LeoVegas ordered to stop advertising in New Zealand

Dig Deeper

Related stories

2025/05/30: Bodog ordered to stop operating in Manitoba 2025/09/29: New Zealand influencers fined NZ$125,000 over online gambling promotion 2025/11/10: New Zealand orders offshore gambling site 20Bet to stop targeting residents 2025/04/01: New Zealand warns influencers they face fines for advertising offshore casinos

The Backstory

Why the advertising crackdown matters now

New Zealand’s order for LeoVegas to stop promoting offshore gambling services lands amid a clear shift from warnings to sustained enforcement. Regulators have moved from policing obscure web promotions to targeting high-visibility marketing channels, media partnerships and influencer campaigns that helped offshore brands reach New Zealand audiences. The Department of Internal Affairs, which oversees gambling compliance, has signaled that geo-agnostic advertising no longer flies if the message is tailored to local customers or accessible on mainstream platforms. The string of actions in the past two years shows authorities testing legal levers, setting precedent with takedown demands and fines, then widening the net to repeat offenders and their marketing pipelines.

The playbook has become familiar: identify offshore brands targeting New Zealand, issue cease-and-desist notices or public warnings, and pressure distribution points such as social media and streaming platforms. The department’s focus has also expanded to sponsorships and influencer deals, reflecting how operators piggybacked on sports culture and creator economies to normalize unlicensed gambling. That context helps explain why the latest order is not a one-off but part of a coordinated campaign to squeeze the commercial incentives that keep the grey market active.

Earlier orders set the tone

Regulators have progressively escalated their stance as offshore operators tested the boundaries of the Gambling Act. Last year and into this year, authorities issued formal notices against multiple brands, culminating in a recent directive to halt local marketing by 20Bet. The move was framed by officials as a necessary response after lawmakers strengthened measures in June to make it illegal for overseas operators to accept bets from inside New Zealand. The government’s position, underscored by the country’s single licensed sports betting channel, is that promotion of overseas gambling is prohibited, full stop. That posture was clear in the order against 20Bet for advertising to New Zealanders, which cited YouTube spots that leaned on Kiwi identity in their calls to bet.

The 20Bet action built on months of agency work narrowing promotional loopholes. Before ramping up fines, the department targeted messaging conduits and demanded immediate takedowns. That shift first became public when officials confirmed they had warned creators and opened investigations tied to offshore brands. As RNZ reported at the time, authorities emphasized that each offending ad exposed the promoter to penalties, and that remote interactive gambling was squarely within the law’s reach. The agency’s approach, documented in early warnings to influencers pushing offshore casinos, was a prelude to more forceful steps against both promoters and the operators they supported.

Influencers emerge as a frontline

Once officials began pressing creators and their sponsors, the landscape changed quickly. The department’s initial warning letters and investigations gave way to fines that tested the sector’s appetite for risk. A tally of penalties this year, including four creators hit with a combined NZ$125,000 over illegal promotions, signaled that the agency was not only watching but ready to levy repeat sanctions. Authorities also fined a Curacao-based online casino for multiple breaches tied to sponsored posts, a move intended to deter offshore operators from using local influencers as de facto ad networks. The escalation is detailed in enforcement actions against New Zealand influencers for promoting overseas casinos, which describe a rising volume of complaints and a growing watchlist.

Those penalties reshaped incentives in two ways. First, they raised the cost of doing business for offshore brands that relied on traction through viral content and personality-driven marketing. Second, they created reputational and financial risks for creators whose audiences skew younger and more online. By targeting the messenger, regulators undermined the utility of one of the grey market’s most effective acquisition channels. That shift amplifies the impact of cease-and-desist notices on operators, including the directive to 20Bet and the latest order that has drawn public scrutiny to LeoVegas’ promotions.

Policy meets public health

New Zealand’s crackdown is not only about jurisdiction and licensing. It’s also framed by a public health narrative that has gained urgency as digital betting proliferates. Annual gambling losses exceed NZ$2.6 billion, with Māori and Pasifika communities bearing outsized harm. To counter the normalization of online wagering, the government and community partners launched a nationwide campaign that pairs attention-grabbing creative with a digital support platform. The effort, designed by a Māori-led agency and a public health group, aims to spotlight the mechanics of gambling products and encourage breaks from play. The strategy and its cultural focus are laid out in New Zealand’s responsible gambling ad campaign targeting Māori and Pasifika audiences.

Public health messaging and enforcement reinforce one another. As regulators tamp down unauthorized ads and sponsorships, the campaign fills the void with counter-marketing that reframes gambling as a risky, engineered product. That also prepares the ground for the government’s next phase: a more defined legal market with higher penalties for noncompliance. Officials have flagged new legislation that would open the door to licensed online casinos and tougher sanctions for operators outside the system. The mix of enforcement, education and future licensing is meant to steer consumers toward regulated offerings and away from offshore sites that face little accountability.

What a regulated future could look like

The planned reforms would mark a pivot from the current prohibition on offshore advertising toward a regime that sets standards for who can operate and how they can market. Policymakers have signaled interest in a limited number of online casino licenses and much stiffer penalties for those who ignore the rules. In practice, that could mean clearer responsibilities for affiliates and influencers, stronger age-gating and identity checks, and a requirement that licensed brands maintain local compliance operations. It also raises expectations that enforcement will get sharper, with powers to disrupt access and payment flows for persistent offenders. The transition period matters: with new rules on the horizon, the department has tightened interim controls to prevent an advertising free-for-all ahead of licensing.

For offshore brands that built New Zealand audiences through sports tie-ins and creator deals, the calculus is changing. Comply with takedown orders and pause local marketing now, or risk future exclusion from a potentially valuable licensed market. For consumers, the short-term effect may be fewer high-profile betting ads and more visible harm-reduction messages until licensed operators emerge under stricter oversight.

A regional marker beyond New Zealand

New Zealand is not alone in seeking court-backed leverage against offshore gambling. In Canada, provinces and state-run lottery corporations have begun testing legal strategies to shut out unlicensed sites. A recent ruling in Manitoba ordered Bodog to stop offering gambling to residents and mandated geoblocking to prevent access within the province. The decision, brought by a coalition of provincial operators through the Manitoba regulator, is seen as a template for wider crackdowns in Canada. The stakes and tactics are outlined in the case that forced Bodog to cease operations in Manitoba, including orders directed at entities behind the sites.

The cross-border parallels are striking: regulators leaning on court orders and technology mandates, ramping up penalties for promoters and pressing platforms to police their ad inventory. For New Zealand, the recent wave of notices and fines builds a record of enforcement that could support stronger measures if offshore brands resist. For operators, the message is consistent across jurisdictions. Advertising into a market without a local license can invite rapid action, reputational damage and, increasingly, judicial remedies that cut off access at the source.