What can Japan learn from its neighbours and traditional gaming culture?
Japan’s gambling landscape has remained an enigma. It began as a seismic opportunity sought after by international casino giants following the enactment of its Integrated Resort Implementation Law in 2018, but as progress slowed potential bidders withdrew, and MGM Osaka emerged as the only new kid on the IR block, with a launch date of 2030.
Now, with Japan promising to open two more IR licences in 2027, ambitious bidders are craning their necks for a leg up over the competition. But Japan has telegraphed mixed messaging on the casino industry.
Depsite it having liberalised gambling in pursuit of the economic benefits that casinos can bring, its regulatory architecture and deeply ingrained social attitudes are not particuarly pro gambling.
The regulatory framework strictly keeps the casino component in check. Casino floor space is capped at 3% of the total floor area of the IR, while Japanese residents are restricted to three visits per week and 10 visits within any 28-day period. Each visit also carries a mandatory ¥6,000 entry fee, reinforcing the government’s intent to curb excessive gambling even as it opens the door to casinos.
Bumpy road to legislation
Japan’s path to IR legalisation was not straight forward. The IR Promotion Act, which set Japan on the road to casino-integrated resorts, was passed in December 2016 after a contentious debate. Nearly two years later came the IR Implementation Act, which laid out the regulatory frameworks for casinos, from entry restrictions to measures addressing gambling addiction and other social concerns. Yet even as the government pitched IRs as a catalyst for tourism, regional development and economic growth, opposition remained aggressive.
Among the opposing forces was Kenji Eda, a prominent House of Representatives lawmaker from Yokohama and a senior figure in the opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan. Eda has been a vocal critic of the government’s IR push, raising concerns over gambling addiction, the economic impact on local businesses and whether the casino-led model would deliver the promised benefits.
The prospect of international operators snapping up Japan’s coveted IR licences gradually lost its lustre, as the likes of Wynn Resorts, Las Vegas Sands, Genting Singapore and Caesars Entertainment balked at the demanding regulatory framework, hefty investment requirements and uncertain returns.
Although the late LVS chairman and CEO Sheldon Adelson hailed the Japanese market as “a holy grail” and the “ultimate of business opportunities”, the company dropped out of the game, scrapping its pledged $10 billion project.
Japan has drawn on Singapore’s IR development model, which embodies a balancing act between ambitious economic visions and restrictive conditions. But Andrew Klebanow, principal of Klebanow Consulting, believes Japan’s IR regulations swerved “too far into crafting regulations and policies”. Klebanow specialises in hotel-casino market feasibility studies, strategic planning and facility planning recommendations.
“As the RFP process played out, regulators introduced additional policies and regulations. As each regulation was introduced, developers adjusted their gaming forecasting models downward. Finally, those models reached a tipping point where potential revenues were insufficient to justify a project’s capital costs,” says Klebanow.
Don’t sell the casino, sell the experience
Japan’s attempt to reap the economic benefits of casino gaming while keeping gambling socially contained is comparable to Asia’s dominant casino hubs Singapore and Macau.
Singapore has also imposed a highly controlled casino model, with casinos embedded within enormous integrated resorts and accompanied by entry controls and social safeguards. But by incorporating other forms of entertainment into their resorts, Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa have proved hugely successful businesses that blend casino gaming with complementing luxury retail, hotels and entertainment.
Genting Singapore’s flagship Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) offers a smorgasbord of non-gaming entertainments, including Universal Studios Singapore. “These different businesses are planned and operated as one connected destination for leisure visitors, families, business travellers and event delegates, with the aim to widen the destination’s appeal, encourage longer stays and support spending across a broader tourism ecosystem,” a Genting Singapore spokesperson tells iGB.
Singapore’s experience shows that tourism growth and stringent social safeguards need not be mutually exclusive. Since its IRs opened, international visitor arrivals have risen from 9.7 million in 2009 to 16.9 million in 2025, while tourism receipts more than doubled from S$12.4 billion to a record S$32.8 billion.
At the same time, problem and pathological gambling rates among Singaporean adults have remained stable, with the rate declining notably between 2023 and 2025. As the spokesperson puts it, the model blends “two objectives together: generating tourism and economic benefits while making responsible gambling and social safeguards central to the model”.
The model is also evolving beyond gaming. RWS’ S$6.8 billion RWS 2.0 transformation is expanding its mix of attractions, hospitality, retail and lifestyle offerings, with the aim to “broaden the appeal of the destination and encourage repeat visitation”.
Ultimately, the operator says, the long-term success of an IR depends on “a broader mix of hospitality, entertainment, lifestyle and attraction offerings” rather than gaming alone.
Genting Singapore believes the key for Japan is not to replicate another market entirely, but to create a framework suited to its own circumstances. “Every integrated resort market is different,” the spokesperson says, adding that policymakers need to “maximise the economic benefits of IRs while minimising their potential social costs.”
Lessons from Macau
Macau generated MOP293.3 billion ($36.3 billion) in gross gaming revenue in 2019, equivalent to 65.8% of its GDP. In 2025, GGR stood at approximately $30.9 billion, still accounting for around 59% of GDP.
Yet Macau’s IR proposition extends well beyond the casino floor. Luxury accommodation, restaurants, shopping, concerts, conventions, art and other forms of entertainment have become part of a wider, equally indulgent experience surrounding gaming.
For Japan, the question is whether this broader proposition could make casino resorts more socially and culturally palatable by giving visitors reasons to come, other than gambling.
But for Klebanow, the lesson Japan should take from Macau and Singapore extends beyond the importance of non-gaming attractions. It is also about how regulation should work. Policymakers, he argues, should establish basic legal and commercial guardrails, while giving operators sufficient “latitude” to “propose and develop projects that best serve both the residential and tourism markets”.
He points to Macau’s Cotai Strip and Singapore’s Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa as examples of how regulatory discipline can coexist with considerable freedom for developers to innovate. “At its core, Japan’s policies need to be pragmatic and allow for developments to succeed – not constrain them to the point that they risk failure.”
Operator interest, who’s next to bid for a licence?
When asked which operator will be willing to take the risk and ultimately win Japan’s next “licence lottery”, Klebanow contends that it depends on how restrictive – or attainable – the regulations and requirements imposed by the government will be.
“If policymakers once again impose onerous policies that limit a property’s profit potential, then most developers will not take the risk of investing upwards of $10 billion in an IR development,” says Klebanow.
One exception, he notes, could be the Seminole Tribe of Florida and their proposed Hard Rock Resort Casino in Tomakomai, Hokkaido.
“They are currently aggressively growing the Hard Rock Casino brand, with developments under way in Las Vegas, New York City, Greece, Puerto Rico and Jamaica. They will put forth an attractive development proposal, and it appears that they now have the support of local government,” Klebanow notes.
Half-baked legalisation
As highlighted by Klebanow, Japan’s fragmented approach to gambling regulation may impact the development of Japan’s IR gambling industry, and Suzanne Perilloux Leckert, co-founding partner of Convergence Strategy Group somewhat agrees.
“Japan is acting cautiously, after observing missteps from other jurisdictions. They are proceeding in the way that best suits them,” she adds.
The factor that led some operators to drop out of the licensing race could be the “uncertainty” created by regulations that “didn’t seem set in stone”, says Leckert.
“Some of them [investors] that were looking at Japan were looking at a big IR licence or nothing. With Tokyo and Yokohama being out of the mix, maybe some weren’t as interested anymore and decided to sit back, and wait and see how regulation and licensing shake out.”
One concern for operators is “the short duration of licences and renewal of licences”, notes Leckert. For operators, the casino business licence is renewable every three years, while the IR development-plan authorisation runs for 10 years, in contrast to the 18-year IR licence term in the Philippines, for instance.
Limiting the duration of licence validity “puts the entire capital investment at risk”, says Klebanow. Further regulations, including limiting residents to 10 visits per month and requiring them to present a ‘My Number Card’ when gambling, further erodes project viability. “Ultimately, casino developers individually concluded that developing an IR was too risky, and they took their billions of dollars in potential capital investment and walked away,” observes Klebanow.
Takeaway from its own Pachinko
Online betting on sports in Japan is in general is not permitted, with the exception of four sports – horse racing, bicycle racing (keirin), motorboat racing and motorcycle racing – each rigidly controlled and regulated directly by the government or government-affiliated public corporations.
However, punters can still get their betting fix through the country’s official toto system, which offers authorised products covering soccer and basketball.
Under Japan’s penal code any betting that creates the possibility of gaining or losing property on a matter whose “outcome depends upon chance” may constitute gambling.
Online gambling more broadly remains illegal, with no sign of legalisation in either the short or long term. If anything, the government appears to be moving further away from the activity, and is actively considering website blocking to prevent illegal gambling in the country.
But through its love of pachinko, social gaming in Japan offers a strikingly different story.
Across some 8,000 pachinko parlours in Japan, machines filled with metallic balls fill expansive spaces, similar to slot machines on a casino floor. Winning balls are tallied and exchanged for non-cash prizes at the parlour, which can then be taken to nearby third-party exchange outlets for cash.
“Pachinko is a huge part of the culture,” says Leckert. She explains the “ease of walking into a pachinko parlour” is irreplaceable.
The sheer scale of pachinko underscores Japan’s complex relationship with gambling. Valued at around $130 billion in 2020, the industry represented roughly 2.5% of Japan’s GDP, highlighting its significant place in the country’s leisure economy.
Engaging the local audience
Developers could absolutely take away lessons on entertainment and engaging the local audience from this longstanding tradition.
Perhaps casinos in Japan could be more slot-heavy, suggests Leckert. “It’s obvious that, culturally, the Japanese have enjoyed playing these machines. Slots might be more successful in Japan than in Macau or Singapore.”
But Klebanow argues that pachinko engages only one specific demographic of Japan’s spciety. Despite the industry’s scale, the format appeals primarily to young men.
Its noisy and crowded parlours, he notes, do little to attract Japan’s critical demographic of women aged 40 and over. They “do not find pachi facilities comfortable or appealing”.
Given that women account for nearly 60% of gaming customers in the US, Klebanow argues that Japan’s IRs should instead offer environments where this demographic feels “safe and comfortable”. The key lesson from pachinko, he concludes, is therefore “not to create gaming environments that mimic them”.
Japan’s next gamble
Ultimately Leckert remains positive on Japan’s IR opportunity. “Stringent regulation really supports a strong industry,” she says. “I don’t see those being at odds with one another, because it’s been done very successfully elsewhere.”
Japan’s ability to lure back the world’s biggest casino developers will hinge on the regulatory framework the government unveils later this year, says Klebanow.
If it strikes a more reasonable balance that encourages economic development, “you will see the world’s best casino operators submit proposals”, he says. The government, he adds, must show it is prepared to give developers enough room to manage the risks of committing billions of dollars in capital.
Klebanow remains cautious about the commercial prospects of Japan’s emerging IR market, particularly given the tight limits on gaming capacity. With only five casinos ultimately envisaged, he argues that the number of gaming machines and tables will be modest relative to Japan’s population, making it “very safe to assume” that gambling will be socially and physically contained.
The bigger question, therefore, is whether such constraints will leave operators enough capacity to generate the returns needed to justify their investment.