India’s blanket ban on online money games shutters a ₹25,000 crore industry, but history shows bans fuel offshore gambling, risking jobs, taxes, and consumer safety instead of curbing play.
Rajat Jain, Senior Corporate Lawyer at Vaish Associates
Earlier this week, Parliament passed a bill that effectively outlaws all forms of online money games in India, which includes rummy, poker, fantasy sports, and other games long recognised by courts as games of skill. Now that the bill has the Presidential assent, every domestic operator has shut down operations. An industry that contributed over ₹25,000 crore annually in taxes, employed 2 lakh people directly and indirectly and built intellectual property over the past decade, has been shutdown overnight.
This is not just about companies or gamers but also about livelihoods, national security, and consumer protection. And the uncomfortable truth is this: bans don’t work.
Perhaps a fitting example is that of Telangana that banned online real money gaming back in 2017. Post the ban, a survey conducted by PRAHAR, an NGO that studied users in Hyderabad, showed that 87% still played daily on offshore betting and casino platforms, while 89% found access to these sites is “very easy” through VPNs, Telegram groups, or APKs. Far from curbing gambling, the ban turbocharged offshore operators.
National data reflects the similar patterns. After the GST hike to 28% in October 2023, offshore companies like Parimatch and 1xBet brazenly advertised: “Play here, no GST or TDS.” Between October and December 2024, offshore gambling platforms clocked 1.7 billion visits from India which is more hits than Facebook and Instagram combined. Deposits are estimated at $100 billion a year, depriving India’s exchequer of nearly $22 billion annually. Not a single offshore operator has ever registered to pay GST.
By shutting down legitimate domestic companies, India is handing over the market to unregulated foreign players.
Much of the public narrative has linked suicides and financial distress to domestic gaming platforms. The reality is far more complex. Domestic operators have never allowed credit; users could only deposit via regulated banking channels and verified payment gateways. Offshore operators, on the other hand, thrive on easy credit. Many players borrow through offshore loan apps, lose money and then face exorbitant interest rates and recovery agents. Non-institutional credit through predatory apps is the reason behind the tragic suicides in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, etc.
By conflating legal skill gaming with offshore gambling, the bill risks worsening the very social problems it sought to solve.
India has hundreds of professional poker and rummy players who compete globally. The new law does not criminalise players, but with domestic platforms banned, they will be pushed to unsafe offshore sites using VPNs. Many have already petitioned the government online, warning that their livelihoods are at stake.
Responsible players who willingly paid GST, played within self-imposed limits, and benefited from safeguards such as KYC checks and deposit caps, now have no legal avenue.
The online real money gaming industry is worth more than $3.5 billion, but its impact extends far wider. The sector has created nearly two lakh jobs, and its advertising spends were among the highest in digital and sports sponsorship. From cricket jerseys to ads on fintech apps, RMG platforms powered a multitude of different ecosystems. Industry leaders estimate that the knock-on effect of the ban could be 20 times the size of the sector itself.
Celebrity endorsements, influencer marketing, and fintech ad revenues have already been frozen. Players’ associations, event organisers, and content creators are now staring at empty pipelines.
Supporters of the ban argue that games like poker or rummy involve chance. But every competitive activity has an element of chance: even cricket outcomes depend heavily on the toss of a coin. What matters is the predominance of skill. Courts have consistently favored the argument of dominance of skill, to legitimize games like rummy and poker. Mathematical models show that in poker and rummy, skill accounts for over 90% of outcomes.
Blanket bans erase this distinction, ignoring 70+ years of jurisprudence and treating skill gaming as gambling.
India has dealt with similar challenges before. Futures and Options trading caused widespread retail losses post-COVID. SEBI did not ban it; instead, it tightened rules, capped exposures, and introduced safeguards. The solution was regulation, not prohibition.
The PRAHAR survey shows the public understands this too: 94% of respondents support regulation over a blanket ban. Regulation can mandate age checks, deposit limits, advertising standards, and responsible gaming features, all of which legitimate operators have voluntarily implemented. Offshore operators, by contrast, offer none of these safeguards.
The choice before India is not between gaming and no gaming. The demand exists, and consumers will find ways to play, whether legally or illegally. The real choice is between a regulated domestic industry that protects users, creates jobs, and generates taxes, or an underground economy that fuels fraud, money laundering, and risks national security.
Blanket bans will not end gaming. They will only in fact certainly push it further into the shadows, where the risks are greatest and the costs—both human and financial are higher.
Empower your business. Get practical tips, market insights, and growth strategies delivered to your inbox
By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy & Terms & Conditions
