The Philippines became one of Asia’s most important online gambling hubs by combining a national gaming regulator with broad powers and special economic zones with authority to license export-focused gaming (notably CEZA in Cagayan).
Over time, the country ran two parallel tracks: domestic-facing regulated gaming products and offshore-facing internet gaming programs, culminating in the rise and later prohibition of POGOs and similar offshore gaming categories under Executive Order No. 74 in 2024.
Key Terms Used In This Timeline
- PAGCOR: The Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation, the state-owned regulator/operator created to centralize and regulate games of chance and generate government revenue.
- CEZA: Economic-zone authority created under RA 7922; developed an early framework for interactive gaming licenses targeting foreign markets.
- POGO / IGL: PAGCOR’s offshore internet gaming licensing approach, later explicitly banned by EO 74 (2024).
1977 To 1994: The Legal Foundation For Regulated Casino Gaming
1977-01-01: PAGCOR is created by Presidential Decree No. 1067-A
- PD 1067-A established PAGCOR during the Marcos era with the goal of centralizing and regulating games of chance and addressing illegal gambling/casino activity.
1983-07-11: The PAGCOR Charter is consolidated in Presidential Decree No. 1869
- PD 1869 consolidated earlier decrees and strengthened PAGCOR’s franchise and regulatory powers. This is a key reference point for how PAGCOR’s authority over gaming developed.
Why it matters for online gambling: online or “internet-based” gaming regulation in the Philippines later builds on the premise that gaming authority stems from PAGCOR’s charter powers and from special economic-zone authorities acting within their own jurisdictions.
1995 To 2007: The “Special Economic Zone” Model And Early Interactive Gaming Frameworks
1995-02-24: Republic Act No. 7922 establishes CEZA and the Cagayan Special Economic Zone and Freeport
- RA 7922 created the economic zone in Santa Ana and neighboring areas, as well as the authority that manages it (CEZA).
Why it matters: CEZA becomes one of the earliest pathways for licensing interactive gaming intended for markets outside the Philippines, separate from PAGCOR’s nationwide remit.
2003-01: “Interactive Gaming Act” framework appears for CEZA’s interactive gaming licenses (export-oriented)
- An Interactive Gaming Act document (January 2003) outlines licensing for “interactive gaming” under the CEZA model.
- Industry summaries commonly tie CEZA interactive gaming licensing to the “Interactive Gaming Act 2003” framework and related master-licensor arrangements.
2007-06-20: Republic Act No. 9487 amends the PAGCOR charter
- RA 9487 further amended PD 1869, reinforcing PAGCOR’s franchise and charter framework into the modern era.
2008 To 2015: Domestic Electronic Gaming Grows Alongside Early “Internet Casino” Distribution
2008-09-25: PAGCOR e-Games stations and venues expand in public visibility
- Coverage from 2008 describes the PAGCOR e-Games café model and the menu of casino-style games offered in the “e-Games station” format.
Late 2000s to mid-2010s: “e-Games cafés” and electronic gaming venues become a major channel
- These venues, often associated with licensed distribution partners, become part of the country’s broader electronic gaming footprint. (This era is frequently cited as the bridge between land-based casinos and mass-market electronic gaming.)
Note: The “e-Games café” story is important for backlinking because it is a uniquely Philippine distribution model that intersects with retail, payments, KYC, and regulatory enforcement.
2016 To 2019: The POGO Era Begins, Then Compliance Tightens
2016-08-26: PAGCOR issues rules and regulations for Philippine Offshore Gaming Operations
- PAGCOR’s “Rules and Regulations for Philippine Offshore Gaming Operations” are widely cited as a starting point for the POGO regulatory era.
Why it matters: This formalized offshore-facing online gambling under PAGCOR, distinct from purely domestic electronic gaming, set the stage for rapid sector growth and later political backlash.
2017-07-14: Republic Act No. 10927 brings casinos (including internet and ship-based) under the Anti-Money Laundering Act coverage
- RA 10927 amends AMLA coverage to include casinos, explicitly including “internet” casinos, which is a core citation in compliance-oriented writing about Philippine gambling.
2017: Tax treatment and enforcement frameworks sharpen around offshore gaming
- BIR Revenue Memorandum Circular (RMC) [No. 102-2017] is commonly referenced for clarifying taxability categories for POGO-related taxpayers and components.
2020 To 2023: Offshore Gaming Controversies Intensify; Domestic Online Licensing Becomes More Visible
This period is marked by rising attention to enforcement, criminality allegations linked to some offshore operations, and ongoing refinements to licensing and compliance narratives. The regulatory debate increasingly separates two issues:
- Domestic, consumer-facing regulated electronic gaming; and
- Offshore-targeted operators physically operating from the Philippines.
2024 To 2026: The Offshore Shutdown And The Post-POGO Landscape
2024-07-22: President Marcos announces a ban on POGOs during the State of the Nation Address
- The ban is explicitly referenced as pronounced on 22 July 2024 in later official issuances.
2024-11-08: Executive Order No. 74 imposes an immediate ban on offshore and internet gaming tied to POGOs/IGLs and related services
- EO 74 orders an immediate ban and blocks new license applications for POGO/IGL and related/ancillary services under PAGCOR and other licensing authorities.
Why it matters: EO 74 is the single most citable “line in the sand” for the offshore gaming era. It is also a strong backlink driver because many articles will reference it, but few will quote and clearly explain its operational consequences.
2025: CEZA seeks clarity or exemptions as the ban reshapes offshore assumptions
- Reporting in early 2025 describes CEZA positioning itself as “POGO-less” and seeking exemption or differentiation, while reiterating that its licensees are foreign-facing and should not accept bets within the Philippines.
2026-01-30: PAGCOR reports 2025 revenue declines with “offshore gaming no longer in the revenue mix.”
- PAGCOR’s 2025 revenue report explicitly notes that offshore gaming was no longer part of the revenue mix, illustrating the policy shift after EO 74.
After the Ban: The Next Philippine iGaming Chapter
With offshore operations curtailed by EO 74, the industry’s center of gravity shifts from export-oriented “office-based” gaming toward tightly controlled, consumer-facing digital play and enforcement-driven policymaking.
Expect regulators to focus on three things: clarifying which online products can operate in the Philippines, tightening AML and KYC requirements for all digital wagering channels, and pressuring payment rails, marketing partners, and tech vendors to remain within approved activities.
In parallel, economic-zone authorities will likely continue pushing for carve-outs or clearer definitions that separate foreign-facing interactive gaming from the political baggage of the POGO era.
The next headline moment is not just about new licenses, it is about definitions: what counts as offshore gaming, what counts as domestic e-gaming, and who bears liability when platforms, affiliates, and processors connect players to operators. Watch for renewed emphasis on responsible gambling tools, data reporting, and cross-agency coordination.
Are Offshore Casino Sites Still Active In PH?
Yes, offshore casino websites can still be reachable from the Philippines, but the big change is where the operation is based. Executive Order No. 74 banned Philippine offshore gaming and other offshore internet gaming operations located in the Philippines, and ordered the halt of those licensed categories and related service providers.
This is why PAGCOR reported that offshore gaming was no longer part of its 2025 revenue base. That said, EO 74 does not automatically shut down foreign offshore casinos that are licensed and operated outside the Philippines, and coverage at the time noted the EO’s scope versus onshore online games of chance run by PAGCOR or licensed casinos.
Some of those sites may still accept PH players, depending on their licensing rules and geo-blocking policies. Access can still be affected by enforcement actions targeting local enablers, such as payment processors, marketing partners, and potential ISP blocking. Expect definitions to keep evolving.