Panama has long been associated with banking, offshore companies and international finance. That history has sometimes created the impression that casinos were restricted or pushed aside when the country came under pressure to strengthen financial regulation.
That is not what happened.
Casino gambling was already legal and regulated in Panama before the country’s major anti-money-laundering reforms. As financial rules became stricter, casinos were brought more deeply into the same compliance system that covered other businesses handling large amounts of money.
The industry remained legal. What changed was the level of oversight.
Panama Already Had a Legal Casino Industry
Casino gambling had an established legal structure long before Panama’s financial reforms became an international issue.
The modern framework was strengthened by Decree Law No. 2 of 10 February 1998, which set rules for gambling activities and gave the Junta de Control de Juegos broad powers over their operation.
The law made operating games of chance without prior authorisation an offence and gave the regulator authority over casinos, slot rooms, betting operations and other gambling businesses.
This gave casino gaming in Panama a clear legal base rather than leaving it in an informal or uncertain market.
The Junta de Control de Juegos Became the Main Gambling Authority
The Junta de Control de Juegos operates under Panama’s Ministry of Economy and Finance.
Its role includes controlling, supervising and regulating games of chance and betting activities carried out in or from Panama.
That includes full casinos, slot-machine rooms, sports betting and internet gambling.
The regulator therefore sits at the centre of both gambling licensing and the wider relationship between gambling and national financial policy.
Casinos Became Part of Panama’s Tourism and Services Economy
Land-based casinos developed as part of Panama’s wider hospitality and entertainment market.
Large casinos became particularly visible in Panama City, often connected with hotels or other tourism businesses.
This mattered when financial reforms later arrived because casinos were not a temporary offshore experiment that could simply be removed.
They were already part of an established, licensed domestic industry.
That gave policymakers a reason to improve supervision rather than dismantle the sector.
Panama’s Financial Sector Came Under Growing International Scrutiny
As Panama’s banking and corporate-services industries expanded, the country attracted more attention from international organisations concerned with money laundering, tax transparency and company ownership.
The scrutiny covered the wider financial system rather than gambling alone.
Banks, offshore companies, legal structures and other businesses that could move or hold money became part of a much broader international discussion about transparency.
Casinos were affected because they are cash-intensive businesses and can also be exposed to money-laundering risks.
The Response Was Financial Reform, Not a Casino Ban
Panama did not respond by making casino gambling illegal.
Instead, it strengthened the systems used to monitor financial activity across several industries.
One of the most important reforms was Law 23 of 2015, which expanded Panama’s framework for preventing money laundering, terrorist financing and the financing of weapons proliferation.
Casinos and gambling businesses were specifically included among the non-financial businesses subject to those rules.
That meant casinos remained legal, but they now had more responsibilities around the money moving through them.
Casinos Became Part of the AML System
Law 23 placed casinos, games of chance and betting systems inside Panama’s anti-money-laundering framework.
That also includes physical or electronic businesses offering those activities through the internet.
The change was significant because gambling regulation and financial regulation now overlapped more directly.
A casino could no longer be judged only by whether its games and licence were in order.
It also had to meet wider obligations around financial transparency and customer activity.
Customer Checks Became More Important
Casinos handle cash, deposits, payouts and other financial transactions, which makes customer identification important from an AML perspective.
Under the stronger compliance system, gambling businesses had to pay closer attention to who customers were, how transactions were recorded and whether activity needed further review.
That does not mean every casino visitor became subject to the same checks as a bank customer opening an account.
It means gambling businesses were brought into a risk-based financial monitoring system rather than being treated only as entertainment venues.
Record-Keeping and Reporting Became Part of Casino Compliance
Financial reform also increased the importance of records.
Casinos and other covered businesses can be required to keep information about customers and transactions and to report suspicious activity where the law requires it.
This gives financial authorities more visibility into money moving through the gambling sector.
The aim is not to stop ordinary gambling. It is to make it harder for gambling businesses to be used to disguise the movement of criminal funds.
The Gambling Regulator Was No Longer Working Alone
The Junta de Control de Juegos continued to supervise gambling operations, but the financial side of casino regulation became connected with Panama’s broader AML system.
Law 23 created a separate supervisory structure for non-financial businesses, and the Superintendencia de Sujetos no Financieros now supervises sectors including casinos, games of chance, betting systems and internet gambling for AML purposes.
This created two different layers of oversight.
The gambling authority focuses on the gambling business itself, while financial authorities focus on risks such as money laundering and financial transparency.
This Did Not Mean Casinos Had Become Suspect Businesses
Including casinos in AML law does not mean the government considered casino gambling illegitimate.
Many countries treat casinos as higher-risk financial environments because they process large amounts of money and can involve cash or fast-moving transactions.
The response is usually stronger supervision rather than prohibition.
Panama followed that pattern.
Casinos remained licensed businesses, but the rules surrounding the movement of money became more demanding.
Why Casinos Attract AML Attention
Casino transactions can involve large deposits, large payouts and repeated movement between cash and gaming instruments.
Those features can make casinos attractive to people trying to disguise where money came from.
That does not make ordinary casino gambling suspicious.
It explains why regulators require the industry to identify unusual activity and keep proper records.
The same reasoning applies to other businesses that handle valuable assets or large financial transactions.
Panama’s Reforms Went Beyond Gambling
This wider context is important.
Law 23 did not single casinos out. The legislation also covered sectors such as real estate, precious metals, company services and other non-financial businesses considered exposed to money-laundering risk.
Casino reform therefore formed one part of a national effort to strengthen Panama’s financial controls.
That is very different from a gambling crackdown.
International Pressure Continued After 2015
The reforms did not immediately end international scrutiny.
Panama returned to FATF increased monitoring in 2019 after the organisation identified strategic weaknesses in the country’s AML and counter-terrorist-financing system.
The government then continued working through an action plan covering areas such as beneficial ownership, supervision, money-laundering investigations and international cooperation.
Casinos existed inside that broader reform environment rather than being the central cause of it.
Panama Left the FATF Grey List in 2023
In October 2023, FATF said Panama had made significant progress and had completed the agreed action plan.
Panama was removed from increased monitoring.
The improvements recognised by FATF covered the wider national system, including stronger risk understanding, supervision of non-financial businesses, beneficial ownership information and money-laundering enforcement.
That provides useful context for the casino sector because gambling was being supervised inside a system that had become more developed across the whole economy.
Financial Reform Changed How Casinos Operated Behind the Scenes
For most players, the casino experience did not suddenly look different.
Slots still operated., tables still opened, and casinos continued serving customers.
The larger changes happened behind the scenes through compliance departments, customer checks, reporting systems and stronger coordination between regulators.
That is why financial reform can be easy to miss from the player’s point of view even when it changes the business substantially.
Panama Chose Regulation Over Retreat
The basic policy decision was to keep legal gambling inside a supervised system.
Rather than treating casinos as incompatible with stronger financial regulation, Panama made them part of the reform.
That approach has a practical advantage. A licensed casino is visible to government. Its owners, premises and operations can be inspected, and financial obligations can be attached directly to its legal right to operate.
Driving the industry underground would remove much of that visibility.
The Same Logic Later Extended to Internet Gambling
Panama’s gambling framework did not remain limited to physical casinos.
The Junta de Control de Juegos approved rules for gambling through electronic communication systems in 2002.
That meant internet gambling had a regulatory route in Panama much earlier than the original version of this article suggested.
The framework was later updated again in 2020.
The 2020 Rules Expanded the Internet Gambling Framework
Resolution No. 11 of 6 March 2020 replaced the older 2002 rules and created an updated framework for games of chance and betting carried out through electronic communication systems.
In explaining the reform, the Junta de Control de Juegos said internet gambling operated from Panama could expand the country’s gaming offer, improve state revenue and help combat illegal gambling.
That is a significant part of the modern story. Panama did not respond to financial reform by abandoning digital gambling. It created more detailed rules for it.
Online Gambling and Land-Based Casinos Now Sit Inside the Same Wider System
The regulator’s current website lists internet gambling among the activities under the Junta de Control de Juegos.
It also provides a formal application route for contracts to operate gambling systems through electronic communications.
That means the modern Panamanian gambling market is broader than a purely land-based casino sector.
Both physical and internet gambling sit within the state’s wider regulatory structure.
Internet Gambling Is Also Covered by AML Rules
Law 23 is especially relevant here because it does not stop at physical casinos.
It expressly covers casinos, games of chance, betting systems and other physical or telematic establishments conducting these businesses through the internet.
This ties Panama’s online gambling framework directly into the same financial compliance system that applies to the land-based industry.
The direction of travel is therefore consistent across both markets.
Legal gambling is allowed, but it is expected to operate inside increasingly formal financial controls.
Why Panama Did Not Need to Choose Between Casinos and Financial Credibility
The original tension turns out to be weaker than it first appears.
A country can have a legal gambling industry and still tighten its financial rules.
The important issue is whether the industry can be supervised.
Panama chose to keep gambling legal while raising the compliance standards around it.
That allowed casinos to remain part of tourism and entertainment while regulators increased their visibility into financial activity.
Why Stronger Rules Can Help a Legal Gambling Market Survive
Stricter regulation creates costs for operators, but it can also strengthen the long-term position of a legal industry.
Banks and international business partners care about the quality of a jurisdiction’s AML controls.
Operators also benefit from clearer rules when those rules reduce uncertainty around licensing and financial relationships.
In that sense, the casino industry’s interests and Panama’s wider financial reforms were not always in conflict.
A more credible national compliance system can also support businesses that depend on international finance.
The Story Is About Integration Rather Than Crackdown
Panama’s casino history is easy to misunderstand if financial reform is treated as a campaign against gambling.
The casinos were already legal. International pressure then pushed Panama to strengthen the way money was monitored across many parts of the economy, and gambling became one of the sectors brought more deeply into that system.
Later, internet gambling regulation was also updated rather than abandoned.
The result is a gambling industry more closely connected to national financial supervision than it was in earlier decades.
How Financial Reform Reshaped Gambling Without Removing It
Panama’s gambling story is not one of casinos surviving a government attempt to shut them down.
It is a story of an existing legal industry being pulled into a stricter financial system.
Decree Law No. 2 of 1998 gave Panama a formal gambling framework. Law 23 of 2015 then made casinos and gambling businesses part of the country’s wider AML regime, increasing the importance of customer checks, records, reporting and financial supervision.
Those reforms continued as Panama worked to strengthen its AML system and eventually left FATF increased monitoring in 2023.
At the same time, Panama continued regulating gambling itself and modernised its rules for internet gaming in 2020.
The direction has therefore been consistent. Panama did not choose between gambling and financial reform.
It chose to keep gambling legal while making the industry operate inside the same increasingly strict compliance system as the rest of the economy.
Financial reform did not push gambling out of Panama. It pulled gambling further into the country’s regulated financial system.
Gavin analyzes online gambling regulation, licensing systems, and market structure across international jurisdictions. With over a decade of experience covering the iGaming sector, his research focuses on how national gambling laws, regulatory authorities, and compliance frameworks shape legal online casino markets. This guide was prepared using primary regulatory sources and official publications from European gambling authorities.