Regulatory bodies in Asia are strengthening their controls over payment routes that have been linked to unlicensed online gambling, with enforcement in India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Singapore leading to a shift in the structure of the way in which fintechs and payment service providers operate.
The cumulative effect of these measures is reshaping how licensed operators and payment providers approach infrastructure. Speaking exclusively with SiGMA News, Ariyo Aboumahboub, Executive Director of Infinite Pecunia Solutions described the shift: “Regulatory pressure has definitely increased in markets like Southeast Asia and India, so banks, PSPs, and e-wallets have become much more cautious about how payment flows are handled, especially for high-volume industries like iGaming.“
The scale of supervisory activity has grown considerably over the past two years. In Indonesia, the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK), the country’s financial services regulator, ordered banks to block more than 30,000 accounts indicated to be linked to online gambling between September 2023 and December 2025. OJK confirmed the figure, placing it at 31,382 accounts. The programme was coordinated with the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs and reflects a multi-year supervisory commitment rather than a single enforcement event.
Data from Indonesia’s Financial Intelligence Unit, PPATK, shows the practical effect of that pressure. Online gambling turnover reached IDR 155 trillion ($9.15 billion) through the third quarter of 2025, but the figure represents a 57 percent decline year-on-year, an indication that sustained payment-side enforcement is disrupting the financial infrastructure underpinning unlicensed activity.
According to OJK, online gambling perpetrators no longer rely solely on bank accounts, but also use other payment instruments, including e-wallets, to carry out transactions. The observation underscores a recurring dynamic in payment enforcement: as one channel comes under pressure, operators divert flows to alternatives, extending the compliance perimeter beyond the traditional banking system.
India’s approach has focused on access restriction rather than account blocking. The Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), acting in coordination with the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, has blocked 357 websites and URLs of offshore online money gaming entities under Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000. Around 700 offshore entities remain under investigation.
The Press Information Bureau (PIB) confirmed the figures, with the DGGI specifying in its statement that the blocked entities were “illegal or non-compliant offshore online money gaming” operators. The framing is deliberate: Indian authorities are positioning enforcement around tax compliance and regulatory standing rather than a broad prohibition on online gambling. Operators holding valid domestic licences and meeting GST obligations are not the target.
What this India action highlights how tools adjacent to payments, including URL blocking to prevent users from funding accounts on offshore platforms, are being deployed within the current legal environment. The authority of the IT Act was established prior to the current enforcement wave, and DGGI is utilising it in a new way operationally.
Payment-related enforcement actions linked to online gambling activity in India and Indonesia. (Source: Canva)
In the Philippines, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) released an Exposure Draft in 2025 setting out proposed rules for payment service providers (PSPs) operating in the online gambling sector. The draft specifies that PSPs offering or facilitating online gambling payment services “shall not be allowed to provide links to online gambling websites or otherwise provide any functionality that will enable access.” Licensing under the Manual of Regulations for Payment Systems will be required.
The BSP framework specifies the compliance obligations for the intermediary rather than the operators. The PSPs dealing with gambling transactions have specific requirements in relation to customer due diligence, monitoring of transactions, and access controls. This is an extension of the regulatory framework in its structure and something that is familiar in other parts of the region.
Singapore’s position is distinct in that the legal architecture is already in place. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) holds authority to issue Payment Blocking Orders under Section 21(3) of the Remote Gambling Act 2014. The presence of such powers, even when not apparently utilised, can be seen as a structural constraint on PSPs that operate in or through Singapore, suggesting that payment controls are not an afterthought in the governance structure.
The response from compliant operators has been architectural. Aboumahboub, said, “Many operators are no longer relying on a single banking channel. Instead, they’re using multiple payment methods, gateways, and regional partners to keep their operations stable.”
The cumulative effect of these measures is reshaping how licensed operators and payment providers approach infrastructure. Aboumahboub described the shift: “Regulatory pressure has definitely increased in markets like Southeast Asia and India, so banks, PSPs, and e-wallets have become much more cautious about how payment flows are handled, especially for high-volume industries like iGaming.“
Monitoring practices are also changing. “Instead of relying only on onboarding checks, there’s much more focus on watching payment patterns day-to-day,” Aboumahboub noted. The change reflects a broader evolution in compliance thinking, one in which risk is assessed dynamically rather than at the point of customer acquisition.
That evolution is likely to deepen. Aboumahboub added, “Once regulators realise that controlling the payment side is one of the most effective ways to influence an industry, it naturally becomes part of the toolbox.”
“It’s quite likely we’ll see this trend appear in more Asian markets.”
– Ariyo Aboumahboub, Executive Director of Infinite Pecunia Solutions
Across four jurisdictions, with different legal systems and regulatory cultures, the same conclusion is being reached: payment flows are among the most tractable points of intervention in unlicensed gambling markets, and the frameworks to act on that insight are being strengthened.
For licensed operators, the practical implication is clear. Those with more diversified payment infrastructure, better transaction monitoring, and compliance programs will have an advantage in ensuring the continuity of their operations despite the increasing scrutiny. Those with more informal or single-channel-dependent arrangements will face increasing risk, not from the formal enforcement, but from the more cautious approach of the banking and PSP sectors.
#iGaming #OnlineGambling #AsiaGaming #Fintech #PaymentSystems #Regulation #GamingIndustry
Welcome to Gambling Consulting Authority (GCA) - Your Strategic Partner in Gambling Industry Advancement
