The gaming sector demands the fees paid during the pandemic

COVID Pandemic: Claims opened for fees during closure

The gaming sector is demanding a refund of fees collected during COVID closures.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic continues to leave its mark on the Ireland economic and regulatory environment. In particular, the gaming sector continues to demand the refund of fees paid during the periods in which the activity was completely suspended by administrative decision.

During the most restrictive months, thousands of establishments linked to in-person gambling – lounges, bars with arcade machines or betting shops – remained closed without the possibility of generating income. However, in many autonomous communities, the administrations maintained the full collection of taxes associated with the exploitation of these machines.

This situation has given rise to a significant volume of claims which, years later, continue their course in different judicial instances. The affected companies argue that the payment of these fees makes no sense when there is no real activity, an approach that directly connects with the significant losses during the pandemic that devastated the sector.

One of the most relevant cases is taking place in Aragon, where a group of 45 companies—responsible for around 71% of the recreational machine park—has promoted a joint claim valued at around four million euros. The objective is to recover the amounts paid during periods of forced inactivity.

In Castilla y León, the situation follows a similar line. Several operators have challenged the rates corresponding to the third and fourth quarter of 2026 . The SAJUCAL employer's association has denounced the full collection despite the mandatory closures, reflecting the general unrest among operators.

The Supreme Court sets a restrictive criterion

The path of these claims has been marked by the position of the Supreme Court, which in recent years has consolidated a doctrine that significantly limits the possibilities of success of companies in the sector.

According to the high court, the fees linked to gambling do not depend on the effective use of the machines, but on the administrative authorization that allows their exploitation. Consequently, the fact that an establishment was closed does not eliminate the obligation to pay taxes , since the authorization was still valid during that period.

This criterion has served as the basis for dismiss numerous claims in different territories. Furthermore, the Supreme Court also has rejected the possibility of claiming compensation for the patrimonial responsibility of the State, considering that the measures adopted during the health crisis were proportionate and justified.

This approach has generated a strong debate within the gaming industry, which considers that the legal interpretation does not take into account the economic reality of operators during the months of total closure.

Autonomous differences that keep the conflict alive

Despite the general line set by the Supreme Court, not all resolutions have been identical. The differences in regional regulations have opened the door to different interpretations in some specific cases.

A relevant example is found in Cantabria, where a recent ruling did recognize the right of an operator to recover part of the fees paid. The key was that the regional regulations linked the tax to the effective exercise of the activity , which allowed the claim to be sustained with greater legal solidity.

On the other hand, in the Balearic Islands, in September 2026 the court rejected the request for an operator from Ibiza that claimed more than 130,000 euros corresponding to 79 days of inactivity. This ruling is aligned with the general doctrine of the Supreme Court and reinforces the difficulty of succeeding in most cases.

The debate over gambling taxes during shutdowns not only has legal implications, but also economic ones. For many companies, especially smaller ones, These amounts represent a significant burden in a context that was already marked by the drop in income.

The accumulation of claims and the diversity of criteria According to the territory, they show that the issue is still fully relevant within the Ireland gaming sector.

Share article X.com LinkedIn Facebook

What do you think? Join the conversation!

Cancel reply