OLG’s Under-25 Deposit Limit is Good PR But Has ‘Far Way to Go,’ Says RG Expert

This week, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (OLG) introduced a new safer gambling policy mandating online deposit limits for “certain players under 25.” 

According to the announcement, the new measure will target under-25s as their engagement increases because it’s a group that “consistently identifies as potentially more vulnerable to gambling-related harm.” However, the release did not define “certain players” or other program specifics. 

Responding to Gambling Insider’s request for details, OLG spokesperson Tony Bitoni clarified in an email that the new policy is triggered when those under 25 deposit $500 or more at once. 

He wrote:

“Currently, after a player under 25 deposits $500 or more at one time into their account, they will be prompted to set a deposit limit.”

Outside of this specific policy, Bitoni said in a follow-up email that OLG monitors all players’ actions and intervenes when necessary.

Given that limited application, Gambling Insider asked Dr. Jeffrey Derevensky for his take on the new policy. Derevensky is the director of the International Centre for Youth Gambling Problems and High-Risk Behaviours at McGill University. 

“It is a good beginning,” Derevensky said during a Friday morning call. “But they’re not putting the deposit limit in place; they’re asking people to set one.”

That’s a big distinction. Many jurisdictions have maximum deposit limits for how much you can deposit in a week, a month, or a year. But they’re not doing that. They’re basically saying that if a person under 25 deposits $500, they’ll send a notification about setting limits. Why are they not doing that with everyone? That’s my concern.”

“I see no reason they couldn’t mandate that for everyone under the age of 25. In fact, many jurisdictions have it for everyone,” Derevensky added.

Deposit Limits Should be Mandatory Everywhere, for Everyone. Not Just at OLG

In the announcement, OLG’s president and CEO, Duncan Hannay, stressed that instituting a deposit limit is not about limiting choice. Rather, the requirement strengthens choice by helping players pause and consider their spending. 

OLG bases its player engagement on research and best practices, Hannay added.

“This new measure is a practical, data-driven step to help players under 25 build safer play habits early.”

Stan Cho, Minister of Tourism, Culture and Gaming, said that responsible gaming remains a government priority. Finding a balance between choice and protection is essential, he added. 

“This initiative reflects the strong collaboration between government, agencies and industry partners to strengthen player protections and ensure Ontario’s gaming market remains safe, responsible and trusted.”

But for Derevensky, who has studied youth gambling behavior for over 35 years, good policy would make limit-setting mandatory for all players. 

A robust policy would A: mandate that everyone establish deposit limits. And B: set a limit for the amount that an individual could deposit. 

Many people refer to this also as a loss limit: you can’t lose more than X. If OLG asked me for my recommendation, I’d mandate a deposit limit for everyone. Everyone. If you don’t want to do that, do it for under 25 and set a parameter for the amount one can deposit if under 25.”

OLG Deposit Limit is a Good Headline, but ‘Baby Step’ Forward

In its current form, the youth deposit limit is mainly “good PR.” Though it may help younger gamblers recognize they “shouldn’t be wagering more than they can afford,” Derevensky suggested.

If you just read the headline, it looks nice. If you delve into its actual components, it’s really a baby step. The headlines are great. They can argue that they’re doing something for young people under 25.” 

“I think they have a far way to go,” he added.

If deposit limits don’t trigger until a $500+ deposit, what happens if the player deposits $400, then another $400, then another $400, then another $400? Derevensky pondered.

He also noted that the limit only applies to OLG. So, realistically, a player could just sign in to another app if limits disrupt their play. 

If I, for example, am on FanDuel and I have a deposit limit of X, and then I go to bet365, and I have a deposit limit of X, it’s not cumulative. There should be some way of linking all of these, so that if you exceed the deposit limit on BetMGM, for example, you can’t go to bet365.”

OLG Deposit Limit Adds Protection for Vulnerable Population

To be fair to OLG, that loophole is beyond their control. And to our knowledge, no jurisdiction currently requires centralized responsible gambling tools, except in cases of shared self-exclusion. BetGuard, Ontario’s centralized exclusion tool, launched in May.

The nature of online gambling allows OLG to “monitor and intervene with customized messages when needed,” Bitoni said. 

“We know that enabling informed decisions and connecting our players with the right tools and supports at the right time, will allow our players to continue to enjoy their play.”

OLG offers a range of safety tools to all players through its award-winning PlaySmart program. The take-up of these pre-commitment tools among digital customers is “great,” Bitoni said, though OLG  would always welcome more engagement. 

At the very least, this latest policy adds a speed bump for a vulnerable population.

“Overall, what’s most important here is that we’re encouraging this group of players, which research consistently identifies as potentially more vulnerable to gambling-related harm than other age groups,  to pause and consider what they are comfortable depositing through mandatory deposit limits.”