Three Swedish MEPs from the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group have challenged the European Commission over a proposed EU own resource based on online gambling, arguing it would violate the principle of subsidiarity and encroach on national taxation powers. In a written parliamentary question submitted on 3 June 2026, Dick Erixon, Charlie Weimers and Beatrice Timgren asked the Commission to justify the legal basis for such a levy, given that gambling is excluded from the Services Directive and remains a national competence. They also questioned whether the tax would benefit EU citizens more than direct member state contributions, and whether the Commission would assess the cost of harmonising gambling tax rates on tax competition between member states.
The question follows a European Parliament resolution adopted on 28 April 2026, which called for exploring an EU own resource based on online gambling. The MEPs note that the Commission closed all gambling cases in 2017, concluding that such matters could be handled more efficiently at national level. They also point out that the EU has never been granted taxation powers by member states, and that the Commission is reportedly forecasting significant budgetary revenue from such a levy.
a legal justification under subsidiarity and conferral, a comparative benefit analysis for citizens, and an assessment of the impact on tax competition. The Commission is expected to reply within approximately six weeks, and its answer will signal whether it intends to pursue the own resource proposal or respect national competence in gambling regulation.
<h3>Policy orientations and stakeholder impact</h3> The question reflects a tension between EU-level revenue diversification and national sovereignty. Proponents argue an EU gambling tax could provide a new, stable revenue stream for the EU budget, reducing reliance on member state contributions. Critics, including the MEPs, see it as a regulatory overreach that could undermine national tax policies and harm the competitiveness of EU-based gambling operators. The proposal would primarily affect EU gambling operators (who could face higher compliance costs and reduced tax competition), member state treasuries (which would lose tax revenue to the EU), and EU citizens (who might ultimately bear the cost through higher prices or reduced services). The MEPs' intervention highlights the political sensitivity of expanding EU own resources into areas traditionally reserved for member states.