A recent study revealed that a majority of Filipino online gambling players prefer stricter regulation over an outright ban, as the industry continues to grow and spark debate in the country.

According to sociocultural research firm The Fourth Wall, 53% of online gamblers surveyed oppose a total ban on regulated platforms, while 80% favor banning unregulated ones due to concerns over scams and addiction. Only 18% fully support a ban.

“Our study reveals greater preference for safer and regulated platforms... An outright ban won't stop online gambling but instead push it underground,” said John Brylle L. Bae, Research Director at The Fourth Wall.

The study, which surveyed over 1,000 players nationwide, found that 85% do not borrow money to gamble. Most began gambling out of curiosity or boredom, and cited safety and legitimacy as top priorities. E-wallets like GCash are the preferred payment method for 92% of players, with many users saying these help them control their spending.

Despite frustrations with regulated platforms—such as withdrawal delays and app glitches—many respondents expressed trust in government oversight, with 73% acknowledging the importance of regulation from bodies like PAGCOR. However, 34% remain unclear on PAGCOR’s full responsibilities, highlighting the need for public education.

Meanwhile, Malacañang said President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is still carefully reviewing the issue. Palace press officer Usec. Claire Castro said it would be premature to declare a total ban without fully understanding the implications. “Unlicensed online gambling platforms are difficult to monitor,” she warned, citing their role in rising addiction cases.

Online gambling in the Philippines saw a 76% increase in scams tied to unregulated sites, particularly on social media. Gross gaming revenue reached PHP 410 billion in 2024, with projections up to PHP 480 billion this year.

Bae stressed that the study aims to inform policy, not promote gambling: “There must be a shift toward more data-driven, research-informed dialogue toward regulation and policymaking.”