The government is considering raising the top payment rate of the Tourism Promotion and Development Fund levied on casino operators from the current 10% of revenue to 15%, drawing intensifying opposition from the industry. Operators argue it is contradictory to constrain casinos as a gambling business while simultaneously expanding their role as a core funding source for the tourism industry. The government maintains that public contributions and the oversight framework must be strengthened in line with the growth of the casino industry.
On the 24th, the office of Cho Kye-won of the Democratic Party of Korea and the Tourism Sciences Society of Korea held a "Debate on Advancing Tourism Industry Laws and Regulations" at the National Assembly Members' Office Building on the 23rd, discussing the tourism fund burden system as well as a casino license renewal system and a prior approval system for the transfer and acquisition of business rights.
Choi Sung-wook, chairman of the Korea Casino Association, criticized at the debate, "On one side, casinos are regulated as a gambling business, and on the other, they are treated as a major funding source for the tourism fund. This is a clear double standard." He said, "Raising the payment rate ceiling to 15% could push loss-making companies beyond management difficulties into bankruptcy," urging the withdrawal of the proposed increase.
The casino industry's tourism fund burden has already swelled to a record high. According to the association, the tourism fund calculated based on 2025 sales at foreigner-only casinos amounted to 219.47 billion won, the highest in the past 10 years. Compared with 135.706 billion won in 2019, before COVID-19, this represents a 61.7% increase. The cumulative amount calculated since 1994 has reached 2.4685 trillion won.
The core issue raised by the industry is that the fund is levied based on revenue rather than profit. Even if a business incurs operating losses, it must pay the fund as long as revenue is generated. Inspire recorded net losses of 264.5 billion won in 2024 and 154.8 billion won in 2025, but its tourism fund amounts during the same period were 16.8 billion won and 28 billion won, respectively. Although the scale of losses shrank, the fund burden actually increased by more than 10 billion won.
An Inspire official expressed concern, saying, "If the fund burden grows further, it could become difficult to attract additional investment," and "thousands of employees and workers at partner companies could also be placed at a crossroads for survival."
The views of the government and some academics differ. Unlike the significant growth of the casino industry, the systems for licensing, ownership management, and public contributions have remained at the level of 30 years ago, they argue. Since 1995, total sales at foreigner casinos have grown 10.3-fold and average sales per operator 7.8-fold, but casino licenses have no separate validity period. The transfer and acquisition of business rights and changes in equity are also managed mainly through after-the-fact reporting.
Kang Jung-won, head of the Tourism Policy Office at the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, said, "Casinos are a tourism business in which an activity prohibited for the general public has been specially permitted to a limited number of operators," adding, "System improvements are not intended to shrink the industry but to create a sound business environment and lay the foundation for growth based on public trust."
However, some pointed out that even if system reform is necessary, expanding the burden based on the current revenue standard as it stands should be reconsidered.
Kwon Kyung-sang, former head of the Planning and Coordination Office at the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, who participated in the practical work of incorporating the casino business into the Tourism Promotion Act in 1994, explained, "At the time, when the tourism fund was depleted, we asked the casino industry to pay 1%, 5%, and 10% by revenue bracket," adding, "There was a premise that a shift to an operating-profit standard would also be considered once accounting transparency was secured."
Kwon proposed as an alternative that the operators' actual ability to pay and their investment status be reflected in the levy system, and that companies incurring operating losses be granted a deferral on paying the increased amount.
In academia, recommendations continued that the fund increase should not be pursued in isolation, but that license management improvements, industry support, and reinvestment of the fund be discussed within a single framework.
Professor Lee Jae-seok of Kangwon National University proposed a casino license renewal system, a prior approval system for the transfer and acquisition of business rights, and the introduction of an independent oversight body. He emphasized that the recycling structure should also be strengthened so that the funds paid by the casino industry are reinvested in building tourism infrastructure, attracting foreign tourists, and expanding integrated resort content.
Professor Choi Young-bae of Gachon University said, "I sympathize with the need for public contribution, but the actual profitability and ability to pay of foreigner-only casinos must be considered together," adding, "We must first decide what standard to use, how much to levy, and where to use the collected funds."
