Rota vs. Curaçao: How the New Rota Casino License Compares to the Classic Curaçao Model
- Tradepass International Tax LLC
- 6 days ago
- 7 min read
For years, “get a Curaçao license” was almost shorthand for launching an offshore online casino quickly and cheaply. That landscape is changing fast — both because Curaçao is tightening its rules, and because new alternatives are emerging.
One of the most interesting newcomers is the Rota Blue iGaming Master License in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), a U.S. Territory.
Below is a practical, operator-focused Rota vs. Curaçao comparison between the Rota Sub-Operator License and the traditional Curaçao casino license (the classic offshore model that grew out of the master/sub-license system, now being replaced by the new LOK regime).
1. Jurisdiction & regulatory framework: Rota vs. Curaçao
Below you can find a Rota vs. Curaçao comparison on the specific features of each online gambling licensing systems:
Rota (CNMI, U.S. Territory)
Regulator: Rota Casino Gaming Commission (RCGC).
Legal basis: Rota Casino Act of 2007, amended in 2024 to legalize iGaming.
Master license holder: Rota Blue Inc., which grants B2C and B2B sub-licenses under the Act.
Policy anchor: Compliance framework aligned with U.S. federal standards (Bank Secrecy Act, FATF) on AML/CFT, KYC and responsible gaming.
In practice, you are operating under a U.S. Territory regulatory umbrella, which is very different from typical offshore islands.
Curaçao (classic offshore model, now transitioning)
Historically based on the National Ordinance on Offshore Games of Hazard (NOOGH) and a master license / sub-license system, with just four master license holders issuing hundreds of sub-licenses.
As of December 24, 2024, Curaçao has moved to a new framework: the National Ordinance on Games of Chance (LOK), with a central Curaçao Gaming Authority (CGA) issuing B2B and B2C licenses directly.
The “traditional Curaçao license” people know from the last decade is that light-touch, master-and-sub-license offshore regime. That is being phased out and replaced with a more robust, EU-pressured compliance framework — but the brand perception in the market still reflects that history.
2. License structure & scope of games
Below you can find a Rota vs. Curaçao comparison with respect to the different license structures:
Rota Blue Sub-Operator License (B2C/B2B)
Types: B2C (casino operator) and B2B (platform / game / service provider).
Vertical coverage: All major online games except traditional sports betting — slots, live dealer, poker, peer-to-peer games, daily fantasy, skill games, esports and crypto games.
Multi-domain: License covers 1 domain; additional domains can be added (up to 30) with an extra monthly fee per domain.
Curaçao License (classic model, now LOK)
Historically: single, all-inclusive license covering almost all forms of remote gambling, including sports betting, under a sub-license obtained from a master license holder.
Under the new LOK: B2B and B2C licenses issued directly by the CGA, still broadly covering casino, sports, lotteries, bingo, etc.
Key difference:
If your business model needs sports betting, Curaçao still has an edge on pure vertical coverage.
If you’re primarily focused on casino / RNG / live / esports / crypto, Rota’s limitation on sports is much less of an issue.
3. Taxes & corporate structure
Here’s where Rota becomes particularly interesting.
Rota – CNMI tax vs. offshore structure
Offshore (no CNMI company)
No local company required
No CNMI tax obligations (0%)
Local presence (CNMI-incorporated operator)
10% GGR tax (territorial level)
21% CNMI corporate income tax
1% Business Gross Revenue Tax (BGRT)
Potential tax credit or refund under CNMI tax code
So conceptually you have two options:
Operate offshore with a Rota license
CNMI does not tax you; only your jurisdiction of incorporation / tax residence matters.
Useful if you already have a tax-optimised corporate structure elsewhere.
Incorporate in CNMI and run the casino from there
You plug into a U.S. Territory tax system with clear statutory rates (10% GGR + 21% corporate + 1% BGRT), potentially attractive for operators who want a fully “onshore” U.S. Territory footprint.
Curaçao – consistently low profit tax
Curaçao has long attracted operators with a very low corporate income tax, typically around 2% on net profits, plus 0% gaming tax and no VAT for licensed online operators.
Under both the older master-license system and the newer LOK framework:
You normally incorporate a Curaçao entity, often in an e-zone structure.
That entity pays ~2% CIT on gaming profits, but no separate GGR tax, no VAT and no withholding tax on dividends to non-residents.
Tax comparison in one line:
Rota: CNMI can be 0% (offshore) or 10% GGR + 21% CIT + 1% BGRT if you choose a CNMI company.
Curaçao: typically 2% CIT on net profits, no GGR tax, no VAT, but you must base a company there and meet local substance requirements.
From a pure tax-rate perspective, our Rota vs. Curaçao comparison shows that Curaçao remains one of the world’s cheapest “semi-regulated” options. Rota’s competitive angle is that CNMI does not insist on taxing you at all if your structure is offshore — but then your chosen jurisdiction becomes the real tax driver.
4. Fees & total cost of ownership
Here's a Rota vs. Curaçao comparison with respect to total cost of ownership of an online casino license in each of the two jurisdictions:
B2C license
One-time initial fee: USD 20,000
Monthly fee: USD 3,000 (license covers 1 domain)
B2B license
Monthly fee: USD 450 (paid annually)
Additional domains
USD 250/month per domain, max 30 domains per license
Application fee: USD 1,000 (refundable only if the license is actually issued; no separate DD fee)
Typical timeframe: 4–8 weeks from application to license, assuming a clean file.
Curaçao under LOK (indicative figures)
Published analyses of the new LOK regime suggest that:
B2C operators can expect:
Application fee ≈ €4,600
Government/National Treasury fee ≈ €24,500 per year
Supervisory fee ≈ €23,000 per year
Total recurring annual fees in the €47,000–55,000 range, plus due diligence charges.
B2B providers:
Application fee ≈ €4,600
Supervisory fee ≈ €24,500 per year
There is also a per-domain fee under the new system, whereas historically one sublicense often covered many domains cheaply.
Cost takeaway:
On headline license fees, Rota B2C is in the same ballpark as a serious Curaçao B2C (depending on FX and package), but Rota B2B is dramatically cheaper than Curaçao’s new B2B pricing.
Under the old Curacao master-licence model, many operators paid far less per year via resellers, but that low-cost route is being closed by LOK.
5. Compliance, AML & reputation
Rota: U.S. standards from day one
Full CDD on the company, directors, officers and UBOs.
Sanctions & PEP screening, background checks, and a detailed AML/KYC policy consistent with U.S. Bank Secrecy Act and FATF recommendations.
Ongoing requirements:
Periodic compliance declarations
Quarterly and annual financial reports
Annual audited financial statements
Monthly player funds certifications
Immediate reporting of suspicious activity (SARs) and serious incidents
In other words, it is built to look and feel like a serious, U.S.-aligned regulatory framework, even though it is targeted at global (non-U.S.) markets.
Curaçao: from “light touch” to more robust oversight
The traditional Curaçao model gained its popularity precisely because it was perceived as:
Fast and relatively cheap
Lighter on AML, RG and reporting compared to Malta, UK, Isle of Man etc.
That leniency also created reputational problems. Some PSPs and counterparties view a classic Curaçao sublicense as higher-risk or “minimal regulation”. The LOK reforms are explicitly designed to fix that:
Centralised CGA supervision, standardised AML/CFT requirements
Stronger responsible gaming rules (e.g. the 2025 Responsible Gaming Policy under LOK)
Stricter enforcement powers against non-compliant operators
Reputationally, Curaçao is in a transition: moving away from “cheap and easy” towards “more serious but still low-tax”, while Rota starts from a U.S.-territory, compliance-first position, albeit with less track record and brand recognition.
6. Market reach & PSP / banking access
Rota
No regional restrictions in the framework itself, but U.S., U.S. territories and OFAC countries are excluded from targeting.
The big angle here is the potential to access banking and PSP relationships in a U.S. Territory, which many operators hope will carry more weight than a classic “Caribbean offshore” license with European or Asian banks.
Curaçao
Still one of the most widely recognised iGaming licenses among PSPs, aggregators and software vendors, simply because of its sheer market penetration.
However, some tier-1 banks and acquirers do not accept Curaçao-licensed operators, or will only on-board them in very specific structures, due to historic concerns about oversight and grey-market exposure.
In short:
Curaçao wins on ecosystem familiarity (everyone knows it, everyone has a “Curaçao flow”).
Rota is more of a credibility and compliance play: U.S. Territory law, U.S.-style AML, and a potentially cleaner story for PSPs that are wary of the old Caribbean offshore model.
7. Which license makes more sense for which operator?
Very simplified:
Rota may be a better fit if:
You want a license under a U.S. Territory framework with explicit Bank Secrecy Act / FATF-aligned AML, and you’re willing to live without sports betting.
You’re a B2B supplier (platform, game studio, aggregator) looking for a low-cost license that still offers strong regulatory credibility.
You intend to structure tax planning elsewhere (e.g. your Rota-licensed operator is incorporated outside CNMI, so CNMI tax is 0% and only your home jurisdiction matters).
Curaçao may remain attractive if:
You absolutely need sports betting under the same umbrella license.
You want to tap into an existing ecosystem where most game suppliers, white-label providers and many PSPs already understand the Curaçao framework.
You value the 2% corporate tax model in Curaçao itself and are comfortable with the new LOK compliance requirements.
Final thoughts about the Rota Casino License
Both Rota and Curaçao are moving in the same broad direction: more structure, more compliance, but still commercially attractive compared to places like Malta or the UK.
Curaçao is evolving from a traditional “volume offshore” jurisdiction to a more standardised European-influenced regime.
Rota is coming to market already framed as a U.S. Territory product, with a clear pitch: “offshore reach, onshore-style oversight.”
As always, this Rota vs. Curaçao comparison is not legal or tax advice. Before choosing a license, you should map your target markets, corporate structure, tax residence and PSP strategy, and then get formal advice tailored to your specific fact pattern.
If you are evaluating whether a Rota casino license or a Curaçao license is the right fit for your iGaming project, consider reaching out to Andrea Ricci, CPA, a U.S. Certified Public Accountant (Washington State License No. 57269) and founder of Tradepass International Tax LLC, who focuses on cross-border tax planning and licensing structures for online casinos and gaming service providers. Andrea can help you compare concrete tax outcomes, map your corporate and licensing structure (including CNMI, Curaçao, and other offshore/onshore options), and anticipate issues with banking, PSPs, and reporting. To explore tailored scenarios for your business, you can contact or connect with Andrea Ricci CPA on LinkedIn and request a free confidential consultation.
To find out more about the new Rota Casino License please click here.
