UK Rejects Horse Racing Levy Hike for Stability 2026

Key Points

• UK government concludes two-year review of Horserace Betting Levy, deciding against any increase from the current 10% rate.
• Announcement made via written statement by Baroness Twycross and repeated in Commons by Ian Murray.
• Review began under previous Conservative administration, overstretched nearly two years beyond deadline.
• Racing authorities sought higher levy, citing shortfall compared to other countries like France and Ireland.
• Government prioritises stability post recent gambling tax changes; rules out legislative changes now.
• No extension of levy to overseas racing bets; current framework deemed sufficient for GB racing-betting relationship.
• Levy applies to bookmakers with >£500,000 annual gross profits on British racing; generated £108m last year (up from £105m).
• British Horseracing Authority (BHA) chief executive Brant Dunshea calls delay “disappointing,” highlights evidence of funding gap.
• Dunshea notes racing spared betting duty hikes in 2025 budget but DCMS had advised levy rise needed for benefit.
• BHA warns overseas betting exemption funds rivals, erodes UK global standing; affordability checks risk illegal betting surge.
• Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) welcomes stability but echoes concerns on affordability checks driving punters to black market.
• Horseracing Bettors Forum (HBF) backs BHA, deems checks unrealistic without levy reform; stresses racing’s cultural importance.

London (Britain Today News) March 25, 2026 – The UK government has decisively ended its protracted review of the Horserace Betting Levy, maintaining the existing 10% rate despite intense lobbying from racing authorities for an increase. This announcement, delivered through a written statement by Culture Minister Baroness Twycross and reiterated in the House of Commons by Minister Ian Murray, brings closure to a process initiated under the prior Conservative government that dragged on nearly two years past its deadline.

Ian Murray outlined the rationale, stating, as reported across multiple outlets including Racing Post,

“[I]n light of the recent changes to gambling taxation, we want to provide stability and certainty to the gambling sector. For this reason, the government does not feel it is appropriate to pursue legislative changes to the rate of the horserace betting levy at this time.”

Ministers also rejected extending the levy—charged on bookmakers’ gross profits exceeding £500,000 from British racing—to wagers on overseas races. They affirmed that existing commercial arrangements

“already appropriately reflect the specific relationship between the racing and betting industries in Great Britain.”

Last year, the levy yielded £108 million, a marginal rise from £105 million the previous year.

Why Did the Government Decide Against a Levy Increase?

The decision prioritises sector stability following recent gambling tax adjustments in the 2025 budget. As per the official statement covered by iGaming Today and Racing Post, the government views further changes as untimely. This stance contrasts with racing’s pleas for parity with international benchmarks, where returns to the sport from betting are reportedly higher.

Brant Dunshea, chief executive of the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), expressed swift disappointment. In a statement relayed by Racing Post journalists, Dunshea noted it was

“disappointing that it had taken almost three years to determine there should be no change in the levy rate.”

He emphasised that racing provided “clear evidence” of the growing chasm between staging costs and betting returns.

Dunshea highlighted a key irony: while the 2025 budget spared racing from betting duty increases—as detailed in iGaming Today’s coverage of the

“UK Budget 2025: Gambling Tax Hikes Approved but Horse Racing Escapes Unscathed”

—the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) had previously advised the Treasury that this relief hinged on raising the levy.

“The government’s latest statement leaves unexplained why, only a few months after the budget, the DCMS now believes there is no need to change the levy rate,”

Dunshea remarked.

What Are the BHA’s Main Concerns Over Funding and Comparisons?

The BHA underscored Britain’s comparatively meagre betting returns versus nations like France and Ireland. Dunshea warned that excluding overseas bets from the levy effectively means

“the sport in Britain is funding our international rivals, which diminishes our global standing.”

He further cautioned against impending Gambling Commission affordability checks, predicting they could repel bettors, slash racing’s income by millions, and spur illegal betting.

“In which case it is surely time for the DCMS and HMT to recognise that adding more red tape to an already highly regulated sector will only fuel a significant rise in illegal betting, deprive horseracing of funding and prevent the government from collecting millions of pounds in much-needed taxation,”

Dunshea urged.

The BHA executive called for ministerial action:

“The government would be genuinely congratulated if it took this moment to recognise the impact that no increase in the levy will have on horseracing’s finances and stopped the introduction of affordability checks which threaten the sport’s future.”

How Has the Betting Industry Responded to the Announcement?

The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) offered a mixed reaction, welcoming the levy stasis for injecting

“some stability for the betting industry”

post-tax hikes, per Racing Post reporting. Yet, it aligned with racing on affordability checks, pressing for “urgent progress.”

A BGC spokesperson elaborated:

“If implemented as currently proposed, they will drive customers away from the regulated market and towards the illegal black market, where there are no protections for customers and no contribution to sport. We remain committed to working with racing to grow this fantastic sport and secure its future.”

What Role Do Affordability Checks Play in the Debate?

Affordability checks emerged as a flashpoint across responses. The BHA, BGC, and Horseracing Bettors Forum (HBF) converged in opposition, viewing them as detrimental without levy reform.

The HBF amplified this on X (formerly Twitter), declaring affordability checks a “not realistic option” absent levy changes.

“Politicians once again need reminding of the cultural, historical and financial importance of a healthy racing industry,”

the forum posted, as noted in aggregated coverage from Racing Post.

What Is the Background of the Horserace Betting Levy?

Enacted since 1963, the levy mandates bookmakers pay 10% of gross profits on British horseracing bets above £500,000 annually into a central fund supporting racecourses, prize money, and integrity programmes. The £108 million haul in 2025 marked modest growth, yet racing leaders argue it lags inflation and international peers.

The review, launched under Conservatives, ballooned from months into nearly three years, fuelling frustration. Government sources, via Commons statements, stressed the levy’s unique GB-centric design, unfit for overseas expansion without upending industry pacts.

How Does This Impact Horseracing’s Finances and Future?

Racing faces squeezed margins as costs escalate—training, veterinary, and infrastructure—while levy income stagnates. Dunshea’s evidence, per BHA releases cited in Racing Post, charts this divergence starkly against France’s higher yields.

Critics like the HBF invoke racing’s heritage, from Royal Ascot to Cheltenham, as a £4 billion economic driver employing thousands. BGC ties this to broader gambling health, warning black market shifts erode tax revenue and sport funding.

What Comes Next for Racing and Betting Regulation?

Ministers signal no immediate shifts, but industry voices demand dialogue. BHA urges DCMS and HM Treasury rethink on checks; BGC seeks collaborative growth. As 2026 unfolds, with flat meetings and festivals looming, pressure mounts for fiscal recalibration to safeguard Britain’s racing pre-eminence.

This ruling caps a saga, yet underscores tensions in a £11 billion gambling ecosystem intertwined with sport. Stakeholders eye budget cycles and Gambling Commission consultations for reprieve.