FINTRAC Fines Two Canadian Gaming Corporations C$631,538 Over AML Failures

FINTRAC imposed a C$399,712.50 penalty on New Brunswick Lotteries and Gaming Corporation on 24 July. The corporation committed one very serious violation for failing to file three suspicious transaction reports when reasonable grounds for suspicion existed.

The cases included common identifiers used by unrelated players, shared credit cards, links between unconnected parties and suspected false identification. FINTRAC cited excessive prepaid-card deposits and chargebacks that could indicate unauthorised use.

These findings matter across the Canada gambling market because automated alerts only create value when teams investigate, document and escalate them. For stakeholders assessing provincial structures, the New Brunswick online casino market provides context on how gaming oversight operates locally.

Nova Scotia Gaming Corporation received a C$231,826 penalty on 23 July for three violations. FINTRAC found that it failed to submit two suspicious transaction reports involving attempted transactions. Indicators included shared player details, suspected false or stolen identification, difficulty establishing identity, and chargebacks.

However, the Nova Scotia case extended beyond missed reports. Its written compliance policies did not fully document and apply ministerial directives. The corporation also lacked a documented enterprise-level assessment covering money laundering and terrorist financing risks across its overall activities.

The first violation was classified as very serious, while the policy and risk-assessment failures were classified as serious. The Nova Scotia online casino landscape offers jurisdictional context for businesses monitoring how provincial gaming models interact with federal financial-crime obligations.

The distinction between the cases is important. New Brunswick demonstrates a breakdown at the point where player activity should have triggered reporting. Nova Scotia shows how the same exposure can be amplified by incomplete policies, weak documentation and inadequate enterprise oversight.

Effective AML compliance therefore requires more than software capable of identifying unusual activity. Operators and gaming bodies need clear thresholds, trained investigators, accountable senior officers, current written procedures, and evidence showing how risks are assessed across products, payment methods, and customer segments.

This direction is visible internationally. AMLA’s 2026 consultation on a unified AML/CFT framework focuses on risk-based supervision and more consistent suspicious transaction reporting. For gaming executives, the practical lesson is that alerts, case management, governance, and regulatory reporting must operate as one connected control environment.

FINTRAC’s public penalty register shows that the two corporations are not isolated cases. Atlantic Lottery Corporation was also fined C$212,025 in 2026, while the regulator reported a record 35 notices of violation across all sectors in 2025–26.

Stéphane Sirard, FINTRAC’s acting director and chief executive, said:

We will take firm action, when it is required, to ensure that businesses do their part.

Canadian gaming enforcement is also extending beyond financial crime. Ontario’s AGCO recently fined Booming Games C$70,000 over a prohibited autoplay feature, reinforcing the wider expectation that regulated businesses continuously test their controls.

For B2B leaders, the message is direct. Compliance must be demonstrable at transaction, policy, and enterprise levels before an examination begins.