Key Points
- Starting from 1 Jan 2027, betting ads in Oz can’t feature anyone who’s currently or was once a famous athlete, celeb, social media influencer, or prominent personality.
- No minimum number of followers required a gaming streamer with less than 10k subs is just as out of bounds as a pro soccer player.
- The onus is on the operators to keep the rules, while a pretty narrow carve-out lets racing folk keep raking it in.
In a pretty bold move, ACMA’s just dropped some guidance on how to interpret the celebrity ban and what it means for small-time influencers. As of 1 Jan 2027, any wagering ads broadcast or online in Australia have got to steer clear of notable people. And that means bookies can’t sign up anyone to star in betting ads either. The ban’s got no exclusions, so you’ll find it on TV, radio, news websites, social media and online gaming basically everywhere.
So who gets classified as ‘notable’ under this new law? Well, it includes current or former athletes, celebs, and influencers, plus anyone the Minister deems worthy of inclusion. And the definition’s got an intentionally broad scope so operators can’t use promotion to get people to gamble, even if it’s not a kid at risk.
The NoFollower Minimum for Influencers: A Reality Check
The guidance’s thrown a bit of a curveball at influencers like there’s no minimum audience size. ACMA’s basically saying that there is “no prescribed number of followers or subs” and that influencing isn’t just about having a verified badge. Your niche community might be enough for you to be caught by this ban.
For example, ACMA’s guidance shows just how easily a small-time esports streamer with less than 10,000 followers can get caught. Their gaming predictions might be getting shared around a specialist community, but that still doesn’t mean they’re safe from the ban. Podcasters, YouTubers and brand reps can also fall under the radar, so it’s not just about getting paid.
Retired Celebrities, Local Radio Hosts & The Faces You Recognise
Just because someone’s hung up their boots doesn’t mean they’re off the hook. ACMA’s guidance has no fixed point when someone ceases to be a notable celebrity. Another example shows that even a cricketer who retired over a decade ago might still be counted, if they’re still featuring on sports broadcasts. And if a breakfast DJ gets paid to read a betting ad on their own show, that’s a pretty safe bet to break the rules too.
Fame can be fleeting and synchronous and operators are expected to respond when that happens. ACMA’s got a scenario that shows just how that might play out. They’ve got a relatively unknown actor who was part of a 12-month deal, but then lands a starring role in a hit international series. Guess what? Bookies are expected to take notice and do the right thing.
Penalties to Operators Only
ACMA clarifies that these rules apply to the licensed wagering service provider and not the celebrities appearing in the advertisements. ACMA is explicit when it says, “Obligations rest with the LIWSP, not the notable person.” Operators will still need to review the completed advertisement and ensure outside agencies are properly informed of these rules ahead of time. Even portraying a celebrity as a fictional character is unlikely to insulate operators from these rules.
A Racing Exception?
It is only for racing advertisements that celebrities will still be permitted to promote their services, but there is very little wiggle room here. The advertisements must relate solely or principally to racing and be advertised on a designated racing programme, channel or online services. An example of an ad featuring a rugby league player for a racing bet advertised on a horse-racing programme would be likely to qualify.
From 2023 Parliamentary Committee to 2027 Ad Ban Deadline
The origin of this ban lies in the 2023 parliamentary report written by the late Peta Murphy. This report found that Australians lost A$25 billion annually on legal gambling. This figure was higher than any other country, in terms of losses per capita. In addition, Australians had the highest per capita losses in online gambling. The committee therefore recommended a total advertising ban in three years’ time.
This was rejected by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on 2 April 2026, when he announced new restrictions instead. Reuters noted at the time that gambling had been estimated to cost Australians A$34 billion the year prior.
In August, PM Albanese promised what would be “the toughest laws on gambling in the history of the nation.” The pushback continued throughout the summer, and at a 4 August hearing, Sportsbet cautioned the inquiry on the wording.
A Heavyweight Rulebook to Kick in 1 January
The famous faces ban forms part of a much larger package coming into force from the same date. Wagering ads are removed from live sport and venues, while TV slots are limited to three per hour from 5 am to 8.30 pm. Meanwhile, online ads will be required to identify an adult user logging in who was previously offered an opportunity to opt out. Violating platforms will incur fines of up to $1.82 million for each corporation. In the words of communications minister Anika Wells: “If you do not want to see gambling ads online, you will not have to.”
According to the government’s own impact assessment, the broadcasters will lose $19.2 million each year from the base of $64 million in annual wagering advertising revenue. This is a 30% loss to the broadcasters from the chosen package of reforms.
Expert analysis: A Big Net with a Racing-shaped Hole
We believe that ACMA has cast an unusually large net, but has left a hole precisely where the devoted punters converge. The racing exception was not accidental, and our concern lies in the fact that it was already identified as vulnerable in the government’s impact assessment. The impact analysis shows that the gambling harm reduction advocates supported the exception but were worried that it could lead to a loophole. And we are also worried about it as 17.8% of Australian adults wager on racing, whereas 12.5% bet on sports.
The numbers in question are worthy of a closer look than the “strongest ever” label received. The same impact assessment shows that a partial ban would reduce the annual wagering expenditure by $62.7 million or 0.8%. The estimate relates to the entire package of advertising regulations, and the impact of the celebrity ban is never measured independently. We understand that measure as protection of children’s screens rather than the wallet of heavy bettors.
In the industry circles, the message is quite opposite – stricter regulations make illegal operators thrive. Jamie Nettleton of Addisons said at SBC Summit that 80% of the Australian tobacco market is now illegal. Australian Bureau of Statistics’ figures prove that 80% of the tobacco sales volume in Australia is illegal, but illicit products represented only 40% of the household expenditure on them. And this information is very important for us as black market threats rarely come with numbers like this.
Share
8 views
