In November 2025, James Packer, the former leader of Crown Resorts, reignited the discussion surrounding gambling regulations in Australia. Speaking to Rampart, a business news platform, Packer voiced his frustrations with the current regulatory environment and its impact on the casino industry.
Packer highlighted that the evolving regulatory landscape, inconsistent enforcement, and abrupt increases in taxes have significantly disrupted the casino sector in Australia. He argued that these changes have provided an undue advantage to smaller venues such as pubs and clubs at the expense of larger casino operators.
According to Packer, the disparity in treatment by state regulators between the two leading casino groups, Crown Resorts and Star Entertainment, was striking. He pointed out that Crown faced more intense scrutiny than its rival. Packer referenced the series of investigations that commenced in 2019, which resulted in leadership changes among regulators in Victoria and Western Australia. In contrast, officials in New South Wales retained their positions, a situation that Packer found perplexing. He questioned why Philip Crawford, head of the NSW Independent Casino Commission, remained in his role despite the apparent issues at Star Entertainment under his watch. While he acknowledged Crown’s failings, Packer contended that the regulatory actions against Crown were disproportionate compared to those faced by Star.
Packer’s most severe criticism was aimed at former Victorian premier Daniel Andrews. He accused Andrews’ administration of reneging on a tax agreement established in 2015, which he claimed stripped Crown Melbourne of tens of millions in profits. This reversal occurred just before Packer completed the AUD 8.9 billion ($5.7 billion) sale of Crown to Blackstone in 2022. He argued that this sudden policy shift jeopardized the already precarious buyout, leaving him feeling targeted by the authorities. Moreover, the years of investigations had compelled him to divest his stake in order to satisfy regulatory fitness requirements.
Reflecting on the broader impact of regulatory changes, Packer expressed concerns about the additional burdens imposed on the industry. The introduction of measures such as compulsory ID checks, stringent time restrictions, and prohibitions on cash transactions placed casinos at a competitive disadvantage. In contrast, pubs and clubs remained free to accept cash, which Packer described as an imbalance that favored smaller establishments over large-scale resorts hindered by numerous regulations.
Despite his frustrations, Packer acknowledged the personal benefits he gained from the sale to Blackstone, deeming it one of his wiser business decisions. He characterized himself as an average businessman who had occasionally succeeded in timing his exits well, citing previous ventures in media and partnerships in Macau as examples. He also candidly discussed his long-term mental health struggles, exacerbated by Crown’s legal troubles, noting that ongoing treatment and two years of sobriety had improved his well-being.
Since stepping away from the industry in 2022, Packer’s remarks have reignited debate about the transformation of Australia’s gambling landscape and the consequences borne by various stakeholders. While some in the industry share Packer’s concerns about regulatory imbalances, others argue that stringent oversight is necessary to ensure accountability and prevent misconduct.
Critics of Packer’s perspective suggest that the intensified scrutiny and regulatory measures are essential to upholding the integrity of the gambling industry. They argue that the reforms, although challenging for operators, were implemented in response to genuine issues identified within the sector. By enforcing stricter controls, regulators aim to foster a more transparent and responsible gambling environment, ultimately benefiting consumers and the industry as a whole.
Moreover, proponents of the current regulatory framework contend that casinos, given their scale and influence, should be held to higher standards than smaller venues. They believe that the enhanced regulations ensure that casinos remain accountable and do not exploit their market position. In this context, the measures introduced, including the prohibition of cash transactions, are viewed as necessary steps to mitigate risks associated with money laundering and other illicit activities.
As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how Australia’s gambling regulations will evolve and what impact they will have on both large and small operators. While Packer’s comments have undoubtedly stirred controversy, they have also highlighted the ongoing challenges and complexities faced by the industry in navigating a rapidly changing regulatory landscape.
