91天堂原創

Auditor Slams Ontario Over Casino Privatization Process, AML Oversight

December 1, 2022
Request a Demo
Back
Two high-profile reforms of land-based and online gambling in Ontario have come under scrutiny after an Auditor General report criticized the province鈥檚 lottery corporation for accepting reduced revenue commitments from private casino operators and the Attorney General faces litigation seeking to upend a new iGaming regulatory regime.

Body

Two high-profile reforms of land-based and online gambling in Ontario have come under scrutiny after an Auditor General report criticized the province鈥檚 lottery corporation for accepting reduced revenue commitments from private casino operators and the Attorney General faces litigation seeking to upend a new iGaming regulatory regime.

Auditor General Bonnie Lysyk on Wednesday (November 30) released a 71-page 鈥溾 on the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (OLG), which manages Ontario鈥檚 land-based casino and lottery markets and until April was the sole legal operator of online gambling in Canada鈥檚 most populous province.

The highly critical report took aim at 鈥渟ignificantly reduced revenue commitments鈥 now in place for certain land-based casinos under OLG鈥檚 so-called modernization plan to privatize the day-to-day operations of land-based casinos across the province, which was first announced in 2012.

The audit found that three casino operators were given approval by OLG even prior to the pandemic to adjust the minimum revenue commitments included in their original contracts.

This enabled Hard Rock Ottawa to reduce the projected revenues under its contract by 25 percent, after its minimum guaranteed share to OLG actually reached 75 percent of total revenue, rather than an initially forecasted 40 to 50 percent.

Similarly, Great Canadian Gaming Corporation was permitted to reduce its guaranteed minimum annual commitment from a bundle of four casinos to the west of Toronto by C$70m, according to Lysyk's report.

The auditor said that 鈥渨hile OLG had no obligation to accept these reductions, they provided the requested relief to Great Canadian and Hard Rock because OLG told us that not doing so could have led these casino operators to enter bankruptcy protection, resulting in a lengthy and complicated court process.

鈥淗owever, OLG assessed the financial viability of these operators based solely on the regional operations without considering the overall financial health of the casino operator and their parent companies.鈥

Overall, updated revenue projections from partly privatized casinos across eight regions of Ontario have been reduced by some C$9.1bn for their first ten years of operations relative to the initial bids made by operators, costing the province some C$320m annually.

OLG, in addition, did not include capital investments proposed by operators as conditions in their actual contracts, with several operators since not following through with their initial plans.

鈥淏y agreeing to lower financial projections that negatively impacts OLG鈥檚 revenue share, OLG weakened its ability to achieve the government鈥檚 objectives of maximizing provincial profits and private sector capital investments,鈥 the Ontario auditor said.

鈥淚t also failed to hold casino operators to the contracts they signed and in one case, another casino operator would have won the contract if the unreasonableness of the successful casino operator鈥檚 bid had been seriously considered during the competitive bid process.鈥

The auditor called on OLG to avoid any further changes to the commitments made by operators, and to re-procure new operators if any 鈥渁re unable to deliver on the revenue and capital investment commitments included in their existing contracts.鈥

Elsewhere, the report criticized OLG for not being proactive in enforcing anti-money laundering (AML) compliance and failing to aggregate casinos鈥 AML reports for filing with federal regulators. It also recommended that OLG introduce new requirements to verify the source of funds of all patrons for cash transactions of C$10,000 or more.

The auditor鈥檚 report further expressed concern that OLG鈥檚 PlayOLG internet gambling offering was now facing increased opposition for private operators partnered with a separate government entity, iGaming Ontario.

Bolstering OLG鈥檚 market share would be a 鈥渟ignificant revenue advantage鈥 for the province, as the Ontario government retains around 45 percent of iGaming revenue from OLG versus just 5.7 percent of the 20 percent share paid by private operators.

The auditor called on OLG to develop a clear strategy to introduce new online products, including more real-time games in collaboration with other provinces, and leverage its ongoing monopoly on online lottery products.

In a formal response to the Auditor General report, OLG said it welcomed the recommendations regarding its casino modernization program that 鈥渉as resulted in $1.7 billion in capital infrastructure investments made by the private sector.鈥

OLG said it would expand its efforts on AML compliance and agreed that casino operators should be held accountable for their contractual commitments. Regarding online gambling, OLG said it was actively expanding PlayOLG鈥檚 live dealer games category and exploring the introduction of a poker product.

Legal Challenge Launched Against Ontario Online Regime

Publication of the Auditor General report regarding OLG came just two days after the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake (MCK) filed a notice to challenge iGaming Ontario and the province鈥檚 Attorney General before the Ontario Superior Court, on grounds that the province鈥檚 new regulatory system for private internet gambling operators fails to comply with a requirement of the Canadian Criminal Code for provincial governments to directly 鈥渃onduct and manage鈥 all gambling within their jurisdictions.

Although unrelated to the OLG audit, Lysyk did raise such a challenge as a potential legal risk in a similar last year.

The MCK filing alleges that Ontario鈥檚 online regime falls foul of the Criminal Code as private operators, not the province, own and operate their own proprietary platforms, procure their own suppliers, are responsible for 鈥渒ey decision-making activities鈥 and meeting compliance obligations, and are the 鈥減rimary beneficiaries of revenue generated.鈥

The application before the Superior Court seeks an order either quashing the iGaming Ontario regime or rendering it inoperative, along with a declaration that Ontario鈥檚 government does not conduct and manage the gambling activities of private operators.

Ontario鈥檚 Ministry of the Attorney General told VIXIO GamblingCompliance that it was reviewing the MCK application but 鈥渁s this matter is before the Courts, it would be inappropriate to comment further.鈥

Still, legal experts believe that the province should be well prepared for the challenge brought by the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake as the Criminal Code question is far from an obscure one.

That the province鈥檚 iGaming regime complies with the conduct-and-manage requirement has been very carefully evaluated by lawyers in the Attorney General鈥檚 office, as well as by those representing the industry, said Don Bourgeois, counsel at Fogler Rubinoff law firm and former Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario general counsel.

The province has also applied various measures to meet the requirement, such as by ensuring iGaming Ontario controls the monies generated through internet gambling, the range of games permitted, and the AML processes that all operators must follow.

Further, if Ontario鈥檚 iGaming regime does not comply with the Criminal Code, then that would also threaten the comparable 鈥渕odernization鈥 structure of OLG and its multiple contracted operators of land-based casinos in Ontario, along with casino and charitable gaming structures in other provinces such as Alberta, British Columbia and Saskatchewan.

鈥淚f the model is so offside of the Criminal Code, then the bulk of gambling in Canada is offside of the Criminal Code,鈥 Bourgeois told VIXIO.

In a press conference announcing the legal challenge, MCK chief Mike Delisle said Ontario鈥檚 model was not only hurting the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake economically, but also 鈥渁lienating us from an industry, I wouldn鈥檛 say we鈥檝e spearheaded, but definitely played a major role in globally since 1999/2000.鈥

Our premium content is available to users of our services.

To view articles, please Log-in to your account. Alternatively, if you would like to gain access to the tools that will help you navigate compliance risk with confidence please get in touch today.

Request a demo

Simply complete the fields below to register your interest. You鈥檒l then be given the option to book a specific appointment with our team.

You understand that by completing this form, you are also signing up to receive marketing communications from us. You can opt out of such communications at any time. Please see our .

Submission sent
Please enter a work email address
Please select an industry of interest
Still can鈥檛 find what you鈥檙e looking for?
Get in touch to speak to a member of our team, and we鈥檒l do our best to answer.
Contact us
No items found.