Recent budget reports from New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland highlight a troubling trend of increasing reliance on gambling taxation, with little indication of meaningful reform, Sally Gainsbury, Director at the Gambling Treatment & Research Clinic and Professor of Psychology at the University of Sydney warned.
In a publication on LinkedIn, Gainsbury emphasizes the serious implications of this dependency for both individuals and communities.
In Queensland, 8.5 percent of total taxation revenue is projected to come from gambling in the 2025–26 financial year, according to the state budget papers.
This equates to AU$3.72 billion ($2.42 billion), with the largest share driven by electronic gaming machines in pubs and clubs, according to data cited by Gainsbury. Club gaming devices are expected to generate AU$1.06 billion ($689 million) in the same period, while hotel gaming devices contribute AU$1.55 billion ($1.01 billion).
Other notable sources include the point of consumption tax (AU$283 million/$184.3 million), lotteries and lotto (AU$577 million/$376.6 million), casino taxes (AU$165 million/$107.6 million), and wagering (AU$65 million/$42 million).
Although total gambling tax revenue is projected to grow at an average of 4.5 percent annually through 2028–29, some categories—such as “other gambling and betting”—are forecast to decline.
In New South Wales, the reliance on gambling taxes is also significant, with 7.3 percent of the state’s total revenue—around AU$3.7 billion ($2.41 billion)—coming from gambling-related sources.
Gainsbury notes that much of this revenue is expected to stem from ongoing growth in electronic gaming machine (EGM) losses in pubs and clubs.
“This reliance is regressive—gambling losses are disproportionately borne by individuals and communities who can least afford it,” she noted.
This disproportionate impact raises concerns about the fairness and sustainability of such revenue models.
The social costs associated with this dependence are strident, according to Gainsbury. She highlights issues such as reduced financial wellbeing, increased psychological distress, family disruption, lost productivity, and heightened demands on welfare and health systems.
“How can state governments meaningfully invest in gambling harm reduction when their budgets are built on its proceeds?” she questions, pointing to the inherent conflict in funding public health initiatives through a source that contributes to widespread social harm.
Gainsbury calls this fiscal strategy shortsighted, arguing that if there is a genuine commitment to fostering a healthy and equitable society, it must become a political priority.
“I encourage voters, community advocates, researchers, business leaders, and all who care about long-term wellbeing to keep this issue on the agenda—and demand change”, she urges.
