1. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) introduced the Casino Control (Amendment) Bill for First Reading in Parliament today. The Bill amends the CCA to:
(a) Enhance the operational effectiveness of our casino regulatory regime;
(b) Tighten the regulation of the casinos and licensees; and
(c) Strengthen protection for vulnerable groups.
Background
2. The Casino Control Act (CCA) was introduced in 2006 to govern the operation and regulation of casinos and was last amended in 2012. Thus far, our regulatory regime has worked well. Casino-related crime remains low1, problem gambling remains under control2, and the casino operators (COs) have not committed any significant breach of gaming-related requirements. Notwithstanding, as part of MHA’s regular reviews of our laws, we have identified areas where the CCA should be amended to ensure it remains effective and keeps pace with changes in the wider gambling landscape.
Enhance the Operational Effectiveness of Our Casino Regulatory Regime
Future-Proof Our Regulatory Regime for Casino Gambling
3. To ensure casino gambling is conducted in a fair and reliable manner, casino games, gaming machines, and chips must be approved by the Gambling Regulatory Authority (GRA). To future-proof our regulatory regime, the Bill will empower GRA to:
(a) Regulate betting and lotteries in the casinos, in addition to games of chance. Today, GRA regulates games of chance offered by the casinos (e.g. table games, games on gaming machines). The Bill will expand the scope of activities that GRA can regulate in the casinos to cover betting and lotteries, to pre-empt any future changes in the gambling landscape. To be clear, there are currently no plans to allow casinos to carry out betting and lotteries.
(b) Approve gaming software deployed on mobile devices. Today, GRA approves gaming machines, which comprise both software and hardware. GRA has observed that manufacturers of gaming machines have been developing software (without the hardware), which can be deployed on off-the-shelf mobile devices such as tablets. This amendment would allow GRA to approve gaming software only, should the need arise.3
(c) Prescribe any instrument or thing to be regarded as chips. This will allow for new wagering instruments (e.g. virtual credits) to be used in future, should GRA assess them to be suitable.
4. Currently, GRA must approve all manufacturers and suppliers of gaming machines that are used in a casino. The Bill will update and streamline the process to only require manufacturers that have control over how gaming machines are designed and manufactured, to seek approval. All other manufacturers and/or suppliers with no control over the design and manufacture of gaming machines would no longer need to seek approval.
Strengthen the Regulation of Main Shareholders, Substantial Shareholders and Controllers
5. The CCA governs the acquisition and disposal of shares in the COs, and allows only approved persons to be main shareholders, substantial shareholders, or controllers of the COs4. The Bill will enhance the approval regime for such persons:
(a) For main shareholders, the Bill transfers powers related to the approval of associated divestments and acquisitions5, from GRA to the Minister for Home Affairs. We have an approval regime in place to hold the main shareholder of each CO accountable for the development of its Integrated Resort (IR) and their long-term commitments in Singapore. The Minister for Home Affairs would be better placed than GRA to take into account whole-of-Government considerations, in deciding whether to approve divestments and acquisitions relating to main shareholdings.
(b) For controllers and substantial shareholders, the Bill transfers related powers6 from the Minister for Home Affairs to GRA. Unlike the regime for main shareholders, these are regulatory decisions relating to the suitability of persons who may exert influence or control over casino operations, and hence more appropriately undertaken by GRA. The Bill will also allow such persons to submit appeals on GRA’s decisions to the Minister for Home Affairs.
(c) The Bill tightens the criteria for identifying associates who require approval under controlled shareholdings regime. Today, a corporate entity with controlling shareholdings in the casinos, as well as its related corporations (i.e. parent companies, subsidiaries, sister companies) are subject to GRA’s approval, as they are all associates of each other. However, this would cover related corporations that do not exercise influence or control over the CO. With the amendment, only corporations that are able to exercise influence or control over the CO will be subject to GRA’s approval.
Strengthen the Evaluation Panel’s ability to assess the economic attractiveness of the IRs
6. The Evaluation Panel was established to provide GRA with an independent opinion on the ability of the IR operators to develop, maintain, and promote the IR as a compelling tourist destination. To this end, the Evaluation Panel would assess how the IRs compare to industry standards and whether they meet market demand.
7. The Bill clarifies in law that the Evaluation Panel, in assessing the IRs’ tourism performance, may also take into account future industry standards and market demand, in addition to prevailing standards and demand.
Tighten the Regulation of the Casinos and Licensees
Enhance Criminal Offences to Deter Casino-Related Crime and Protect the Integrity of Gaming Operations
8. To ensure our laws continue to be an effective deterrent against casino-related crime, the Bill introduces the following new offences in the CCA:
(a) Offence to withdraw bets after the result of the game is known. Currently, it is an offence for patrons to place a bet in a casino after the result is known, but it is not an offence to withdraw a bet after the result is known. As a result, the Police have had to use offences in other laws to deal with such cheating cases. The proposed amendment right-places this offence under the CCA.
(b) Offence to record non-card games. It is currently an offence to use a device to record cards dealt in the course of gaming. However, the Police have encountered cases of patrons who attempt to cheat the casinos by recording play patterns of non-card games (e.g. gaming machines). The Bill will expand the current offence to cover the recording of non-card games.
(c) Offence for any person to destroy or falsify key documents, knowing that the document is required to be produced under the Act. Currently, it is an offence for a person to destroy or falsify a document which he is required to submit to GRA. However, the offence does not cover any other person who handles or has access to the document (e.g. staff of the COs), should they destroy or falsify the document. The Bill closes this gap.
9. Currently, it is an offence for persons who are excluded from the casinos7 to enter, remain, or take part in gaming in a casino. However, in order to prosecute such persons, GRA has to prove that the excluded person was aware of his exclusion status when he entered the casino, which can be hard to prove. To address this, the Bill will make an excluded person liable for entering, remaining or taking part in gambling on casino premises if it is proven that he knows, or ought reasonably to know that he was an excluded person. (See Annex for examples of how this would apply.)
Expand Suitability Criteria for COs
10. We expect the COs to conduct their business operations in an ethical and credible manner, and implement good corporate governance practices. To reflect GRA’s regulatory expectations, the Bill will allow GRA to also consider the following when assessing a CO’s suitability to hold a casino licence, on an ongoing basis:
(a) Whether the CO conducts business in a manner which is unethical or will bring discredit to casino gambling in Singapore (e.g. allowing unethical practices such as workplace discrimination or harassment, or conducting a negative marketing campaign to smear the other CO); and
(b) Whether the CO has poor corporate governance practices or weak internal controls (e.g. disregarding whistleblower reports alleging misconduct of employees).
11. The Bill empowers GRA to take disciplinary action against a CO, if GRA assesses the CO’s suitability to hold a casino licence is affected due to breaches of the criteria in para 10.
12. The Bill will also empower GRA to take disciplinary action against licensees8 for regulatory breaches even after their licences have lapsed, if the disciplinary action had commenced prior to the licence lapsing9. This ensures licensees do not avoid punishment for failing regulatory requirements, despite their licences lapsing.
Require Information Sharing to Strengthen Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing Measures
13. Due to regulations under the Personal Data Protection Act, a CO is currently not allowed to share the personal data of a patron directly with another CO, without the patron’s consent. However, such information sharing might be necessary for the COs to assess money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing risks associated with the patron. Today, GRA facilitates the exchange of such information between the COs, but this is operationally inefficient and impedes COs from taking timely action.
14. To address this, the Bill amends the CCA to allow and require the COs to share information of patrons with each other, for the purposes of tackling money laundering, terrorism financing10 and proliferation financing. This would allow the COs to take quicker action on their end.
Strengthen Protection for Vulnerable Groups
Criminalise Breach of Family Visit Limit11
15. Today, it is an offence for an individual to breach an Exclusion Order by Law, Third Party Exclusion Order, Third Party Visit Limit, or Family Exclusion Order. For parity, the Bill will also criminalise the breach of a Family Visit Limit for casinos.
Allow the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) and Its Committees12 to Immediately Substitute an Exclusion Order With a Visit Limit, and Vice Versa
16. Currently, NCPG and its Committees can only revoke an existing Exclusion Order or Visit Limit, and subsequently impose a new Visit Limit or Exclusion Order. The process usually takes a period of one to two months, during which the individual would not be protected by any safeguards. To streamline the process and ensure that individuals are better protected, the Bill will allow NCPG to immediately substitute an Exclusion Order with a Visit Limit, and vice versa. The NCPG will also be able to substitute safeguards with more stringent ones, such as a Visit Limit with an Exclusion Order, to protect the individual, if necessary.
Other Amendments
Regularise Collection of Entry Levies
17. The casino entry levy serves as a social safeguard to deter casual and impulse gambling by among Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents. As part of the Government’s commitment to keep problem gambling under control, we increased the casino entry levies on 4 April 2019 for Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents from $100 to $150 for the daily levy, and from $2,000 to $3,000 for the annual levy. This was operationalised via the Casino Control (Variation of Entry Levies) Order 2019, which was valid for five years up to 3 April 2024.13
18. It was always the Government’s intent to maintain the higher entry levies beyond the five-year period. However, MHA had overlooked the expiry of the 2019 Order, and the entry levies automatically reverted to the lower rates on 4 April 2024.
19. To address this, MHA introduced the Casino Control (Variation of Entry Levies) Order 2024 on 8 May 2024 to prospectively restore the daily levy at $150 and annual levy at $3,000. From 4 April to 7 May 2024, about $4.4 million was collected above the legislated entry levy rates.
20. The Bill will regularise the higher entry levies collected from 4 April to 7 May 2024. This is in line with the Government’s intent for introducing the higher entry levy rates in 2019, to maintain the effectiveness of the entry levy as a social safeguard. We have tightened our processes to avoid a repeat of such an incident.
Other Miscellaneous Amendments
21. The Bill will also make other amendments to the CCA, including streamlining the regulatory process for contracts signed by COs and aligning penalties of existing offences with similar offences in other laws.
[1] In 2023, only 137 reports of crime, or 0.2% of all reported crime cases, were at the casinos.
[2] Overall probable pathological and problem gambling rates among Singapore residents have been low and stable at about 1%.
[3] Such gaming software must only be deployed and playable within the casino premises, should it be approved.
[4] Main shareholders are designated by the Minister for Home Affairs in subsidiary legislation; controllers are persons who have at least 12% stake in or significant control over the CO; and substantial shareholders are persons who have at least 5% stake in the CO.
[5] These are the powers to approve: (i) the transfer and disposal of a main shareholder’s shares in the CO, if it leads to them owning less stake than any other shareholder; and (ii) any other persons’ acquisition of stake in a CO, if it leads to them owning more stake than the main shareholder.
[6] These include the powers to approve a person becoming a substantial shareholder or a controller (or exempt such persons from approvals), and direct someone to cease to be a substantial shareholder or controller.
[7] These are persons with exclusion orders issued by the National Council on Problem Gambling, the Police or GRA; and persons with Family Exclusion Order(s) or Exclusion(s) by Law.
[8] Casino operators, special employees, international market agents and international market agent representatives.
[9] This already applies to other gambling licensees regulated under the Gambling Control Act.
[10] Similar provisions can also be found in the Financial Services and Markets Act to allow prescribed financial institutions to share such information.
[11] The NCPG administers the following types of casino exclusion orders and visit limits, which prohibit individuals from entering casinos or limit the number of casino visits per calendar month:
(a) Self-Exclusion / Voluntary Visit Limit: Imposed upon voluntary application to ban / limit visits to the casino;
(b) Family Exclusion Order / Family Visit Limit: Imposed upon application by a family member, the NCPG can ban / limit visits to the casino if the person’s gambling behaviour has caused harm to his/her family;
(c) Third-Party Exclusion Order: Imposed by the NCPG without application, to ban / limit visits to the casino, individuals who have a poor credit record or are vulnerable to financial harm due to his/her gambling behaviour; and
(d) Exclusion Order by Law: Imposed automatically to ban financially vulnerable groups (i.e. undischarged bankrupts and persons on social assistance programmes or subsidy schemes funded by the Government or any statutory body, from entering the casinos).
[12] Refers to Committees constituted to make or revoke an Exclusion Order or a Visit Limit.
[13] As part of the negotiations in 2019 for the COs’ re-investment plans, a 5-year moratorium on the entry levy rate was introduced after the increase in entry levy rates. In other words, the intent was to legislate that the entry levy rate would not increase during the 5-year period, rather than to allow the entry levy rate to revert to the previous rates after the 5-year period.
