Genting Casinos UK CEO Highlights Risks from Machine Gaming Duty Proposal

Paul Willcock, who serves as CEO of Genting Casinos UK, delivered a detailed warning in a CityAM opinion piece about the effects of a planned increase in Machine Gaming Duty on the company's operations across the country. The Treasury has considered raising the rate that applies to gaming machines from 20% to 40% as part of the October budget process, and Willcock stated that this adjustment would render 13 of the firm's 32 UK casinos unprofitable or unsustainable. Those sites represent 38% of the portfolio, and the shift could place 850 jobs in jeopardy while also affecting the local economies that rely on regular casino visits for footfall and spending.

Details of the Warning and Financial Projections

The duty increase targets machines directly, and Willcock explained how the higher rate would compound existing cost pressures that already affect land-based sites. Multiple casinos operate on tight margins because of fixed expenses such as rent, staff wages, and compliance requirements, so doubling the levy on machine revenue would eliminate the remaining profit at those 13 locations. Observers note that the company has tracked revenue patterns closely since the earlier rise in remote gaming duty, which established a precedent for higher taxation across different segments of the gambling sector.

Data from internal modeling shows that machine income forms a substantial portion of total revenue at many Genting properties, particularly those outside major city centers where table games generate less consistent returns. The calculation indicates that after the duty adjustment, net proceeds would fall below the level needed to cover operating costs at the affected venues. This outcome would force decisions on closures or significant reductions in opening hours, both of which carry direct consequences for employment numbers.

Survey Evidence from Industry Members

A Bacta membership survey provides supporting context for the scale of the potential impact across the wider sector. Every respondent in that survey anticipated a negative effect from the proposed Machine Gaming Duty change, and 90% described the expected impact as severe. The results align with Willcock's assessment because they capture views from operators who run similar machine-heavy sites and who have already absorbed the previous duty rise on remote products. Those who studied the survey data observe that smaller and mid-sized casinos face the steepest challenges, since they lack the scale advantages available to larger integrated resorts.

The survey also recorded concerns about knock-on effects for suppliers and local businesses that depend on casino traffic. Participants described how reduced machine profitability would limit investment in new equipment and refurbishments, which in turn would slow customer visits and further erode revenue. Figures from the responses reveal a consistent pattern: operators expect to cut staffing levels first, followed by venue reviews that could lead to permanent closures in marginal locations.

Employment and Regional Economic Connections

The 850 jobs identified in Willcock's analysis represent roles that range from croupiers and machine technicians to security and hospitality staff. Many of these positions sit in towns and cities where the casino functions as a notable employer and a draw for evening and weekend visitors. Local suppliers, including food and beverage providers plus transport services, would experience reduced demand if multiple sites scale back or close. Researchers who track regional gambling data have documented similar ripple effects in past cases where duty changes or regulatory shifts altered venue viability.

Willcock pointed out that the October budget timing leaves limited room for operators to adjust pricing or product mixes before the new rate takes effect. Because machine duty applies directly to gross gaming revenue, any attempt to offset the increase through higher stakes would require regulatory approval and could trigger further compliance costs. The combination of these factors leaves the company with few immediate levers to protect the affected sites.

Context Within Recent Tax Developments

The proposed Machine Gaming Duty adjustment follows the earlier increase in remote gaming duty, which raised the rate on online products and established a pattern of higher taxation across different gambling formats. Industry records show that Genting Casinos UK has maintained steady investment in its land-based estate despite those prior changes, yet the cumulative effect of successive duty rises now threatens to exceed the tolerance of certain venues. The Bacta survey captured this cumulative pressure when members described how the latest proposal would compound the margin squeeze that began with the remote duty adjustment.

Official budget documents have not yet confirmed teh final rate, yet the warning from Willcock and the survey results have already entered public discussion ahead of the October announcement. Stakeholders continue to review the figures to assess how many additional sites across the UK might face similar pressures if the 40% rate applies uniformly.

Conclusion

The statements from Genting Casinos UK and the accompanying Bacta survey data outline a clear set of projections tied directly to the proposed Machine Gaming Duty increase. Thirteen casinos, 850 positions, and connected local economies stand at the center of those projections, with the October budget date serving as the immediate decision point. Further updates will depend on the final Treasury announcement and any subsequent operator responses.