New Zealand’s largest illegal lottery operator sentenced over US$6.2 million operation

Dig Deeper

The Backstory

A prosecution lands as New Zealand rewires online gambling

The sentencing of Waiariki Mcllroy-Jones closes one enforcement case but opens a larger question for New Zealand: how far illegal online gambling has already embedded itself before the country’s regulated market begins. Authorities said the Jonez LRC operation generated more than NZ$11 million in annual revenue, drew about 70,000 participants and sold more than 287,000 entries for prizes including cars, boats, caravans, cash and a freehold house. For regulators, the size of the case made it more than a one-off breach of lottery rules.

The Department of Internal Affairs brought the charges under the Gambling Act 2003, which limits gambling activities with prizes above NZ$5,000 to licensed, nonprofit organizations. The agency’s first prosecution of an illegal online lottery therefore arrives at a pivotal time. New Zealand is preparing to move from a largely prohibited online casino environment into a licensed market, a transition that gives the department broader powers but also raises expectations that it will act against operators outside the system.

From offshore access to a domestic licensing regime

For years, New Zealanders have been able to access offshore gambling sites even though online casino gambling was not legal domestically. The government’s answer has been to create a limited licensing model rather than leave the activity in a gray market. The Department of Internal Affairs began preparing the industry for that shift when it opened a register of interest for prospective online casino operators, signaling that companies seeking approval would need to engage early with the regulator.

That outreach was framed as a way to design a system that was clear for operators and safer for consumers. Officials argued that regulation would help reduce harm and improve customer protections, while also bringing advertising and tax obligations into a controlled framework. The model is not open-ended: The government has said licenses will be awarded through a competitive process, limiting the number of legal operators and attempting to avoid a flood of new entrants.

The policy turn has not been without opposition. Tribal leaders have argued against liberalizing the gambling market and urged the government to halt the auction of online casino licenses. Their objections reflect a broader concern that legalization can expand exposure even when paired with controls. The illegal lottery case strengthens the government’s counterargument that prohibition has not kept large-scale digital gambling schemes from reaching consumers.

Parliament gives regulators sharper tools

The legislative foundation for that shift was set when New Zealand’s online casino bill cleared its final parliamentary reading. The bill placed oversight of online casinos, including offshore-based companies that serve New Zealand customers, with the Department of Internal Affairs. It also authorized up to 15 licenses through a competitive process and required operators to identify and exclude problem gamblers, comply with consumer protection rules and pay tax in New Zealand.

Those provisions matter in the context of the Mcllroy-Jones case because they move enforcement beyond after-the-fact prosecution. The new regime gives the department wider authority, including takedown notices, formal warnings and fines that can reach NZ$5 million for serious or repeated breaches. It also creates financial incentives for compliance by allowing licensed operators to advertise legally to New Zealanders while forcing tax contributions into the domestic system.

The bill also linked online gambling revenue to public benefits, including support for sport and social causes. That was politically important because offshore and illegal operators can extract money without returning revenue through taxes, community funding or harm-reduction systems. The illegal lottery prosecution illustrates the gap lawmakers are trying to close: Participants faced risk, a private operator generated significant revenue and the state had to rely on criminal and civil recovery tools after the fact.

Rules put consumer protection at the center

The government’s implementation rules show how tightly New Zealand intends to supervise licensed igaming once the market opens. In regulations published ahead of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 taking effect, officials set out detailed protections for players, including spending, deposit and play-time limits. The rules also require self-exclusion tools, time-out options and break-in-play features, with customer identity verification before accounts can be activated.

Those measures, described when the government published online gambling rules for the new market, are aimed at distinguishing licensed operators from the kinds of informal or illegal schemes that regulators say can scale quickly through online channels. The rules prohibit credit cards and other credit-based payment methods for igaming deposits, ban autoplay mechanics on slot games and prevent users from playing more than one online slot at the same time.

Advertising is also tightly circumscribed. The regulations ban sponsorship-style advertising, affiliate marketing, promotions encouraging impulsive play, personalized offers designed to increase spending and marketing aimed at under-18s. Gambling ads will be restricted from public transportation and the front pages of print publications. Operators must submit regular reports on user activity and profits and pay a quarterly levy equal to 3.5% of online gambling profits.

That compliance burden is central to the state’s strategy. Legalization is being paired with conditions designed to make the regulated market unattractive to bad actors while giving consumers a safer alternative to unlicensed sites. The challenge is that illegal operators, by definition, do not face those costs unless enforcement is visible and credible.

Prediction markets test the boundaries

The department’s stance on new forms of event wagering shows that New Zealand is not limiting its attention to casinos and lotteries. It recently concluded that prediction market platforms Polymarket and Kalshi are illegal under New Zealand gambling law. The decision treated event contracts on politics, sports, monetary policy and other outcomes as gambling products when offered to New Zealanders by unauthorized operators.

That position matters because prediction markets occupy a contested space between financial products, information markets and betting. New Zealand’s Financial Markets Authority has indicated that some products could meet the definition of derivatives, but that does not necessarily remove them from the Gambling Act. The Department of Internal Affairs’ view is that if New Zealanders are staking money on uncertain outcomes through unauthorized platforms, the products fall within the gambling perimeter.

The regulator’s approach mirrors a broader international trend. Australia’s gambling regulator has also classified such platforms as gambling, and New Zealand officials have said notification letters would be issued for clarity. For licensed casino applicants, the message is clear: The new regime will not be defined solely by traditional games. Authorities are trying to draw a firm line around any digital product that functions like wagering, especially when marketed across borders.

Regional scams heighten the enforcement stakes

New Zealand’s domestic enforcement also sits against a wider Asia-Pacific backdrop of online gambling, scams and cross-border labor exploitation. In Myanmar, authorities recently sentenced 18 Nepali nationals to prison for work at illegal online gambling and scam centers near the Thai border, according to reporting on the Myanmar enforcement case that cited Makalukhabar. The case was part of a broader action involving hundreds of foreign nationals.

Those operations are different from the New Zealand lottery case, but they point to the same structural issue: online gambling businesses can scale rapidly, recruit across borders and operate beyond the reach of ordinary consumer protections. Reports from the Myanmar case said workers were often recruited with promises of digital marketing or customer service jobs, only to have passports confiscated and be kept under tight security. The enforcement challenge therefore extends from consumer loss to organized crime and human vulnerability.

For New Zealand, the Mcllroy-Jones sentencing is likely to be read as a warning shot before licensing begins in earnest. A regulated market can create lawful channels, tax revenue and harm controls, but it also creates a sharper distinction between approved operators and everyone else. The department’s first illegal online lottery prosecution signals that the state wants that distinction to have consequences. As the 2026 framework approaches, the credibility of New Zealand’s gambling overhaul will depend on both sides of the equation: licensing operators that meet the rules and pursuing those that do not.