In recent years, the Philippines has experienced significant changes in its regulatory policies for the gaming industry, especially after the complete ban on Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGO), which shifted the focus to Philippine Inland Gaming Operators (PIGO). However, as the number of PIGOs increases, there is growing concern from various sectors of society about their regulation and potential risks.
In 2024, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos announced a comprehensive ban on POGO, citing its association with serious criminal activities such as money laundering, human trafficking, and sexual assault. This move resulted in about 9,000 former POGO employees being stranded in the country, with some attempting to travel to places like Pakistan to engage in illegal activities.
In this context, PIGO emerged, primarily targeting local Filipino players and offering a variety of online gaming services including sports betting, electronic games, and bingo. As of July 2025, 61 PIGOs have been licensed by the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR).
Although PIGOs operate within a legal framework, their potential impact on society has raised widespread concern. Senator Hasha De Silva pointed out that PIGO and POGO essentially offer the same "games of chance," the only difference being that the former targets local players while the latter primarily serves foreign gamblers.
Furthermore, the popularity of PIGO could lead to minors being exposed to gambling, increasing the risk of gambling addiction. Since these games can be easily accessed through mobile apps, the threshold for gambling has been significantly lowered, posing a greater temptation, especially to young people.
The Philippine government is cautious in its regulatory stance towards PIGO. President Marcos stated that the government is considering introducing stricter regulatory measures for digital gaming services and may impose taxes to address the growing problem of gambling addiction.
However, PAGCOR emphasizes that PIGO operations are strictly regulated, not associated with criminal activities, and that violators will be fined or have their licenses revoked.
Conclusion
The regulatory policies of the Philippine gaming industry are in a period of transition. Although PIGOs operate within a legal framework, their potential impact on society cannot be ignored. The government needs to strengthen the regulation of PIGOs while promoting industry development, ensuring that their operations do not negatively affect society. In the future, balancing the development of the gaming industry with social responsibility will be an important issue facing the Philippine government.
