Racing vs. Bookies: Finding Common Ground

The grand British horseracing tradition—where the horses are fast, the hats are oversized, and the funding model is still stuck in the 1960s. As if watching a horse race wasn’t dramatic enough, the real spectacle is the ongoing spat between racing and betting over how much money bookmakers should pony up to support the sport. This time, it’s sports minister Stephanie Peacock (Labour MP for Barnsley South) playing the role of mediator, urging both sides to, for the love of God, “not go back to square one” and just get on with agreeing a voluntary levy increase.

For those unfamiliar with this charming back-and-forth, let’s rewind a few months. Racing and bookies were apparently on the verge of agreeing to a lovely 11.5% levy (up from 10%), before Prime Minister Rishi Sunak came crashing in with a snap general election, like a toddler who just discovered how to knock over Jenga towers. The whole thing collapsed faster than a Cheltenham favourite pulling up at the second hurdle, and since then, both sides have been bickering over who dropped the ball.

Racing vs. Bookies: Can’t We All Just Get Along?

The relationship between racing and betting is starting to look like a dysfunctional marriage—long on shared history, short on current harmony. Negotiations had been this close to producing a deal in May, until the Sunak snap election derailed everything. Now, Peacock, the ever-optimistic sports minister, is back in Westminster Hall urging the two sides to stop glaring at each other across the table and focus on what really matters: getting more cash flowing into the sport, and fast.

During Thursday’s debate, Peacock hinted that the bookmakers’ proposal to increase the levy to 11.5% had actually been deemed “reasonable” by the racing side. Most of this bump would go into a growth fund to get more people interested in horseracing—because, apparently, horses racing at 40 miles per hour and people dressed like they’ve stepped out of Downton Abbey isn’t enough of a draw these days. Yet despite this sliver of progress, both sides remain locked in a dispute that would make a divorce lawyer’s eyes light up.

Martin Cruddace’s Big Pitch: Tax Slots, Save Racing

Enter Martin Cruddace, CEO of Arena Racing Company, who’s not only on board with the levy increase but has a few bright ideas of his own—namely, a tax shuffle that would protect racing from being lumped in with the more dubious elements of the gambling world. Cruddace, with all the flair of a man who knows his prize money is at stake, has called for a cut in General Betting Duty (GBD) and a simultaneous increase in the statutory Levy. His goal? To ensure horse racing doesn’t get lumped in with online slots and casino games, which, let’s be honest, have about as much prestige as a Poundland scratch card.

At the moment, General Betting Duty on racing and sports betting is 15%, while Remote Gaming Duty (that’s your online slots and casino games) is at a chunky 21%. Bookmakers, meanwhile, pay a statutory Levy of 10% on racing bets, which is then funneled back into the sport via prize money and other funding—essentially keeping the whole show on the road. Cruddace’s suggestion is simple: shift the percentages so racing gets more from the Levy, while online slots take the brunt of the tax burden.

According to Cruddace’s plan, the government could reduce GBD to 10%, hike the Levy to 15%, or settle somewhere in between—perhaps at 12.5% for both. Bookmakers wouldn’t pay any more overall, but racing would see a nice bump in revenue, while bookies would have a little more incentive to shift their focus from neon-lit slot machines back to the noble world of horse racing. In his view, racing is a world-leading industry contributing to the economy—unlike slot machines, which contribute mainly to tears and overdrafts.

Simon Clare’s Balancing Act: Still at Entain, Still Walking the Tightrope

But let’s not forget Simon Clare, who, while still comfortably seated at Entain (the mega-corp that owns Ladbrokes and Coral), has recently been appointed to the Horserace Betting Levy Board. Clare’s job is a bit like being asked to referee a boxing match where both fighters are throwing the rulebook out the window. He has to keep racing and betting from tearing each other apart, while ensuring his company’s profits don’t end up looking like the losing end of a 100/1 bet.

Clare’s position is tricky, to say the least. He’s trying to convince bookmakers to perhaps embrace a higher Levy, knowing full well they’d prefer to focus on the more profitable world of online gaming. After all, why would a bookmaker fall over themselves to support horse racing when they could be raking in guaranteed profits from a slot machine called Golden Hooves? His task is to "sell" the idea that horseracing is worth betting on—not just for the punters, but for the bookmakers too. It’s not an easy gig, but then again, if anyone can balance the interests of two squabbling industries, it’s a man who knows his odds. Is a bookmaker really going to support Racing over Big Corps?

Back to Square One (Again)

As Peacock said during the debate, “We think this is the best and fastest option of getting additional money flowing to the sport,” which is government-speak for “please sort this out before we have to legislate, because no one has the time or patience for that right now.” The government has no current plans to impose changes on the levy, so they’re relying on the racing and betting industries to get their act together, voluntarily. Yes, voluntarily. What could possibly go wrong?

It’s not that racing and betting don’t want to reach a deal—they do. It’s just that, like two people trying to assemble a flat-pack wardrobe from IKEA, they’re struggling to agree on the details without chucking the instructions out the window. And, of course, there’s the ever-looming specter of the Treasury, which sees the £11bn gambling sector as a shiny source of potential tax revenue—especially when the upcoming budget is eyeing every penny.

The Final Stretch: Will They or Won’t They?

So, where does that leave us? Racing and betting are once again being asked to come together, hash out their differences, and agree on a levy increase before we all end up back at square one—a place they’ve visited more often than a lost tourist in Piccadilly Circus. Martin Cruddace is lobbying hard to keep horseracing from being lumped in with the flashy, risky world of online slots, while Simon Clare is trying to keep the bookmakers on board without driving them straight into the arms of the casino operators. And all the while, Stephanie Peacock watches from Westminster, hoping she won’t have to break out the legislative hammer to force a resolution.

It’s a high-stakes game, and the outcome will likely determine whether British racing gets the funding boost it so desperately needs, or whether it’ll be left playing second fiddle to a digital fruit machine. Either way, racing’s future is looking like a photo finish—and we all know how unpredictable those can be.