{"id":13506,"date":"2026-01-22T10:09:54","date_gmt":"2026-01-22T09:09:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/italiangamingexpo.com\/2026\/01\/22\/pvr-e-nuovi-sistemi-di-pagamento-il-focus-nel-talk-di-aircash-a-barcellona\/"},"modified":"2026-01-22T10:11:42","modified_gmt":"2026-01-22T09:11:42","slug":"pvr-e-nuovi-sistemi-di-pagamento-il-focus-nel-talk-di-aircash-a-barcellona","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/italiangamingexpo.com\/en\/2026\/01\/22\/pvr-e-nuovi-sistemi-di-pagamento-il-focus-nel-talk-di-aircash-a-barcellona\/","title":{"rendered":"PVR and new payment systems: the focus of Aircash’s talk in Barcelona"},"content":{"rendered":"

With a talk dedicated to Gaming and Payment during the ICE fair, new opportunities and risks of regulation on PVR are outlined.<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n


\nBarcelona –<\/strong> The Italian online gaming market is preparing for the implementation of the PVR (Points of Sale for Recharges)<\/strong> regulation, which imposes various new rules on operators. Although its implementation has been repeatedly postponed, due to appeals filed with the Lazio Regional Administrative Court, creating prolonged uncertainty in the market. Despite the delays, the regulation remains an integral part of the Italian regulatory roadmap. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

A tangled situation that we wanted to delve into with IGE Magazine<\/strong> during the ICE Barcelona 2026<\/strong> fair, bringing together some experts in the field at the Aircash stand, a specialist in payment systems and a leading operator in the market. In a talk aimed at clarifying the current state of regulation, the practical implications for operators, and what to expect once the regulation comes into force. To do this, we gathered Mattia Nicelli, Country Specialist Italy at Aircash, Marco Castaldo, CEO of Microgame, and lawyer Stefano Sbordoni, founder of Sbordonipartners<\/strong>, under the moderation of Alessio Crisantemi, Director of IGE Magazine \/ ItalianGamingNews.it<\/strong>. <\/p>\n

Lawyer Sbordoni is tasked with framing the current situation occurring at the regulatory and judicial level regarding payment with a focus on the PVR topic.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe PVR is somewhat the sore point of the reform \u2013 explains the lawyer \u2013 in the sense that it is still under the judgment of the competent courts, in this case, the Lazio Regional Administrative Court. The PVR is a concept we know, which originated long ago, in 2007, even in 2006, and from there it has taken various forms. Today it is the point of contact between physical and online, and for this reason, it represents both a bulwark and a problem to be solved. In the administration’s idea, actually of the government, because decree 41 of 24, which started the reorganization of games dealing with online, provides in article 13 precisely the figure of the PVR establishing its register, where it is stated that these points of sale, let’s say that at the points of the current panel, is what takes place at the point of sale, therefore the payment of the game account recharge that interests us. This article 13 in its 5 paragraphs outlined some peculiarities of the PVR, including the establishment of the register and the traceability, reporting, and enforceability of the operations carried out at the PVR.\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cUntil today \u2013 continues Sbordoni \u2013 we know and do not know that the use of the PVR is somewhat more flexible by some, many, few operators, because ‘in and out’ operations are carried out that do not find a direct response in the regulations. Precisely to limit these operations, this article 13 has provided both the register and the famous limit under discussion of 100 Euros of cash recharge per week per customer, which has created enormous turbulence in the market, the operating conditions, therefore no <\/span><\/span>cash out<\/i><\/span><\/span> nor payment of winnings and the recognizability of the PVR through the placement of an external plaque or an identifiable QR code. The standard contract that must be signed and which is communicated in its essential elements by the administration itself is precisely the obligation to use payment instruments that ensure the traceability of the transaction, therefore cash with that limit we mentioned, while for other methods if they are for example ‘scratch’ or other they must be brought back to the cash limit. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

All this point by point, but in particular the register and the 100 Euro limit are under judgment because some operators have challenged this rule at the Lazio Regional Administrative Court and we find ourselves at a final postponement which then rose to the Council of State because there was a judgment that then went on appeal, Council of State September 26, 2026, next date. Here arises that uncertainty of applicability that according to some institutions actually exists, as I described it, according to others must await the outcome of the judgment. So outcome postponed as said to September.\u201d <\/span><\/span>
\n