The Social Market Foundation has called for an increase in MGD on Cat B slots just three months after the Treasury hiked taxes on the industry, in a move criticised by trade bodies as “putting venues and jobs at risk.” However, the widely acknowledged anti-gambling think tank SMF claims more than 40 percent of voters from every major national political party back the increase.
The Social Market Foundation has called on the government to introduce MGD on Category B slot machines to 40 percent, in a move that will reportedly add more than £275m to the public finances and is supported by 43 percent of UK adults.
Despite the Treasury having already increased the tax burden on the industry, the think tank has urged ministers to increase the duty for machines in AGCs, arcades and bingo halls, which is currently set between 5 and 25 percent depending on stake.
“Our modelling shows that raising Machine Games Duty is one of the few tax rises that would actually improve the public finances twice over, once through higher receipts from the machines themselves, and again as spending shifts to sectors that generate more jobs and more tax revenue per pound,” said SMF chief economist Gideon Salutin.
“The way we’ve set it out ensures that tax is raised only on the most harmful type of slot machines, while insulating the hospitality industry entirely.”
Salutin added “the public clearly understands this,” indicating a recent survey of 2,047 people undertaken by Survation that suggested more than 40 percent of voters from every major national political party back the proposals.
However, speaking to SBC News, Regulus Partners’ Dan Waugh said the sample size of the survey was “a fairly thin basis for enacting policy, given that most adults in Britain don’t play machines and so would not be adversely affected.”
“It would be interesting to obtain a copy of the survey questionnaire as the framing of the question can influence how people respond.”
Bacta described the proposals as “a direct hit on Britain’s land-based gambling sector, but the damage would not stop there. It would be felt on high streets, in seaside towns, in social clubs, on piers, in family entertainment centres, across bingo premises, and throughout the supply chain of manufacturers, machine suppliers and small businesses that depend on this sector.”
The Gambling Business Group was equally critical. “The SMF has a long standing reputation for producing tax them high research targeted at the high street gambling industry. It clearly meets the ideological agenda, but its economic substance simply doesn’t add up. What I witnessed at the survey’s launch this week was an evangelical mission, and what the country needs is a growth one. And we keep saying this: you cannot tax the country into growth, and you cannot run fair trade through prohibition.”
The Bingo Association, too, were acutely aware of the damaging fall-out from a SMF vision, noting, “land-based bingo industry are deeply embedded in local communities. The proposals set out in the report would have a significant impact on bingo clubs and the communities and jobs which they support.”
Meanwhile one of the primary targets in the SMF sights were also fighting back. A spokesperson for the Betting and Gaming Council added that the organisation “fundamentally disagrees” with the proposal for an increase in MGD.
“Betting shops, bingo clubs and casinos support local jobs, help keep high streets alive and provide valued community spaces for millions of adults. A further increase in Machine Games Duty would put venues and jobs at risk while driving more customers towards the growing illegal gambling market.”
“Tax policy should be evidence-led and proportionate, recognising the pressures facing businesses across the regulated betting and gaming sector.”
Bourgeois BS
The Social Market Foundation, the Benedict and Beatrice Bourgeois of British think tanks is at it again
Cracking open one of their Cru Bordeaux reds, brought up from the wine cellar by Billy the Butler from Bermondsey, the SMF have conjured up their solution to save the ordinary classes from the evils of high street bingo, working men’s clubs, betting shops and AGCs.
The idea of middle-class intellectuals telling ordinary people what’s best for them has no place in 2026 Britain – and yet the Social Market Foundation continues to punt out the prohibition principles of 1926 as if it’s going to save the country.
This week’s round of gambling tax rise proposals is another instalment of the Foundation’s long-standing campaign against gambling. As an ideology, it’s one stop short of standing on every street corner handing out a copy of their latest survey “Addressing the Harm”. And the government and politicians should do exactly what ordinary people do when approaching those street corners. Walk on by.
Over the coming week we will hear a lot more from analysts, industry figures and business experts punching out the numbers and the economic equations raised by the SMF on Tuesday. And many will hope to delve deep into what is actually a very shallow pool. Even on the back of a fag packet, the SMF numbers don’t stack up. And that’s primarily because the think tank only thinks one side of the financial equation is important.
It defies all credible research in Europe on gambling taxation: raising taxes has led to a reduction in tax receipts to the governments in Italy and the Netherlands to name but a few.
In a forensic assessment of the Social Market Foundation’s Report by leading analyst Dan Waugh, he sliced and diced the findings like a world class sushi chef, discarding much of it as “demonstrably poor”, “sloppy and selective”, “poor use of evidence and false arguments” and “shoddy”.
There will be more from the Waugh front further into the paper where the industry bodies, Bacta, BGC, Bingo Association and the Gambling Business Group, will be making their observations, all of whom were in attendance at the SMF’s survey launch this week.
And in fairness, most are deeply concerned by the sustained tax and prohibitive attacks lodged from moralists in the intellectual and political classes. And with the emergence of a new political force of Burnham, the worries are legitimate that the industry might get burnt.
But whether the SMF report is the fire starter is somewhat dubious. This is a think tank whose reputation and credibility has been torched by its own zealous advocacy for affordability checks and subsequent back-tracking and embarrassing reversal on the checks which have proved to be a total disaster.
Research from SMF should come with a health warning: this information can seriously damage your economy.
And that’s exactly what this tax report and survey will lead to.
The bourgeoisie at the SMF should stick to their dinner parties and leave data analysis to the experts that value balance and evidence over ideology. And a word of advice: stop telling ordinary people what’s best for them. Unless, of course, losing jobs, losing revenues, losing high street occupancy and losing family and international businesses is your idea of growing the economy and national wealth.
The SMF got it catastrophically wrong once; it doesn’t deserve the chance to get it existentially wrong second time round.
Originally published on Coinslot on July 6, 2026. Republished with permission.