Is It the End of Google Ads in Gambling? We Asked a Google Ads Manager

I’ve been working in iGaming affiliate marketing for a while now. I talk to operators, affiliates, SEO specialists, content creators. But there’s one group of people whose perspective I find particularly valuable and rarely heard: the Google Ads managers who actually run gambling campaigns day in, day out.

If you’ve been anywhere near iGaming paid acquisition in the last 18 months, you know the landscape has shifted dramatically. Google’s gambling advertising policy changed 18 times in 2025 alone, more than any other year. Certification requirements have gotten stricter. Sweepstakes casinos lost their loophole. And in March 2026, Google dropped what might be the most consequential update yet: accounts now need “good policy health” to even be eligible for gambling certification.

So I reached out to Albin Skoglund, a Google Ads manager who works closely with iGaming companies. I wanted his unfiltered take on where things stand, what’s actually changed behind the scenes, and whether there’s still a future for Google Ads in gambling.

Here’s what he told me.

The big picture: is Google shutting gambling advertisers out?

Lucas: Albin, let’s start with the obvious question. A lot of people in the industry feel like Google is slowly closing the door on gambling advertising. From where you sit, is that an accurate read?

Albin Skoglund: I talk with a lot of iGaming companies. A short version from me is that I know the policy is tightening the screws. Pretty much only the 100% compliant brands can survive in the long run.

“100% compliant” sounds reasonable in theory, but in practice, it’s an incredibly high bar. We’re talking about an industry where regulatory frameworks differ from country to country, where licensing requirements change constantly, and where even well-intentioned operators can trip over a technicality.

The sweepstakes and crypto casino loophole is dead

Lucas: What about the brands that were operating in grey areas? Sweepstakes casinos, crypto casinos… they used to find creative ways around Google’s policies. Is that still viable?

Albin Skoglund: Sweepstakes or crypto casinos that used to find loopholes aren’t really doing well anymore, if they ever did.

The data backs this up. In October 2025, Google reclassified sweepstakes casinos, removing them from the “social casino” category and placing them under the stricter “online gambling” framework. That means full operator licensing, country-specific certification, and mandatory responsible gambling messaging. Most sweepstakes platforms that had found a comfortable spot advertising as “social casinos” saw their certifications revoked overnight.

For crypto casinos, the situation is even more challenging. Most operate under Curacao or similar offshore licenses that Google doesn’t recognize for advertising purposes. The loopholes these brands relied on weren’t just tightened. They were bricked shut.

The nuclear option: blocking accounts with violation history

Lucas: One thing I’ve been hearing about is Google taking a harder line on accounts that have had policy issues in the past. Can you confirm that?

Albin Skoglund: Something that was rolled out recently: if an ad account or an agency manager account has a history of policy violations, they are completely blocking them from getting gambling certified.

This is probably the most significant change of 2026, and I don’t think the industry has fully processed what it means yet.

Google’s March 2026 certification update introduced the concept of “good policy health” as a prerequisite for gambling certification. It’s not just about your current compliance. It’s about your entire account history. If your account has accumulated violations over time, even if they were resolved, you may no longer be eligible for certification.

And it goes further. This applies at the Manager Account (MCC) level too. If an agency manages multiple gambling accounts under one MCC and a significant number of those accounts have had certifications revoked or policy violations, the entire MCC can lose eligibility. One bad client can tank the certification prospects of every other account under the same umbrella.

What about the agencies managing these campaigns?

Lucas: That MCC-level accountability sounds like it could fundamentally change how agencies approach iGaming clients. What’s your perspective on that?

Albin Skoglund: Absolutely. If you’re running an agency with a manager account that has a history of violations, you’re done. They won’t even let you apply for new gambling certifications. The whole MCC gets flagged.

Think about what that means if you’re a PPC agency specializing in iGaming. Your entire business model is now at risk every time you onboard a client who turns out to be non-compliant. The risk-reward calculation has fundamentally changed. Agencies can’t afford to take a chance on a borderline operator anymore, because the downside isn’t just losing that one client. It’s potentially losing the ability to run gambling ads for any client.

Is there still a path forward?

Lucas: So for the operators and affiliates reading this, what’s the realistic outlook? Is Google Ads still worth investing in for gambling?

Albin Skoglund: For the brands that are fully licensed and fully compliant, yes. Google Ads is still a powerful channel. The competition is actually getting thinner because so many players are getting pushed out. But you have to be clean. No shortcuts, no grey areas.

For operators, the margin for error is zero. Google blocked over 270 million gambling ads in 2025 and recorded 9.7 million policy violations from gambling publishers alone. They’re not just setting rules. They’re actively enforcing them at scale.

For affiliates, the situation is significantly harder. Google’s policy updates now require affiliates to own their domains outright (no more subdomain tricks), hold their own certifications independent of the operators they promote, and maintain a clean policy record. For most small to mid-size affiliates, this effectively prices them out of the channel.

So is it really the end of gambling ads?

Not exactly. Google isn’t banning gambling advertising. They’re making it so that only the most legitimate, best-resourced, fully-compliant players can participate. That’s a very different thing, but the practical outcome for a large portion of the industry is the same: Google Ads is no longer accessible to them.

What Albin described isn’t a sudden shutdown. It’s a slow squeeze. Each policy update removes another workaround, closes another grey area, raises another bar. The brands that built their acquisition strategy around finding the next loophole are running out of room. And the ones that invested in compliance from day one are the only ones left standing.

Albin Skoglund: “From Google’s perspective I think it’s positive – in case they are looking to make money 😅 It’s an auction in the end and who pays most will pretty much get the most. The wealthy brands will do better since they pay more. The wealthier can also pay more per CPA usually, and have higher LTV – which makes sense.”

Whether you think that’s a good thing or a bad thing probably depends on which side of the compliance line you’re standing on.

Thanks to Albin for sharing his perspective. If you’re a Google Ads manager, operator, or affiliate with experience navigating these policy changes, we’d love to hear your take. Reach out to us.