In Estonia, 2026 began with an unusual episode: some online gambling operators voluntarily decided to pay nearly half a million euros to the state to cover a tax they were not actually required to pay due to a legislative error.
It all stemmed from a drafting mistake in the tax law adopted in December, which effectively excluded online casinos from the remote gambling tax for the first two months of the year.
Parliament stepped in to correct the rule, but the amendment will only take effect in March. In the meantime, the Ministry of Finance suggested an unconventional solution: if you wish, you may make a donation equivalent to the unpaid tax.
And that is exactly what happened. Eight operators agreed, paying a total of around €497,000 — a figure that rises above €637,000 when the income tax applied to donations is taken into account.
Four companies donated the funds to the Cultural Endowment, which receives a share of gambling revenues, while four others paid directly to the Ministry of Finance.
This gesture, in a sector often at the center of tax-related controversies, did not go unnoticed. Estonia has 41 remote gambling license holders, but only a few chose to “self-tax.”
If the law had been in force from January, the state could have collected nearly €2 million in just the first two months. At present, only a little over a quarter of that potential amount has been covered.
Strictly from a legal standpoint, the companies had no payment obligation. From a reputational standpoint, however, the situation looks different.
Gambling revenues directly fund cultural activities and other sensitive areas of the public budget, and the sudden loss of income could have fueled a political debate unfavorable to the sector. In this broader discussion about operator responsibility and player-facing value, topics such as payment flexibility including options covered in our guide to bonus crab casino paysafecard and long-term retention strategies like casino rewards also remain highly relevant.
In March, the 5.5% tax rate on monthly net revenue from remote gambling will return, restoring normal tax conditions.
Even so, the episode remains noteworthy, revealing a curious dynamic: in a sector where tax pressure and economic sustainability are often debated, some companies chose not to take advantage of a temporary regulatory loophole.
It is not every day that tax authorities invite people to pay voluntarily — and someone actually does.
