy you seek. For eligible British-regulated disputes, UKGC ADR requirements provide for referral after eight weeks, subject to permitted pauses, or earlier when deadlock or a final position is reached. ADR is free to the customer.
For Gibraltar casino complaints, the Commissioner’s procedure sets referral conditions and provides the Complaint Resolution Request Form. Exhaust the internal complaint process first. The Commissioner cannot independently order consumer redress, so an upheld complaint does not guarantee payment.
For gambling licensed in both Gibraltar and the UK and taking place in the UK after 1 November 2014, that procedure requires the relevant operator’s agreement to referral. Gibraltar is not an automatic second appeal for every British account. Use the route covering the company and transaction involved.
Start with the reason for the restriction, then use the checklist to connect it to your account. Keep any country-change notice and arrange clarification about your balance before acting on unclear instructions.
Eligibility does not remove the risk of losing money. Respect self-exclusion and set affordable limits. GamCare offers support in Great Britain; elsewhere, use an appropriate local service.
No. The country restrictions discussed here apply at different levels: Gibraltar oversight, destination-country law, local authorisation and the operator’s contract. A genuine Gibraltar casino license proves neither permission to serve every market nor acceptance of every customer. Use the company and product attached to your account to identify the applicable rules, rather than treating the group’s headquarters as the answer.
Not necessarily. First identify which list you are reading. FATF statements, operator exclusions and enforcement blocklists answer different questions. The terms may also contain broader residence or lawful-use conditions without naming every country. Missing from one list does not mean all the other requirements have been met. If a provider’s position remains unclear, obtain clarification before sending money.
No. It establishes that a payment went through. It does not prove that the provider has the necessary permission or that you meet every account condition. If you discover a location problem after depositing, stop betting and ask how the balance will be handled. Keep the receipt and registration confirmations: they document what happened, but do not themselves guarantee a refund.
Yes. FATF revises its statements, and operators can also change the markets they serve. Read any notice for its reason, affected service and effective date. Distinguish the date gambling stops from instructions for account access or withdrawals. A provider’s exit should not be described as a new national prohibition unless the official legal position supports that conclusion.