The Upper Tribunal has wiped out millions of pounds in Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) assessments against Jumpman Gaming in a ruling that could have major implications for the UK’s online casino sector.

On 25 September, Jumpman won its appeal against HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) over the tax treatment of promotional free spins, with the court ruling that approximately £13.2m in additional RGD should be reduced to zero.

The dispute concerned a Jumpman welcome offer for new customers, who could make a qualifying deposit to receive a free spin of its Mega Reel. The promotional game could then award further free spins on other casino games.

HMRC demanded approximately £13.2m in RGD from Jumpman for the accounting periods between July 2018 and December 2022. It argued that extra free spins won through the promotion should be treated as gaming payments for tax purposes.

Earlier HMRC victory overturned

A First-tier Tribunal sided with HMRC last year regarding those subsequent spins. However, Upper Tribunal judges have now overturned that part of the decision.

In a highly technical ruling, the case was overturned on the interpretation of section 159A of the Finance Act 2014, specifically with regards to parliament’s definition of “the gaming” when it set out an exclusion from RGD for certain freeplay promotions.

HMRC argued that the carveout applied only to freeplay generated by earlier gaming activity, where a payment had been waived. Jumpman countered that the legislation referred to remote gaming more generally.

The Upper Tribunal preferred Jumpman’s interpretation, explaining that HMRC’s approach could require operators to track the origin of a freeplay through a chain of prior transactions that was potentially too long.

The judges concluded that such an extensive tracking exercise did not emerge naturally from the legislation. As a result, the further free spins fell within the statutory exclusion, and therefore did not create an additional RGD liability.

The tribunal also left in place the earlier finding that Jumpman’s initial free Mega Reel spin was not taxable, resulting in the full £13.2m RGD bill being slashed to nothing.

A win, but not on every point

The judgment was not a complete endorsement of Jumpman’s arguments, however.

For example, the operator unsuccessfully challenged the First-tier Tribunal’s treatment of the initial Mega Reel spin.

Jumpman argued the spin was essentially a normally paid-for game being provided free of charge, while the Upper Tribunal found that the lower tribunal had been entitled to conclude otherwise.

In particular, the Mega Reel displayed a “spin value” that did not necessarily represent a price that a customer would otherwise have paid, while Jumpman’s internal accounting treatment was not made visible to customers.

Paid versions of the Mega Reel were also only offered occasionally and on an invitation-only basis, although that distinction likely worked in Jumpman’s favour.

The initial promotional game generated no RGD liability, while the further free spins it awarded qualified for the statutory exclusion.

Jumpman also won on a separate point about how tax laws should be interpreted. The First-tier Tribunal had refused to consider government documents published before the RGD rules were changed in 2017, whereas the Upper Tribunal said those documents should have been taken into account.

Consultation documents proved the government had already considered the problem of repeatedly taxing freeplays and had ultimately decided it could meet its policy objectives by taxing the first use of freeplays only.

Operators keep close eye on Jumpman

This decision looks set to have a significant impact on more than just the bottom line of Jumpman Gaming.

Evoke explicitly identified the outcome of this case as a potential multimillion-pound exposure.

In its FY 2025 accounts, the William Hill owner said it faced potential exposure of £17.6m if HMRC succeeded in the Jumpman appeal and moved to chase other operators for under-declared RGD.

At the time, Evoke did not recognise a provision for that £17.6m, because management said it did not consider the outcome probable, treating it instead as a potential risk.

Elsewhere, Jumpman parent company and Betway owner Super Group had taken a different position following the First-tier Tribunal defeat.

Super Group’s 2025 annual report recorded a related $26.4m provision. Of that amount, $16.9m related to RGD, while the remainder accounted for estimated penalties and interest.

Super Group acquired a majority interest in Jumpman in September 2022 and acquired the remaining stake in 2024. Jumpman forms a major part of its online casino business and operates some 200 brands, generating nearly all of its UK revenue.

Decision lands as UK RGD hits 40%

The judgment arrives at a sensitive time for UK online casino taxation.

RGD increased from 21% to 40% on 1 April 2026, meaning promotional play now carries much bigger tax consequences for operators than during the period covered in the Jumpman dispute.

HMRC’s guidance now states that RGD is charged at 40% of a gaming provider’s profits from remote gaming with UK customers.

The ruling around freeplay is important from a commercial perspective, especially for casino-first brands, where free spins, bonuses and promotions are key to acquisition and retention.  

NEXT.io will monitor the situation closely as HMRC may still seek permission to appeal.