Spain’s 17 autonomous communities have reportedly backed a joint document defending their authority over land-based gambling and calling for regional powers to be respected as the DGOJ expands coordination.
The move does not change existing law or introduce new operator requirements, but it highlights growing debate over the balance between national oversight and regional control.
All 17 autonomous communities have reportedly backed a common position defending their powers over land-based gambling
The initiative focuses on licensing, venue conditions, market planning and the role of regional governments in future reforms
Regional representatives are concerned that greater DGOJ coordination could extend into areas already handled by autonomous communities
Spain’s existing gambling law provides a framework for cooperation between the state and regional authorities
No immediate change to licences, venue rules or operator obligations has been announced
The dispute centres on the balance between national coordination and regional decision-making.
The DGOJ regulates Spain’s state-wide online gambling market, while autonomous communities retain important responsibilities for land-based gambling within their territories. Regional governments can therefore apply different rules depending on local market structures, venue distribution and policy priorities.
Ramón Cubián, the gambling official for the Community of Madrid who helped drive the joint initiative, highlighted those differences.
Cubián said:
Each autonomous community has a different political, economic, social and business environment.
The position does not reject cooperation with the national government. Instead, regional representatives are seeking assurances that common player-protection objectives will not reduce their existing role in regulating physical gambling environments.
Spain’s legal framework already recognises cooperation between the state and autonomous communities.
Under Law 13/2011 on gambling regulation, published in the Boletín Oficial del Estado, the Gambling Policy Council acts as the coordination body between the central government and Spain’s autonomous communities.
The law also allows both sides to develop regulatory proposals according to their respective competencies. For the land-based sector, this distinction matters because regional authorities retain responsibility for many rules governing physical gambling activity.
The current initiative therefore represents a debate over how those existing competencies should operate as Spain develops more coordinated player-protection policies rather than a formal change to the regulatory structure.
The disagreement comes during a wider period of regulatory development in Spain.
Earlier this year, Spain approved a cross-operator deposit limit system designed to track player deposits across licensed online operators rather than applying limits separately to each platform.
That measure strengthens centralised oversight in the nationally regulated online market. However, regional authorities appear keen to ensure that similar coordination does not automatically extend into land-based gambling without recognising their existing powers.
Technology is also becoming more prominent in Spain’s player-protection approach. The DGOJ is developing its own player-risk system after collaborating on a gambling risk model developed with Dutch researchers. The technology uses behavioural data to help identify patterns associated with potentially risky gambling.
These measures sit alongside the DGOJ’s 2026–2030 player safety programme, which places greater emphasis on prevention, early detection, research and cooperation between regulators and other stakeholders.
For operators, there is no immediate regulatory change to respond to. The joint document itself does not appear to have been made publicly available, and no new licensing or compliance measures have been introduced as a result. Its importance instead lies in the signal being sent by Spain’s regional authorities.
The reported agreement across all 17 autonomous communities suggests that the division of responsibilities could become an important issue in future discussions around gambling reform, particularly where national player-protection measures could affect retail venues.
Operators active in Spain’s land-based market will therefore need to follow both national policy developments and regional regulatory decisions. The next stage will depend on how the DGOJ, the Gambling Policy Council and autonomous communities handle that balance as broader reforms continue to develop.
