## Regulating bodies The Norwegian Gaming Authority (the “NGA”) regulate and supervise all games of chance offered by the exclusive rights operators and private operators that have obtained licences to operate certain lottery, bingo, casino and poker services. Moreover, the NGA is responsible for enforcement against foreign gaming operators violating the Norwegian Gaming Act. ## Supervision by Regulator The NGA conducts annual audits of the exclusive rights operators, do regular compliance assessments, and regularly impose administrative sanctions against unlicensed operators offering or marketing gaming services targeting the Norwegian market. ## Enforcement against licensed operators The past few years, the NGA have issued several penalty fines against the exclusive rights operator Norsk Tipping for breaches of the Gaming legislation. Only the past two years, Norsk Tipping have been issued fines amounting to NOK 120 million. Cease-and-desist-orders and coercive fines have also been issued and notified. ## Typical triggers for enforcement against unlicensed operators Enforcement against unlicensed operators is typically triggered if the offering or marketing of gaming services is directed at the Norwegian market. As the provisions in the Gaming Act apply for the offering or marketing of gaming services that “target the Norwegian market”, it is not prohibited to offer or market gaming services to Norwegian customers as long as the services offered do not target the Norwegian market. Consequently, the fact that private operators allow Norwegian consumers to access their gaming services does not in itself constitute a violation of the Gaming Act. On a general note, making Norwegian laws applicable to activities conducted in other countries on the basis that those activities have an effect on Norwegian territory, raises several complex and debated questions of international law. Based on information provided in the preparatory works combined with decisions made by the Norwegian Gaming Authority, the assessment of whether an offer of gaming services may be considered directed at the Norwegian market must be carried out on a case-by-case basis, where the following elements are particularly relevant: The gaming website uses Norwegian names, symbols, or refers to itself as a Norwegian gambling offer, The text of the gaming website is written in Norwegian, Proceeds from the games are earmarked for Norwegian organizations, The gaming website or the marketing of gaming services showcase Norwegian support measures (e.g., the hotline for gaming addiction), The gaming website allows users to place bets with the Norwegian currency or informs the customer what the equivalent amount is in Norwegian currency, The website offers Norwegian customer support, The website offers gaming activities with the same name as activities provided by the Norwegian exclusive rights operators, The gaming services are marketed in Norway or through Norwegian channels, The website offers distinct Norwegian betting objects, such as the local government election in Norway or Norwegian game show results, The gaming provider actively seeks to circumvent the payment blocking measure, by facilitating payment to and from Norwegian customers and providing customers with information on how they can circumvent the payment blocking measure, The gaming website, the gaming provider or its parent company has Norwegian representatives, spokespersons, or ambassadors, and leaves an impression of being a Norwegian market operator. In the preparatory works, it is also noted that the factors relevant under this assessment may vary, subject to future developments in how unlicensed gaming services are designed and marketed. Although some relevant factors are provided, the list is non-exhaustive, and leaves considerable uncertainty. It is also interesting to note that the NGA recently have breached their own “targeting”-test, as listed above. Both the preparatory works of the Act as well as two Norwegian cabinet ministers have stated that foreign gambling operators are allowed to passively accept Norwegian players that themselves seek out foreign gambling providers. However, the NGA have in the past year issued several DNS-blocking orders towards gambling providers that do not hit any of the “targeting”-markers. ## Enforcement actions taken against unlicensed operators On a general note, enforcing Norwegian laws on foreign operators for activities conducted in other countries on the basis that those activities have an effect on Norwegian territory, raises several complex and debated questions of international law. However, the Gaming Act empowers the NGA with several enforcement mechanisms allowing it to take actions against unlicensed operators. The key provisions of the Gaming Act will be described in the following. The ban on the act of offering gaming services All games of chance (where the participant in exchange for a stake may participate in the game to win a prize of economic value) are covered by the offering ban, including online games. The ban is supplemented by the ban on the act of marketing gaming services, which will be explained in the section below regarding marketing. Firstly, the scope of the offering ban is determined by what constitutes an “offer” or a “contribution to offer” gaming services. In the preparatory works to the Gaming Act (in Norwegian: Prop.220 L (2020–2021) Lov om pengespill) it is noted that the offering ban should be interpreted broadly, and it is underlined that a specific assessment must be carried out to determine whether an activity may be considered covered by the offering ban. Several factors are listed as relevant under the assessment, but it is stated that, as a main rule, an activity will be covered by the ban if it is perceived by the public as an invitation to participate in games of chance. Secondly, the scope of the offering ban is determined by when an offer is considered to “target the Norwegian market.” Please see above for a further description of what constitutes targeting the Norwegian market. Access to information The Gaming Act empowers the NGA with the authority to demand access to information from “everybody”. The duty to give access to information is general and includes any piece of information that the NGA finds necessary to conduct its duties according to law. The information may be related to persons, businesses, organizations, or others that have a connection with the offering or marketing of gaming services. Furthermore, the NGA possesses the right to demand access to premises for conducting necessary inspections. Any party involved in the “matter” subject to inspection may be required to assist the NGA as it deems necessary for conducting the inspections. In the event of non-cooperation, the NGA may seek police assistance, provided it suspects that illegal gaming activities are offered on the premises. Failure to grant access to the requested information pursuant to the Gaming Act provision 26 may result in penalties for non-compliance in the shape of fines. Cease-and-desist orders The NGA is authorised to impose cease-and-desist orders. It may be imposed in the event of violations of provisions in the Gaming Act or in other regulations provided pursuant to the Act. The order shall be directed at whoever is the nearest to bear responsibility for the activity considered to violate a provision in the gaming regulation, which could be both a physical and a legal person. A failure to comply with a cease-and-desist order may trigger additional administrative or penal sanctions, such as the imposition of coercive fines or penalty for violations (fines). For online gaming services, a failure to comply with a cease-and-desist order may also lead to DNS-blocking of the online gaming services. Please see more abou DNS-blocking below. Coercive fines The NGA may impose coercive fines to ensure that an order to access information or a cease-and-desist order is complied with. In addition, the NGA, if it has a particular reason to believe that whoever has violated the Act or an order issued under the Act will commit new violations of similar character, it may impose coercive fines in advance. Such a fine would then enter into force at the same time the new violation is committed. Penalty for violations (fines) The NGA is granted power to impose fines for intentional or negligent violations of the offering ban, the marketing ban, the requirement to block payments to and from unlicensed gaming operators, and the abovementioned requirement to give NGA access to information. Such fines may be levied on the individual responsible for the transgression or, if the act was committed on behalf of the company, the fine may be imposed on the company itself. A penalty for violations may only be imposed if the violation is considered substantial or if it is committed on multiple occasions. The Act does not define what constitutes a "substantial" violation, but the responsible Ministry has clarified that it should involve a certain magnitude and may depend on factors such as the duration of the violation, its consequences, and the extent of damage caused. The maximum fine is 10 percent of the company’s net sales in Norway for the preceding year. For individuals, the maximum fine is as of 1st May 2025 NOK 130.160. ## Punishment Intentional or grossly negligent violations of the offering ban and the marketing ban are punishable by fines or imprisonment up to one year. An offense is subject to punishment only when it is considered “substantial”, where the extent, effect and degree of guilt is emphasised. Further, “aggravated” substantial violations are punishable by fines or imprisonment for up to three years. When determining whether the violation is severe, factors to consider include whether the action involves a substantial amount of money, is directed at children, is committed on multiple occasions or for some considerable time, or if the violation, for other reasons, must be regarded as particularly harmful. ## DNS-blocking The NGA is granted power to require internet service providers to implement DNS-blocking of websites that offers gaming services and target the Norwegian market without a licence issued by Norwegian authorities (“The DNS-blocking measure”). The preparatory works state that the NGA shall as a main rule have tried to contact the gaming services, before imposing DNS-blocking, and that a cease-and-desist order will be a normal first step before issuing a DNS-blocking order. Furthermore, a DNS-blocking order must be proportionate. This entail that the considerations in favour of issuing a DNS-blocking order must outweigh the specific interests that are adversely affected by the order, as well as the consideration of freedom of information and freedom of expression in general. The preparatory works indicates that the threshold for considering a DNS-blocking order as a disproportionate interference with the freedom of expression of the website owner, is high. Since the DNS-blocking provision entered into force on 1 January 2025, the NGA has required blocking of 238 websites, owned by 72 different companies. A recent notification to Norwegian internet providers included additional 62 websites that the NGA intends to DNS-block. The payment blocking measure The above-mentioned prohibitions in the Gaming Act are supplemented by a provision prohibiting the transfer of payments to and from gambling operators not holding a Norwegian licence. The prohibition also covers payments to and from other entities who facilitates payment transactions on behalf of unlicensed gaming companies. The provision is directed at Norwegian banks and financial institutions, requiring them to establish procedures that can detect transactions involving bets and winnings in gaming activities not licensed in Norway.
Norway · Question 10 of 11
Norway Gambling — Enforcement: How hard does the regulator enforce?
Unfavourable · Confirmed · Expert approved · 6 post-review updates · Not reviewed · In expert review scope · Back to full Norway report →
Key section parameters
| Jurisdiction | Norway (NO) |
|---|---|
| Regulator | Recorded in register |
| Favourability | Unfavourable |
| Confidence | Confirmed |
| Review status | Expert approved · 6 post-review updates · Not reviewed · In expert review scope |
| Last collected | 27 Oct 2026 |
Summary answer
## Regulating bodies The Norwegian Gaming Authority (the “NGA”) regulate and supervise all games of chance offered by the exclusive rights operators and private operators that have obtained licences to operate certain lottery, bingo, casino and poker services. Moreover, the NGA is responsible for e…
Not reviewed Read update
Lotteritilsynet notified 62 unlicensed gambling sites, including Polymarket and Kalshi, of intent to DNS-block them on 8 October 2026, acting under pengespilloven section 32a. Recipients face a response deadline of 15 October 2026, with a final blocking decision expected shortly after. This extends an established programme that has already blocked 238 sites across 72 companies, confirming the mechanism is operationally proven rather than newly created. The inclusion of event-prediction platforms marks an extension of the regulator's enforcement theory, which treats any gambling-style offering made available to Norwegian consumers without a Norwegian licence as falling within its statutory remit. The underlying notice or decision document has not itself been retrieved; the finding rests on corroborated press reporting from TV2 and Dagens Næringsliv. As a standing matter, the pengespillforskriften requires Lotteritilsynet to maintain and publish a register of blocked websites and the grounds for blocking, giving operators and the public visibility into the regulator's enforcement pattern.
Not reviewed Read update
Lotteritilsynet notified 62 operators of DNS blocking on 8 October 2026, extending an existing blocking programme that already covers 238 sites. The notice gives recipients until 15 October 2026 to respond before a final decision (vedtak) is expected. For the first time, the named operators include prediction-market platforms Polymarket and Kalshi, which the regulator's director, Atle Hamar, has stated publicly are treated as unlicensed gambling operators regardless of any licence held elsewhere. No official Lotteritilsynet press release or vedtak text was retrieved for this round; the account rests on the director's statements as corroborated across independent Norwegian press outlets (TV2, E24, NRK). The enforcement mechanism is the DNS-blocking order rather than a criminal prosecution route, consistent with the regulator's established pattern of administrative blocking against unlicensed, foreign-directed operators. No other enforcement event was identified this period.
Not reviewed Read update
Lotteritilsynet's enforcement activity this cycle spans two distinct tracks under the consolidated Gambling Act. The established track is DNS/ISP blocking of unlicensed offshore operators: formal decisions issued in March 2025, under a DNS-blocking power added to the Act by Storting amendment, forced blocking of 57 illegal gambling websites owned by 23 companies. The enabling statute is a durable instrument; the individual blocking decisions themselves are more fragile, case-specific actions subject to revision as sites and ownership structures change. The newer and more significant track this cycle is direct compliance enforcement against a licensed monopoly participant: Lotteritilsynet has threatened Norsk Rikstoto with daily fines over four responsible-gambling breaches concerning loss limits, risk controls and player-safety messaging, with fines for three breaches beginning to accumulate from 1 April 2026 and a loss-limit rollover penalty from 16 May 2026 if uncorrected within a three-week response period. This finding rests on trade-press coverage rather than a directly retrieved regulator decision, so it carries Probable confidence. The shift from offshore-only targeting to direct action against the state's own licensee indicates a rising compliance bar across the entire regulated sector, licensed and unlicensed alike.
Not reviewed Read update
Lotteritilsynet issued its first formal DNS-blocking decisions in March 2025 against 57 illegal gambling websites owned by 23 companies, exercising a power granted by Storting amendment to the Gambling Act for the first time. This sits alongside the durable, standing payment-blocking regime under the Regulation of 19 February 2010, which requires financial institutions to refuse transactions with unauthorised gambling operators, including MCC 7995 blocking. In parallel, the regulator turned enforcement inward: Norsk Tipping AS was fined NOK 36 million in February 2025 over self-exclusion failings and NOK 46 million over a technical failing affecting Eurojackpot and Lotto, while Norsk Rikstoto was notified of prospective daily coercive fines from 1 April 2026 for three breaches and from 15 or 16 May 2026 for a rollover-related breach, rooted in insufficiently clear risk messaging at registration and loss-limit modification. All findings carry Confirmed confidence. The statutory basis (Gambling Act, DURABLE; 2010 regulation, DURABLE) supports both extraterritorial and domestic enforcement without reliance on fragile guidance.
Not reviewed Read update
Lottstift enforcement intensity against Norway's two state monopoly operators escalated sharply this cycle. Norsk Tipping was fined NOK 25 million in September 2025 for an April 2025 draw error that wrongly omitted 16,968 customers, invalidating 52 winners, and a further NOK 10 million for a separate June 2025 Eurojackpot technical failure — two distinct incidents within months, pointing to a systemic technical-control weakness. A probable-confidence, secondary-sourced report also records a NOK 1 million Lottstift fine against Norsk Tipping for Money Laundering Act violations identified in a 2025 supervisory review; no primary Lottstift decision text was retrieved for this figure. Norsk Rikstoto separately faces a warning of daily fines from 1 April 2026 for four responsible-gambling breaches, an escalating enforcement mechanism rather than a one-off penalty. These cumulative, concurrent actions against both monopoly operators mark a material deterioration in compliance posture, even though the underlying monopoly legal structure itself remains unchanged this cycle.
Not reviewed Read update
Lotteritilsynet issued its first formal DNS-blocking decisions in March 2025, a Confirmed-tier finding corroborated by both the regulator's own materials and independent trade press, compelling internet service providers to block 57 illegal gambling websites owned by 23 different companies and redirecting affected users to a state-hosted information page. This sits alongside the pre-existing payment-intermediary blocking regime operating under Gambling Act section 5 since 2010, run in cooperation with Norwegian banks against unlicensed operator accounts. Durability differs across the two mechanisms: the DNS-blocking power is fragile in instrument terms, exercised through individual regulatory decisions rather than a standalone blocking statute, while the payment-blocking regime carries mixed durability given its statutory basis but bank-cooperation-dependent implementation. Together the two mechanisms substitute for direct extraterritorial prosecution, cutting offshore unlicensed operators off from both the technical access layer and the financial access layer connecting them to Norwegian consumers. The primary Nkom-specific technical order text underlying the March 2025 decisions was not directly retrieved this cycle, a sourcing gap that leaves the granular mechanics of the blocking order dependent on regulator and secondary summaries rather than the underlying instrument itself.