Unveiled: Undercover pact boosts gambling deposits using Schufa-G data secretly

Uncovering a Hidden Alliance: The Schufa-G Scandal Exposed

By Timm Schaffner, Edited by Angela Burke

Feeling the Heat: A Scandalous Collusion Exposed

German media outlets have unveiled a buried deal between state interior ministers and online gaming providers. This secrecy-shrouded agreement allegedly has been facilitating a workaround for the 1,000 euro monthly deposit limit stipulated by the State Treaty on Gaming. Players can potentially bypass thorough financial assessments using a simplified credit check known as "Schufa-G information." Critics denounce this maneuver as a dangerous threat to player protection.

A Shadowy Partnership

By law, players should only qualify for greater deposit limits if they can validation that they can afford such spending, according to Section 6c (1) (3) of the State Treaty on Gaming 2021. This safeguard aims to ensure that individuals don't gamble beyond their financial capabilities. The LUGAS system handles the technical aspect of evaluating these limits.

Instead of demanding detailed financial evidence from players angling for increased limits, authorities have deemed the Schufa-G information sufficient, as reported by Tagesschau.

The Smoking Gun

An exposed document evidencing an agreement between the federal states and the gaming provider Tipico has been made public by the network Investigate Europe. It confirm that the federal states have granted providers the ability to exponentially increase players' deposit limits based a simplified Schufa credit query.

The newly devised Schufa-G information, however, merely enquires about a person's general creditworthiness. Research conducted by Investigate Europe indicates that an individual who earns approximately 1,000 euros monthly could boost their deposit limit to 10,000 euros per month.

A Dissenting Verdict

The association between Schufa-G information and increased deposit limits has already been evaluated judicially. The Higher Administrative Court of Saxony-Anhalt ruled in December 2024 that Schufa information should not be regarded as adequate proof of a player's financial capability. This decision prompted recommendations from the Joint Gaming Authority of the States (GGL) to establish an appropriate alternative method. However, this appears to have had little practical impact, as the Schufa-G information remains a cornerstone for credit limit increases.

On a Collision Course

Addiction researchers and consumer advocates, including Burkhard Blienert (Federal Government's Drug and Addiction Commissioner) and Tobias Hayer (University of Bremen's addiction expert) have expressed concern over the implications of this practice. Players might find themselves in a debt spiral, while providers might actively encourage substantial losses.

A Matter of Transparency

The murky nature of this regulation has fueled further frustration, as the public and many politicians only recently learned about it. Consumer advocates urge for income proofs or bank statements to replace the problematic Schufa-G information as a basis for raising credit limits.

Time will tell whether more courts will weigh in on the Schufa-G issue and what actions the GGL can take to halt credit limit increases based on the Schufa-G information.

Other online gaming providers, like Tipico, might have been granted a similar capability to increase players' deposit limits based on simplified Schufa-G credit queries, as per the leaked agreement in the Tipico-federal states document exposed by Investigate Europe.
The Higher Administrative Court of Saxony-Anhalt warned in December 2024 that Schufa information should not serve as a general-news basis for determining a player's financial capability, yet the practice remains prevalent and disputed.
As doubts grow over the transparency of the deposit limit increases and concerns rise about potential exploitation of vulnerable players, calls intensify for a shift away from Schufa-G information and towards income proofs or bank statements as a more secure basis for establishing credit limits.