Spain’s 17 Regions Push Back on DGOJ Gambling Overreach

All 17 of Spain’s autonomous communities have signed a joint document defending their authority to set the terms of business for land-based gambling venues, opening a fresh rift with the national regulator over how much control regions should retain as Spain moves toward more unified gambling rules.

A Joint Document Defending Regional Powers

The document and the concerns behind it were aired at the Expo Congress in Madrid, where regional officials laid out what they see as overreach by the Directorate-General for the Regulation of Gambling (DGOJ) into the licensing of venues and the application of fixed national rules.

The challenge is being led by Ramón Cubián, Madrid’s Director-General for Land and the official responsible for gambling in the capital region. Cubián, speaking to Spanish outlet AZAR Plus, said the document was submitted to the DGOJ and the Gambling Policy Council on September 7, following talks among all 17 regional administrations that began on July 14.

He emphasized that the agreement brought together governments with differing political priorities around a shared goal. “With all 17 autonomous communities present, we drew up proposals which we then circulated, incorporating contributions from several autonomous communities into a consolidated text,” Cubián explained. “We have not produced a political text; we have produced a working document defending freedom and the powers of the autonomous communities.”

At the core of the regions’ concerns is a push to preserve their existing authority over land-based gambling, including licensing and the conditions that govern individual venues. Their worry is that an expanded coordinating role for the DGOJ could eventually override responsibilities that are currently assigned to regional governments.

Communities Argue They’re Closer to the Ground

Cubián argued that regional oversight is directly tied to the day-to-day supervision of gambling businesses and the protection of customers. “The autonomous communities are the authorities dealing with these matters every day. We have the daily responsibility to guarantee freedom of enterprise, freedom of leisure and protection for vulnerable people,” he said. “This is not simply about insisting that ‘this is my competence.’ It is the autonomous communities that protect vulnerable people within their territories, because that is our responsibility.”

He traced the current dispute back to discussions following the 2025 Gambling Policy Council, when he said the DGOJ first proposed taking on a coordinating role over protections for vulnerable land-based gambling customers. “There was an attempt to assume a coordinating role over the autonomous communities, telling us what we had to do to protect vulnerable people in land-based gambling,” Cubián said.

He maintained that shared national objectives should still leave room for regional differences. “Each autonomous community has a different political, economic, social and business reality,” he said. “The specific circumstances of gambling differ in each community, as do the number of gambling venues and people’s ways of life.” The joint agreement calls for regional governments to be included in decisions affecting land-based gambling going forward, including any future changes to retail distribution. “We ask that these matters be analysed with everyone participating, including within the Gambling Policy Council, so that there is coordination between the state and the autonomous communities,” Cubián added.

DGOJ Pushes a National Framework Without a Clear Timeline

The DGOJ, for its part, maintains that its mandate from the Ministry of Consumer Affairs supports aligning Spain’s fragmented gambling framework around common protection standards. The regulator and the ministry continue to work on joint initiatives, including a universal deposit-limit system and a shared algorithm designed to detect gambling harm and risky behavior.

The proposed universal deposit-limit system would apply a €600 daily cap across all licensed online operators, closing the loophole that currently lets customers treat each operator’s deposit allowance as a separate limit. The companion algorithm would set common criteria for identifying risky gambling behavior and triggering intervention, while separate reporting requirements for players under 21 are also envisaged as part of the wider protection framework.

Despite those ambitions, frustration persists over the DGOJ’s failure to provide operators and stakeholders with detailed technical documentation for these projects, which were first presented back in 2023. Businesses say they need clarity on data requirements, system integration, risk indicators and intervention procedures in order to prepare, and the continued absence of those specifications has left open questions about delivery timelines and operational obligations.

Cubián voiced support for stronger safeguards against identity theft in online gambling, while insisting that any legislative changes must also reinforce institutional cooperation rather than centralize control. “Taking advantage of this amendment to the Gambling Act, the framework for institutional collaboration should be guaranteed, maintaining an effective protection system and the effectiveness of the national system itself,” he said.