Canada’s quiet divergence on credit cards in online gambling
When US Senator Elizabeth Warren took to X earlier this year to denounce what she called a “$10 junk fee just to fund a $20 bet”, she was not merely chastising payment processors. Warren was signalling that the politics of how gamblers move their money is shifting, and payment rails – once the plumbing of the industry – are becoming a stage for public scrutiny.
South of the border, it feels like a movement is happening. FanDuel and DraftKings have ended credit‑card deposits for their sportsbooks across the US and many states either already restrict their use for some forms of gambling or are considering doing so. What began as a gripe about fees has morphed into a debate about whether gambling with borrowed money should exist at all.
Canada remains unmoved. Ontario’s regulated iGaming market permits credit cards without fuss, and research suggests they remain among the most popular ways for Canadians to fund their betting accounts.
In a world where other jurisdictions including parts of Europe are tightening the screws, Canada’s permissiveness stands out. Is this regulatory pragmatism, or a sign that Canada is drifting out of step with an emerging global consensus?
Permissiveness built on familiarity
Provincial regulators like the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) and Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis have taken a relatively straightforward view: credit cards are one payment method among many, and not inherently riskier than the alternatives.
While both agencies permit credit card deposits on Play Alberta, they continue to monitor developments elsewhere.
“While Play Alberta allows deposits through credit cards, we are always exploring other jurisdictions – domestically and abroad – to establish industry best trends and if they would be appropriate in the province,” says the AGLC’s Karin Campbell. She stresses that other safeguards, such as deposit and loss limits, remain central to promoting healthy gambling habits.
Cards offer what regulators and operators like; mature infrastructure, predictable fraud controls, and a consumer base that already uses them for everything from groceries to tax payments. For operators, they reduce friction. For consumers, they provide convenience – and, in some cases, loyalty rewards that make deposits feel like a two‑for‑one transaction.
Canadian bettors, for their part, tend to stick with what they know.
“Beyond online sports betting, credit cards have long been Canadian consumers’ go-to payment method for e-commerce,” says Greg Kirstein, GM of iGaming for North America at Paysafe.
This familiarity is reflected in Paysafe’s data, with 54% of consumers listing a credit card as a payment preference compared to 42% for debit cards. Interac and digital wallets also play their roles, but credit cards remain firmly embedded in the mix.
“Considering credit cards’ popularity for e-commerce, when Ontario launched its private sports betting market in 2022 and placed no restrictions on cards, it was unsurprising that we saw the same trend for gambling,” says Kirstein. “Credit cards continue to be the top payment method in Ontario, with 50% of online sports bettors including them as a preference in our 2026 iGaming research.”
Yet the international mood is shifting, and Canada’s comfort with credit‑funded gambling increasingly looks like an outlier.
The American rethink
Most US states that have already banned credit cards for sports betting did so, citing concerns about debt‑fuelled gambling. But the more interesting development is the industry’s own recalibration.
FanDuel and DraftKings have not waited for lawmakers, pre‑emptively moving in response to political pressure and fee scrutiny.
The American debate blends two anxieties. One is the populist anger over opaque fees, an easy target for politicians keen to show they are protecting consumers. The other is the more technocratic concern that gambling with borrowed money may exacerbate harm.
Credit cards, unlike debit or bank transfers, introduce the possibility of revolving debt. That makes them an obvious pressure point for policymakers. But banning a payment method does not eliminate demand; it merely shifts it elsewhere.
Lessons from Europe
Europe offers a preview of where such debates can lead. The UK Gambling Commission banned credit cards for gambling in 2020 after research suggested that credit‑funded play correlated with higher markers of harm. Other European markets have taken varied approaches, from outright prohibitions to affordability checks and deposit monitoring.
“In markets like the UK, which banned credit cards for iGaming from 2020, and Massachusetts, which launched its market in 2022 with the same restriction, bettors certainly shifted towards other payment methods,” says Paysafe’s Kirstein. “Our 2026 iGaming research revealed that 53% of UK players list a debit card as a preference compared to an international benchmark of 39%.”
Kirstein notes that an “overwhelming majority” of players won’t avoid wagering if credit cards aren’t an option – they’ll use an alternative, whether that’s their debit card, a digital wallet or a local payment method.
But the common thread is that once gambling regulation is framed as a public‑health issue, credit cards become difficult to defend. They are a visible symbol of risk, even if not always the riskiest instrument in practice.
Canada has not yet reached this stage of discourse. But the global direction of travel suggests they may have to, eventually.
Does banning credit actually reduce harm?
The intuitive answer to this question is yes: restricting access to borrowed funds should reduce the risk of debt accumulation. But payment behaviour rarely follows neat logic.
To Kirstein’s point, when one rail is blocked, consumers migrate to others. Debit cards, e‑wallets and instant bank transfers can all facilitate rapid deposits. In some cases, alternative credit products – such as buy‑now‑pay‑later services – may be even less transparent. There is also the risk of displacement to unregulated or offshore operators. If restrictions feel heavy‑handed, a minority of players may seek out less regulated channels.
The AGCO says its framework focuses on behavioural indicators rather than payment rails in isolation. “We require operators to use multiple data sources to monitor and assess their players for signs of potential harm and provide assistance to those at risk,” says a spokesperson for the commission.
“That means looking at spending patterns, time indicators, and the use of higher-risk or multiple payment methods.”
In the same vein, AGLC’s Campbell says the variety of responsible gambling tools and resources are the regulator’s “first response to player protections”. Regardless of funding method, she notes, deposit increases are not immediate on Play Alberta, with a 24-hour waiting period before the new threshold takes effect.
Operationally, credit cards are not necessarily the highest‑risk option. They come with established fraud analytics and dispute processes. Operators understand the chargeback landscape well. The question is not whether credit cards are safe, but whether they are politically sustainable.
Paysafe’s Kirstein says most transactions proceed without incident. However, he notes that cards carry distinct risk characteristics, including broader dispute rights with more robust consumer-protection rules. This, he says, can lead to higher dispute and chargeback exposure for operators.
“There tends to be a slightly higher incidence of fraud with credit cards compared to debit, whether that’s through stolen cards or so-called ‘friendly fraud’, where a chargeback is attempted by a bettor after a loss,” he says.
Campbell says AGLC has layered compliance controls in place to mitigate those risks.
“[There are] multiple compliance and risk mitigation tools in place to prevent credit card fraud and abuse, including name verification, shared credit cards and multiple declined transactions in a 12-hour period.”
Canada’s crossroads
Even at four years old, Ontario’s iGaming market is still young. Regulators have prioritised channelisation and responsible gambling frameworks built around behavioural monitoring rather than blunt prohibitions. Within that architecture, credit cards are treated as one rail among many.
Ontario operators “tend to balance credit cards’ popularity among customers with their slightly higher risk,” says Kirstein. “As a result, savvy sportsbooks’ cashiers invariably include Interac e-transfer, digital wallets, eCash and local payment methods, as options alongside credit cards.”
But optics matter. As scrutiny of both gambling and consumer debt intensifies globally, the symbolism of gambling on credit may become harder to defend. ESG‑minded investors, cross‑border operators and payments providers are already attuned to the shifting winds.
For policymakers, the decision will hinge on evidence: Do credit‑funded deposits correlate with higher harm indicators in Canada? Would restrictions meaningfully change outcomes, or merely redirect behaviour? And how would a ban affect channelization of play?
Provincial regulators maintain watchful eyes.
“We continuously evaluate our Standards using evidence and data – including from other jurisdictions – to ensure our regulatory framework reflects emerging risks and best supports public protection,” says the AGCO.
A question that will not stay hypothetical
For Canadian operators, even if legal, accepting credit cards may soon look out of step with international norms. Canada is not reckless for allowing credit cards in regulated gambling. Its model emphasises oversight, transparency and intervention tools rather than paternalistic bans. But the global conversation is moving, and Canada will not be able to ignore it indefinitely.
The eventual answer may not be binary. Enhanced monitoring, clearer fee disclosure or differentiated limits could offer a middle path. But the days when payment methods were mere technical infrastructure are over. They have become proxies for regulatory philosophy.
Canada’s current stance reflects pragmatism. Whether it remains so will depend on how the politics of borrowed money – and the politics of gambling – continue to evolve.
This article first appeared in the Summer 2026 edition of the Canadian Gaming Business Magazine. You can download the full magazine here.
