The Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) and the Estonian Tax and Customs Board (EMTA) are two regulatory authorities within the European Union that issue licences to online gambling operators. While both frameworks allow companies to provide iGaming services in various jurisdictions, they differ significantly in terms of regulatory structure, compliance obligations, taxation, and international positioning.
The MGA, established in 2001, is Malta’s national gaming regulator and has historically played a central role in European online gambling. It issues licences under the Gaming Act (Chapter 583 of the Laws of Malta) and supervises B2C and B2B operations. The regulatory framework includes detailed obligations relating to anti-money laundering (AML) as overseen by the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit (FIAU), player fund segregation, and regular audits. According to the MGA’s Annual Report for 2023, there were 335 active remote gaming licences in Malta.
Estonia’s EMTA operates under the Gambling Act of 2008 and regulates both land-based and remote gambling activities. Online operators must secure two approvals: an activity licence and a separate operating permit. According to EMTA, in April of 2025 a total of 39 companies hold valid remote gambling licences issued by EMTA. The Estonian licensing process is generally faster and less resource-intensive than Malta’s. Applicants must maintain a local representative and an Estonian bank account, but there is no requirement for substantial physical presence.
A key distinction lies in taxation. Malta applies a statutory corporate tax rate of 35%, but companies may access a full imputation system which, through shareholder refunds, can reduce the effective tax burden to between 5% and 10%, depending on the structure. Estonia does not tax retained profits. Instead, corporate income tax is levied at a flat 22% only upon distribution of dividends or deemed profit allocations.
In terms of international regulatory weight, the MGA was, prior to the introduction of national licensing regimes, the de facto standard for operating in large European markets such as the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany. These markets now require local licences, and MGA authorization is no longer sufficient for legal operation within their borders. However, in jurisdictions within the EU and EEA that have not implemented local licensing frameworks, the MGA remains the primary regulatory basis under which many operators are authorised to offer services, making it one of the most widely used cross-border licences within the bloc.
Estonia’s EMTA licence is valid under EU cross-border service rules but according to Priit Kask of https://kiirkasiinod.co the licence holds little relevance outside Estonia. The smaller scale of EMTA’s oversight results in a lower international profile. Nonetheless, Estonia remains compliant with EU anti-money laundering and data protection standards.
Both licences offer access to the European Economic Area (EEA), but actual market entry depends on local laws. In many EU countries, national licences override cross-border permissions.
In summary, the MGA licence remains a comprehensive regulatory framework with significant ongoing relevance in non-localised markets. EMTA provides a leaner, lower-cost licensing alternative, though with narrower recognition.
Disclaimer: Play responsibly. Players must be over 18. For help visit https://www.rgf.org.mt/.