If you’ve spent any time around iGaming, you already know the playbook: a “new jurisdiction” appears, promises fast approval, low fees, minimal due diligence, and a license that supposedly opens doors with banks, payment processors, and partners. One of the most visible examples right now is the so-called “International Gambling License” marketed under the name “Central Reserve Authority of Western Sahara”

Two jurisdictions that frequently attract the attention of emerging operators are Rota iGaming (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) and Gibraltar iGaming (United Kingdom overseas territory). Although both offer pathways to operate legally and to interface with payment providers, the regulatory, tax, and reputational frameworks behind them differ substantially.

At its core, gambling involves risking something of value, usually money, on an event with an uncertain outcome. The goal is to win a prize or reward, which can also be monetary or non-monetary. To understand gambling fully, it’s important to look at its three key components.

The new Rota casino license offers a U.S. Territory framework with stronger AML, clearer oversight and the option to remain tax-neutral offshore, while Curaçao keeps its edge on ultra-low profit tax and sports betting coverage. Choosing between them depends on whether you prioritise compliance credibility or pure cost efficiency.