B2B / B2C Licences
B2C licences authorize serving players; B2B licences authorize supplying games/platforms to other operators.
The licensing distinction between serving players (B2C) and supplying the industry (B2B — games, platforms, odds, payments). Mature regimes license both layers: Sweden made supplier licences mandatory in 2023, Gibraltar's 2025 Act added a Support Services category, and the MGA has issued both classes since 2018.
B2B licensing is the regulator's lever over the supply chain: a games studio that cannot legally supply unlicensed operators chokes the black market upstream. The Dutch KSA's sanctions against suppliers serving unlicensed sites show the mechanism in action.
The split runs through every modern licensing framework because the industry itself is layered: the brand a player sees sits on a platform, fed by game studios, odds compilers and payment providers the player never sees. Licensing only the visible layer leaves the machinery unsupervised — which is precisely the gap supplier licensing closes.
The adoption timeline tells the story of a converging standard: Malta licensed both layers from its 2018 Act; Sweden made supplier licences mandatory from July 2023; Gibraltar's 2025 Act added a Support Services category; Curaçao's LOK separates B2C and B2B authorisations. Once a few major regimes require licensed suppliers, the requirement propagates — studios license everywhere their operators operate.
The split appears throughout this site's licence pages: Curaçao's LOK fees differ by category, Gibraltar's 2025 tiers price B2C and B2B separately, and Malta's framework recognises both. As supplier licensing spreads, the atlas expects the B2B column to become as informative as the B2C one — which platforms and studios hold which authorisations increasingly determines where brands can legally operate.