Georgia has taken an unusual step in the regulation of its gambling market. Since 2024, the country has gradually developed a separate framework for international-facing online gambling and, in July 2026, completed the model by introducing a dedicated licensing route for operators which target foreign players while excluding Georgian citizens altogether.
The legislation does not formally use the term ‘offshore licence’. Instead, it refers to these permits as the ‘international organisation’ of gambling in systemic-electronic form, ie online gambling. In practice, however, the model performs many of the functions associated with a flexible gambling licence: an operator establishes and licenses its business in Georgia but may use that licence to serve players outside Georgia.
The important distinction is that Georgia has not built the regime as a lightly regulated offshore registration product. The operator must be a Georgian company and remains subject to local taxation, technical certification, monitoring, domain restrictions, anti-money laundering controls and other requirements which resemble domestic regulation more closely than the simplified frameworks associated with some traditional offshore jurisdictions.
I. Conditions of Georgian offshore licences
The June 2026 amendments created three separate international permits:
- Online casino games.
- Online slot-machine games.
- Online sports betting.
The local regulator, the Revenue Service of Georgia, has confirmed that Georgian citizens cannot participate in gambling conducted under these international permits. The commercial purpose of the regime is therefore clearly external: the licensed activity may be organised from Georgia, but the customer base must be located outside the domestic Georgian market.
Each permit is issued for five years and carries an annual statutory permit fee of around USD 38,000. The first annual payment must be made before the permit is issued, while subsequent payments are due for each following 12-month period. An operator wishing to cover all three verticals therefore faces ~USD 115,000 in headline permit fees per year, before technical, monitoring, corporate and operational costs are taken into account.
The general requirements for applying for and maintaining an international licence largely mirror those imposed on domestic online operators:
- The permit holder must be a business registered in Georgia. The online gambling application framework also requires an actual Georgian address from which the activity is managed and organised, as well as the location of the relevant server infrastructure in Georgia. This creates a degree of local substance which is absent from many conventional offshore structures.
- Operators must submit game rules, details of the games offered, player registration and verification procedures, technical documentation, financial transaction procedures and contracts with relevant game or technology providers. The regulator may also request additional supporting documents where necessary to assess the operator, its ownership, funding and technical readiness.
- Technical requirements include an initial technical examination and an authorisation certificate, together with integration into the Georgian monitoring system. Games, platforms and relevant technical products must comply with Georgian standards, and the operator must maintain systems capable of recording and reporting activity in the form required by the authorities.
- The existing government tariff for the initial technical examination of online gambling is ~USD 13,000 per activity direction and authorisation certificate, and up to ~USD 38,000 for equipment used to integrate an online gambling operator with the electronic control system. The operational monitoring charge for systemic-electronic gambling may reach 0.5% of GGR per month. Accordingly, the annual permit fee should be treated as the headline licensing cost rather than the operator’s total regulatory expenditure.
- Each international permit may be used for only one website operating under one internet domain name. This restriction is relatively insignificant for a single-brand operator, but becomes commercially important for businesses which rely on multiple brands, white-label structures or country-specific domains.
- The tax framework provides for a reduced 5% rate on taxable profit derived from the participation of foreign citizens in online gambling, compared with the heavier 20% treatment applicable to relevant domestic gambling activity. The preferential treatment reinforces the export-oriented logic of the regime by making foreign-player business economically more attractive than domestic-facing activity.
- Foreign players’ gambling winnings are exempt from Georgian personal income tax, further separating the international regime from the tax treatment applicable to Georgian participants.
Taken together, these conditions make the Georgian product materially different from the historical concept of an offshore licence obtained primarily through incorporation, payment of a fee and outsourced infrastructure. Georgia is effectively offering a foreign-facing licence inside a domestic regulatory perimeter, with local substance, technical oversight and ongoing monitoring remaining central to the model.
II. Pros and cons of Georgian offshore licences
Georgia is not merely allowing locally licensed operators to accept some foreign traffic. It has created a separate foreign-facing permit, removed the need for the underlying physical gambling business, set the permit fee at ~USD 38,000 per vertical, retained reduced tax treatment for foreign-player activity and removed international permit holders from the separate gambling business fee.
Main advantages of the licence can be systematized as follows:
- The central benefit of the regime is that none of the international licences requires the corresponding land-based gambling permit. This is particularly important because Georgia’s domestic licensing structure still contains strong links between online and land-based gambling in some verticals. The international regime removes that operational dependency and allows an operator to establish an online business without first maintaining a physical venue.
- The cost comparison is particularly favourable for online casino operations. A standalone domestic online casino permit carries a substantially higher headline cost (~USD 2,000,000), while an online permit linked to a land-based casino may be cheaper but requires the operator to establish and maintain the corresponding physical business. Georgia offers permit-fee exemptions for land casinos in certain tourism-development zones, including Gudauri, Bakuriani, Tskaltubo and Signagi. Even there, however, premises, staffing and operating costs remain, whereas the international route does not require a physical gambling business.
Online sports betting provides an even clearer example of the distinction. The headline online permit cost is broadly comparable, but a domestic operator must first obtain and maintain a land-based licence for a sports betting shop. The land-based betting permit itself can cost between USD 11,400 and USD 114,000 per year, before rental, staffing, systems and other operating costs are considered. The international permit removes this physical requirement entirely, which can materially reduce both entry costs and continuing operational complexity.
- Holders of the three international permits are also exempt from Georgia’s separate gambling business fee, which applies to local operators. This exemption, combined with the lower tax treatment of foreign-player activity, shows that the regime is intended not merely as a legal permission to accept foreign customers but as a commercially differentiated export model.
- An additional potential advantage is the licence’s relative novelty and the jurisdiction behind it. Georgia has an established gambling sector and is positioned between European and Asian markets. An international permit which expressly authorises foreign-facing activity may therefore be easier to present to payment providers, suppliers and other B2B counterparties than a structure which relies only on the absence of a prohibition in the home jurisdiction. The point is particularly relevant for operators which want an international licence but do not want their corporate and compliance profile to depend entirely on a jurisdiction already associated primarily with offshore gambling.
Georgia is therefore testing whether a relatively small but established national gambling market can separate economic participation in gambling from domestic consumer exposure while offering international operators a licence which appears more substantive than conventional offshore registration.
At the same time, the offshore licence contains some structural drawbacks caused by the inexperience of the industry and novelty of the regime:
- Banks, payment providers and suppliers are already familiar with established regimes such as Curaçao and Malta and may have onboarding procedures built around them. The Georgian licence has limited international recognition, so counterparties may remain cautious until its supervisory practice and the behaviour of the first licensees become more established.
- The one-domain limitation may be equally restrictive for certain business models. It can be manageable for a single-brand operator with one principal website but will inevitably increase licensing and restructuring costs for groups operating multiple brands, white labels, acquisition domains or country-specific websites. In this respect, the Georgian regime is less flexible than offshore jurisdictions which permit a wider portfolio of domains under one licence.
- Taxation is another potential disadvantage. Unlike some offshore regimes where corporate or gambling taxes may be zero or minimal, the Georgian framework still imposes a tax burden on international-facing activity. Georgia therefore competes less on zero-tax positioning and more on the combination of moderate cost, legal clarity and regulatory substance.
- A further limitation is that authorisation to target foreign players under Georgian law does not extend into the jurisdictions where those players are located. The laws of each target market remain applicable, and a Georgian permit does not replace a local licence where the destination country requires one. The permit should therefore be viewed as a home-jurisdiction authorisation rather than a universal passport into regulated markets.
III. Reasons for the creation of offshore licences
The rationale for the Georgian international licence lies in two policy objectives which might otherwise appear difficult to reconcile: preserving gambling as a significant source of public revenue and economic activity while reducing the exposure of Georgian consumers to the same industry.
Gambling generated around USD 1.2bn in GGR in 2024. At the same time, Georgia has progressively tightened access to gambling for its own citizens. Since 2022, the minimum gambling age has been 25 for Georgian citizens, compared with 18 for foreign citizens and stateless persons. The reforms also created lists of prohibited and dependent persons and excluded certain public servants and socially vulnerable citizens from gambling. During the legislative process, one stated objective was to ‘limit access as much as possible’.
The scale of the exclusion system further illustrates this approach. As of May 2026, more than 1.57m Georgian citizens were included in the national gambling-access restriction database, equivalent to roughly 60% of the adult population. The figure is not a measure of gambling addiction, as the database covers several statutory categories. The separate ‘dependent persons’ register contained 41,042 individuals, of whom 40,978 had voluntarily restricted their own access.
Available population research provides a more focused indication of problem gambling. A 2022 survey of 4,060 respondents aged 18–64 found that 15.3% had gambled during the preceding year and 2.9% reported patterns classified as problem gambling; the proportion rose to 5.6% among men and 6.7% among people aged 25–29. UNICEF also reported that 20% of surveyed 16-year-olds were excessive gamblers and 12% were problem gamblers. A separate survey of 1,000 people aged 14–17 found that more than one in ten gambled with varying frequency.
Against this background, the international licensing regime can be viewed as a mechanism to retain gambling-related economic activity, employment, technology and tax revenue in Georgia while gradually shifting the customer base outside the domestic market. Rather than creating a standalone offshore regime, Georgia has incorporated the international permit into its existing regulated gambling framework, including corporate registration, technical infrastructure, certification and electronic monitoring.
Additionally, the regulator itself confirmed several reasons and aims behind the creation of international facing regime:
- According to information shared directly by the monitoring agency RSi with industry participants, the authorities do not appear to be seeking a mass-licensing model. Instead, the regulator expects the international permits to attract only a limited share of the broader offshore market, including operators which might otherwise consider jurisdictions such as Curaçao or Malta, and has indicated an ambition to capture roughly 5–10% of that applicant pool over time.
- The regulator also does not currently intend to impose a narrow list of permitted target countries: apart from jurisdictions restricted for sanctions, anti-money laundering or similar reasons, operators are expected to choose their own target markets, subject to the laws of those jurisdictions.
- Applicant quality is expected to be central. The authorities have indicated that they are conscious of the political, enforcement and reputational problems which have affected certain offshore gambling centers and want to avoid a simple ‘buy a licence’ model. Operators will be expected to satisfy the substantive corporate, financial, technical and compliance requirements before obtaining a permit. In practice, this means that the value of the regime will depend not only on how many licences Georgia issues, but also on whether the first group of licensees is sufficiently credible to build recognition with banks, payment providers and international suppliers.
- The policy objective is also economic. The authorities see the regime as a way to expand Georgia’s gambling industry and attract investment while avoiding additional gambling-related harm among local residents. In this sense, the international permit extends an existing feature of the Georgian market: land-based casinos already rely heavily on foreign visitors, and the new regime applies a similar outward-facing logic to online gambling. If the model succeeds, Georgia would effectively monetise its regulatory and technical infrastructure as part of an export-oriented service industry rather than relying solely on domestic gambling demand.
The model therefore differs from traditional flexible jurisdictions. Georgia is not positioning itself solely as a low-tax licensing centre but is using an established domestic framework to license operators targeting foreign players. The key proposition is the separation of economic activity conducted from Georgia from the exposure of Georgian consumers to that activity, giving the regime the characteristics of a regulated gambling export model.
IV. How the licence can be used
The Georgian international permit currently appears strongest for an operator with a limited number of domains, a relatively concentrated brand structure and clearly defined foreign target markets. It is particularly relevant for international sportsbooks because it removes the physical betting-shop requirement which continues to apply to the domestic online route. For casino operators, it provides a comparatively straightforward online-only route without requiring a Georgian land-based casino.
The licence may also appeal to businesses which want a structure that is easier to present as substantive regulation rather than conventional offshore registration. The Georgian company requirement, local infrastructure, electronic monitoring and mandatory technical authorisation support that argument and provide counterparties with a clearly identifiable national regulatory framework.
The regime is less efficient for multi-brand or white-label groups which depend on large domain portfolios, because the one-domain rule can quickly become restrictive. It is also a poor substitute for local licences in regulated target markets. Its best use case is therefore a focused operator which wants a legally explicit foreign-facing base and is prepared to accept meaningful Georgian regulatory substance.
Most importantly, operators should distinguish regulatory quality from commercial acceptance. Georgia has already created an inexpensive, legally explicit and supervised foreign-player regime and has signalled that it intends to be selective about the operators admitted to it. It has not yet had enough time to establish broad recognition among international banks, payment providers, suppliers and other counterparties.
Overall, the Georgian international permit should currently be viewed as a high-potential but still unproven licensing product. Its strongest competitive advantage may ultimately be that Georgia is not known as a traditional offshore gambling hub: it can offer a foreign-facing licence without much of the historical baggage associated with the conventional offshore model, while retaining a national regulatory framework and meaningful local substance.
Whether this becomes a durable licensing hub will depend on the quality of the operators admitted, the consistency of supervision and the performance of the first international licensees.