When it comes to corporate transparency in the iGaming industry, few have been as successful in evading scrutiny as SoftSwiss. Despite being marketed as a neutral software provider, evidence is mounting that SoftSwiss is using Curacao-based entities to obscure its ownership and avoid the regulatory spotlight. This tactic is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore, and regulators worldwide must take notice.
Curacao: The Wild West of Online Gambling Licensing
Curacao has long been a favorite haven for online gambling companies seeking to operate in a jurisdiction with minimal regulatory oversight. The island’s gaming licenses are notoriously easy to acquire, with few requirements for due diligence or consumer protection. This has made Curacao an attractive option for companies looking to escape the tighter regulatory environments found in jurisdictions like the UK, Australia, or the EU.
SoftSwiss, however, appears to have taken this to an extreme. By associating itself with Curacao-based entities, SoftSwiss is using a convoluted structure of ownership to mask its true involvement in high-risk gambling operations.
Masked Ownership and Regulatory Evasion
At the heart of SoftSwiss’ operations is the strategic use of Curacao entities, including the likes of Hollycorn N.V. and CoinsPaid, two companies with deep ties to the SoftSwiss ecosystem. These entities are often used to obscure the true ownership of gambling platforms and payment services, creating a murky trail that’s difficult for regulators to follow.
While SoftSwiss publicly positions itself as a “neutral technology provider,” the reality is much more insidious. These Curacao-based shell companies, with their minimal oversight and lax regulatory standards, act as a buffer between SoftSwiss and the scrutiny of authorities in higher-regulated markets. This structure allows SoftSwiss to continue its operations unchecked, while maintaining a degree of plausible deniability.
The Price of Secrecy: A Regulatory Time Bomb
By hiding behind Curacao’s weak licensing framework, SoftSwiss is exposing consumers and regulators to significant risks. Without proper oversight, there’s no guarantee that SoftSwiss or its partner entities are following the basic rules of player protection, fair gaming, or anti-money laundering standards. For players, this could mean anything from fraudulent activity to data breaches to non-payment of winnings.
Moreover, this shell game only works as long as regulators continue to ignore it. As jurisdictions tighten their regulations and demand more transparency, SoftSwiss’ reliance on Curacao as a shield for its ownership structures could become a massive liability. The longer this continues, the more likely it is that SoftSwiss and its Curacao-based affiliates will face a reckoning.
It’s time for regulators to shine a light on this elaborate game of corporate evasion. Consumers deserve better, and the industry needs greater accountability. SoftSwiss has been hiding in plain sight for too long.