Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Technologies

The State Sees Every Bet — But Only If the Operator Wants to Show It

The State Electronic Monitoring System (DSOM) has been launched in test mode, and the first operator has already connected. There is one problem: connection remains voluntary for six months — while the shadow market waits for no one.

Oleg Bazylewicz

By Oleg Bazylewicz

April 10, 2026 · 2 min read

The State Sees Every Bet — But Only If the Operator Wants to Show It
Ілюстративне фото: Depositphotos

While the war was ongoing, Ukraine's gambling market grew inconspicuously to significant proportions: over 9 months of 2025 alone, total i-gaming revenue reached 47.6 billion hryvnias. The state received 17 billion hryvnias in taxes — but before launching DSOM, it had no tool to verify whether this was the complete amount.

What is DSOM and why it matters

The State System for Online Monitoring is a centralized IT platform that records in real time all operations of gambling organizers: bets, winnings, refunds, player account top-ups. The government appointed the state enterprise "Diia" as the technical administrator of the system. According to Bornyakov, the system is capable of processing millions of requests per minute and was designed with cyber threats in mind.

The first phase covers approximately 60% of the functionality provided for by law — precisely the part that allows the State Tax Service to control the tax base. The second phase — game results accounting, slot machine control, responsible gaming — is scheduled for autumn 2026.

Voluntariness as a bottleneck

The first operator has already connected, others are in the process. But connection remains voluntary for now. As Mezha.net reports, citing PlayCity, businesses have been given six months to join — after which the mandatory phase begins.

This is where the structural vulnerability of the reform becomes apparent. The President of the Association of Ukrainian Gambling Operators (AUGO) Oleksandr Kohut warned publicly back in summer:

"If you don't fight the illegal market effectively, you will very effectively control the white market online — but at the same time the white market will shrink, and the size of the illegal market will grow."

Oleksandr Kohut, President of AUGO

In other words, DSOM provides transparency for those who are already legal. For those operating in the shadows — it poses no obstacle whatsoever.

Shadow market: data measured for the first time

In August–September 2025, KANTAR, Gradus, and Factum conducted the first comprehensive study of the level of informality in Ukraine's gambling industry. The operators' association used specific figures in letters to the Ministry of Digital Transformation, the Ministry of Finance, and PlayCity — as an argument against new restrictions for players at legal casinos, which in their view would only accelerate the outflow to the illegal segment, part of which, according to AUGO data, has Russian origins.

What's next

The Ministry of Digital Transformation has prepared three bills — amendments to the Tax Code, the Law on Gambling, and the Law on Lotteries. The documents are undergoing public consultation. Full market connection to DSOM is scheduled for 2026.

The system exists. Data will be available. The question is different: if within six months of voluntary connection some operators still don't join — will PlayCity have the resources and political will to apply coercive measures without fearing that licensees will flee to the shadows?

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026