Anjouan gaming license vs Curacao

Choosing between an Anjouan gaming license vs Curacao is a trade‑off between speed, cost, and regulatory intensity. Curacao has licensed iGaming since 1996 and is rolling out LOK reforms (2023–2025) under the Curacao Gaming Authority, with stricter anti‑money laundering and customer checks, ongoing audits, and local substance—incorporation, a physical address, and about three local hires. Anjouan has licensed since 2005 via ABGB/AOFA, offers a single license covering all verticals, and typically approves faster—often 2–4 weeks when documents are complete, sometimes a few days. Costs diverge: Curacao’s new model raises fees (even with a widely cited 2% profit tax and no VAT), while Anjouan is lower‑cost with 0% GGR tax and no VAT. Both licenses cover casino, sportsbook, poker, live dealer, and allow crypto, but banking and PSP recognition remains stronger for Curacao and is rapidly improving for Anjouan. In short, Anjouan suits a fast, budget launch, while Curacao suits scaling with traditional partners under tighter compliance.

Anjouan gaming license vs Curacao: the real question behind the headline

If you’ve ever sat across from a founder who is burning cash while waiting for a regulator to reply, you know the “Anjouan vs Curacao” debate isn’t academic. It’s about what you’re optimizing for: speed to market, cost of compliance, access to payment rails, or long‑term brand credibility. The answer changes depending on your business model, target markets, and your investors’ risk appetite.

As a lawyer who has lived through more than one regulatory pivot, I’ll keep the jargon light and the advice practical. Both Anjouan and Curacao can get you legally online. But they live on different ends of the spectrum: Anjouan leans into efficiency; Curacao is moving toward heavier oversight and higher trust signals. The trick is matching the jurisdiction to the stage and strategy of your gaming business.

Where both regimes stand now

Both jurisdictions issue a single umbrella license that can cover casino, sportsbook, bingo, poker, live dealer, and lotteries. Both are broadly used for international operations outside Tier‑1 markets. And both are accepted by a growing ecosystem of platforms, aggregators, and alternative PSPs.

That’s where the similarities end. Curacao has been tightening its rules, centralizing oversight, and adding substance and reporting. Anjouan has focused on a streamlined, business‑friendly pathway with essential AML/KYC and responsible gaming controls, but without bulky bureaucracy. Your experience as an operator will feel very different in each place.

Curacao in transition: from sub‑licenses to a centralized regime

For decades, Curacao’s master/sub‑license model made it the default “startup passport” of iGaming. That chapter is closing. A new centralized licensing framework has replaced sub‑licenses with direct licensing and stronger supervision. Expect more robust AML/KYC, responsible gaming, and technical controls, along with clearer accountability under a single regulator.

What this means operationally: more documentation up front, ongoing reporting afterward, and real‑world “substance” expectations. You should plan for local presence and staffing, clearer governance, and heavier internal compliance. In return, you get a jurisdiction that is steadily rebuilding reputation with banks, providers, and regulators abroad.

Anjouan’s pitch: streamlined, credible, and fast

Anjouan has been issuing gaming licenses since the mid‑2000s, but only recently became the quiet favorite of speed‑hungry operators. The application workflow is lean, due diligence is focused, and the licensing scope is broad. In many cases, you can license a non‑Anjouan company, which makes restructuring optional rather than mandatory.

You’ll still need clean UBOs, decent policies, and a workable business plan. Expect checks on domain ownership, RNG certification where relevant, and basic responsible gaming measures. The appeal is tactical: less administrative drag, faster turnaround, and a cost base that doesn’t smother early‑stage teams.

Important note on tax: Anjouan is frequently marketed as 0% GGR and no VAT for offshore operators. Always validate the current position with local counsel and your tax adviser; incentives can change, and what matters is how your whole structure is treated, not just the license.

Cost, timing, and taxes: what founders actually feel

For most startups, runway and momentum matter more than ideology. Here’s how that translates in practice.

Timing: Anjouan often turns around faster, sometimes in weeks rather than months, assuming your documents are clean. Curacao’s new regime is more methodical; plan for a longer pre‑launch phase.
Cost: Anjouan’s application and annual fees are generally lower, and you’re not paying for heavy local substance. Curacao’s fees and ongoing compliance overhead are higher than the old era, and you should budget for local operations.
Taxes: Curacao historically offered low corporate rates and no VAT on B2B exports under certain structures. The effective rate depends on your exact setup. Anjouan is commonly promoted as 0% GGR with no VAT on offshore activity. Do a full cross‑border tax map before you celebrate; payment flows, PE risks, and IP location will make or break your effective rate.

Compliance and enforcement: credibility vs agility

Compliance is not a checkbox; it’s your passport to payment rails and partners.

Curacao’s trajectory is clear: more formal AML/KYC, tighter responsible gaming, stronger audits, and clearer accountability. That makes onboarding with conservative PSPs, larger affiliates, and brand‑sensitive suppliers easier—once you’re through the door.

Anjouan offers a pragmatic middle ground: credible due diligence and policy expectations without over‑engineering. Responsible operators can meet the standard without 12 layers of process, and that keeps the business nimble. The trade‑off is perception: some counterparties still see Curacao as the safer bet for scale, while others now view both as equivalent for mid‑risk markets.

Market access, PSPs, and banking: what actually opens

Operators love to ask if one license “unlocks” more countries or banks. The honest answer: your acceptance is a function of five things—your target geographies, UBO profile, compliance hygiene, fraud history, and platform controls.

Restricted markets: Both licenses exclude the usual suspects (think US, UK, and other prohibited or sanctioned territories) unless you also hold local approvals. Your geoblocking, KYC, and marketing discipline matter more than the logo on the license.
PSPs and banks: Many alternative PSPs accept both Anjouan and Curacao when the file is strong. Tier‑1 acquirers and certain EMI/banks tend to warm faster to Curacao under the new framework, but the gap has narrowed. Quality of documentation and risk controls often trump the jurisdiction label.
Content and platforms: Major game suppliers and aggregators work with both, subject to their own risk lists. If you’re aiming for top‑tier enterprise integrations, Curacao can still carry a reputational edge. For agile aggregators and crypto‑friendly rails, Anjouan is widely workable.

Technical and operational expectations

No matter where you license, be ready for the same core disciplines: RNG certification or game fairness attestations, segregation of player funds where applicable, age and location checks, dispute handling, and reporting. Hosting can be flexible, but ensure lawful data storage and backup practices and respect any local mirroring or record‑keeping obligations.

If you build for a higher bar from day one—clean KYC flows, clear RG tools, decent data retention—you’ll reduce switching costs later if you decide to stack an additional license.

Substance, people, and governance

Curacao’s newer framework leans into local presence and governance. Budget for local officers, board structure, and reporting cadence. This is good for credibility and painful for payroll.

Anjouan keeps the substance ask lighter. You’ll still need named officers, coherent policies, and audit‑ready records, but the staffing and infrastructure footprint is leaner. That’s a relief for startups; just don’t let “lean” become “loose.” Sloppy files are the number one reason PSPs say no.

Who should choose what: a candid fit check

Choose Anjouan if:

You need speed and cost efficiency to hit market windows.
Your initial focus is LATAM, parts of Asia or Africa, or crypto‑friendly audiences.
You’re building a disciplined compliance core but don’t want heavy local substance yet.
You’re comfortable with alternative PSPs and a phased banking strategy.

Choose Curacao if:

You’re building a brand for scale and plan to court traditional banks and bigger B2B partners.
You want the signaling benefit of a more supervised regime from the start.
You can absorb longer timelines, higher fees, and local operational commitments.
You intend to layer into stricter markets over time and want a head start on governance.

A practical licensing playbook you can actually use

Phase 1: structure and strategy

Map your ownership and governance cleanly. Choose where your operating company sits, where IP lives, and how funds flow. Identify target markets and prohibited geos and set your risk appetite in writing. This is where tax and payments design happens—don’t bolt it on later.

Phase 2: documentation and platform readiness

Prepare UBO KYC, proof of address, CVs, bank and professional references if required, source‑of‑funds declarations, and corporate docs. Draft AML/KYC, RG, complaints, and T&Cs that match your actual flows. On the tech side, line up RNG certificates or supplier attestations, geoblocking, age checks, and reporting dashboards.

Phase 3: application and stakeholder soft‑launch

Submit your application and, in parallel, pre‑board with PSPs and aggregators using a “compliance pack” that mirrors your license file. The fastest operators win because they run these tracks together. Keep your communications crisp; unclear files stall underwriters.

Phase 4: go‑live and post‑licensing hygiene

Once live, behave like you’re being audited. Track KPIs for KYC pass rates, chargebacks, RG interactions, and complaint resolution. Keep registers current, update policy versions, and document any material changes. Regulators and PSPs forgive honest mistakes; they don’t forgive messy records.

Common myths I keep hearing (and what’s true)

“Banking depends on the license.” Not exactly. It depends on your risk profile, paperwork, and controls. The license helps, but it’s not the make‑or‑break factor.
“Anjouan is ‘light touch’ so no one takes it seriously.” The market has moved. Plenty of reputable providers accept it if your compliance is real.
“Curacao automatically grants better market access.” Not automatically. Access is about target geos, geoblocking discipline, and partner policies.
“We can fix compliance later.” Regulators, PSPs, and affiliates now expect day‑one maturity. Retro‑fitting is slow and expensive.

Pricing, taxes, and total cost of ownership

Don’t compare application fees in isolation. Model a 24‑month total cost of ownership that includes:

Licensing and renewal fees.
Local substance costs (where applicable): people, office, local agents, audits.
Compliance ops: KYC vendors, transaction monitoring, RG tooling, legal updates.
Technical certifications: RNG/game testing and periodic re‑tests.
Tax: effective rate across the full structure, not just the headline in one jurisdiction.

When you run the math honestly, Anjouan often wins for speed‑to‑cash and burn rate in year one. Curacao can pay off when you leverage its governance signaling to unlock larger partners at scale. Different games, different scoreboards.

Stacking and migration: planning your next move now

A smart path for many teams is phased licensing. Launch with Anjouan to validate CAC/LTV, product‑market fit, and partner demand. Build clean compliance muscle. Then add Curacao—or another jurisdiction—when your metrics justify the heavier lift. If you intend to migrate entirely later, architect the platform and contracts now to make the switch boring rather than brutal.

This isn’t about playing favorites. It’s about sequencing. Founders who plan the second license from day one save months when the time comes.

My blunt take, as counsel who has seen the scars

If you’re racing a clock and budget, Anjouan gets you live faster with credible guardrails and fewer fixed costs. If you’re playing a long game with institutional partners in mind, Curacao’s maturing framework earns you more benefit of the doubt—but you’ll pay for it in time and cash.

Either way, your anjouan or curacao gaming license is not the strategy. It’s a tool. The real moat is disciplined compliance, honest marketing, sound payments architecture, and a team that treats governance as part of product. Get those right, and the “license vs license” debate becomes a lever—not a limitation.

Factor	Anjouan gaming license	Curaçao gaming license
Regulator and regime	Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority (AOFA). Single, all-vertical gaming license (casino, sportsbook, poker, bingo, lottery). Business-friendly offshore regime.	Curaçao Gaming Authority (CGA) under the new LOK framework. Direct B2C/B2B licensing replaced the old master/sub-license model. More prescriptive rules and oversight.
Typical time to license	Fast. Often 2–4 weeks once documents are complete; some projects report even faster. Complex structures can take longer.	Slower under LOK. Commonly 6–12 weeks; legacy migrations and additional checks can extend timelines.
Upfront government fees	Lower. Among the most affordable globally for full-scope iGaming.	Higher than Anjouan. Fees and compliance costs increased versus the previous model.
Ongoing government fees	Annual renewal at modest levels. No GGR tax.	Annual and supervision fees apply. No VAT on bets; overall tax burden depends on structure and substance, but compliance overhead is higher.
Tax on gaming revenue (GGR)	0% GGR.	No specific GGR tax; historic structures leveraged low corporate tax. Effective burden depends on local company setup and incentives.
Company location	License can be issued to a foreign company. No requirement to incorporate locally.	Local Curaçao entity required under LOK.
Local substance	No mandatory local hires.	Local presence required. Industry sources report a practical expectation of at least several local FTEs.
Hosting and data	Flexible hosting. No mandated local server; keep secure logs and backups.	Tighter rules. Local data mirror/approved hosting and retention standards as guided by CGA.
Compliance core	AML/KYC, responsible gaming, due diligence on UBOs, policies and procedures.	Enhanced AML/KYC, RG, ongoing monitoring, and more formalized governance under LOK.
Audits and reporting	Streamlined. No routine external audit by default; targeted checks possible.	Stricter. Periodic reporting and audits can be required; more documentation throughout the license term.
RNG and game testing	RNG certifications required when applicable; recognized lab reports accepted.	Game fairness and RNG testing required via recognized labs; clearer technical standards.
Scope of activities	One license covers all common online gaming verticals.	One license can cover major verticals; B2B/B2C scopes defined in the application.
White label and sub-structures	White labels possible via contractual setups under a primary licensee; no “sub-license” regime.	Sub-licensing ended. White label requires compliant B2B arrangements; each B2C typically needs its own license.
Payments and banking	Growing acceptance by processors and EMIs. Tier‑1 banks may be selective; strong KYC improves outcomes.	Broad industry recognition. Banks/PSPs still perform strict KYC; acceptance generally stable but tied to compliance and substance.
Crypto policy	Crypto allowed with AML controls and transaction monitoring.	Crypto permitted with enhanced controls and reporting under LOK.
Market access reality	Both are offshore. You must block prohibited markets (e.g., US, UK, NL, FR, ES, DE and other restricted countries) and follow local laws.	Same. License is not a passport; geo-blocking and targeted compliance remain mandatory.
Documentation to apply	UBO KYC, proof of address, bank and professional references, CVs, origin-of-funds, business plan, domain proof, policies (AML/KYC/RG), platform description, game/RNG certs where relevant.	UBO KYC, corporate docs for the local entity, hosting details, policies (AML/KYC/RG), business plan, financials, technical and security descriptions, game/RNG certs.
Operational flexibility	High. Fewer procedural hurdles; quick pivots are feasible.	Moderate. More prescriptive processes and change notifications under CGA oversight.
Reputation signal to partners	Improving fast. Seen as pragmatic and cost-effective; acceptance now widespread across many suppliers and PSPs.	Established name with long market history; tighter 2023–2025 reforms aim to boost credibility.
Key advantages	Low cost. Very fast setup. 0% GGR. No compulsory local company or staff. Single license covers all verticals.	Strong recognition. Clearer technical standards. Better fit for scaling with traditional banks and larger counterparties.
Key drawbacks	Newer reputation in some corridors. Fewer formal audits may concern conservative partners.	Higher cost. Longer timelines. Local substance adds payroll and admin. No more sub-licenses.
Best for	Startups and lean teams prioritizing speed, budget, and broad coverage. Crypto-friendly operations. LATAM/Asia/Africa focus.	Operators building a long-term brand with traditional banking, larger suppliers, and stricter governance expectations.
Not ideal for	Teams needing a “Tier‑1 style” compliance badge or extensive onshore optics.	Shoestring budgets, pre-revenue startups, or teams needing very fast go‑live.
2024–2025 trend (industry reports)	Rapid uptake as a Curaçao alternative. Focus on essential safeguards without heavy red tape.	Ongoing transition to LOK. Stronger enforcement and clearer rules, but with more cost and complexity.
Migration notes	Popular landing spot for ex‑Curaçao operators seeking faster timelines and lower overhead.	Migrating in may require building local company, hiring staff, and re‑tooling compliance.
Cost drivers to watch	KYC depth on UBOs, number of domains, payment stack mix, game testing scope, external legal opinions for target markets.	Local staff and office, audits and reporting cadence, hosting and security controls, game certifications, legal opinions for markets.
Common pitfalls	Underestimated PSP due diligence, weak geo-blocking, incomplete policies, thin business plan.	Delays from substance setup, insufficient technical documentation, gaps in reporting or governance.
Quick decision aide (vs)	Choose Anjouan if speed, cost, and operational simplicity matter most.	Choose Curaçao if credibility with banks/suppliers and structured compliance outweigh extra time and cost.