The role of indigenous peoples and gambling houses

1) The big picture: legal frameworks and participation formats

• Own/sovereign jurisdictions (a prime example is Kahnawà: ke with its own Commission and regulation of interactive games);
• Provincial Revenue Sharing Agreements, providing permanent transfers to community funds;
• Operating models of casinos owned/operated by First Nations organizations under agreements with provincial regulators.

Together, this forms a sustainable system of financing community programs, jobs and local projects.

2) Kahnawà sovereign jurisdiction: ke and online gaming

The Kahnawake Gaming Commission (KGC) was created by Kahnawà: ke Gaming Law (1996) and regulates interactive gambling "inside or from the territory" of Kahnawà: ke. The technical core is Mohawk Internet Technologies (MIT): a basic infrastructure with which a significant part of the hosting of KGC-licensed online operators has historically been associated; MIT also created jobs within the community itself. KGC regulation declares coordination and mutual assistance with other regulators.

Why it matters: Kahnawà: ke is a unique example of how indigenous people have built their own licensing/supervision system for online games, relying on their right, while interacting with a wide ecosystem.

3) Saskatchewan: SIGA as' gold standard'allocation

• 50% - in First Nations Trust (distributed among 74 nations), 25% - in Community Development Corporations (CDCs), 25% - in the provincial General Revenue Fund.
• In fiscal 2024-2025, SIGA reported a record gross revenue (GGR ~ CA $378 million) with a constant net income distribution formula.

Effect: The model provides direct investment in First Nations communities and local projects, as well as regular revenue to the provincial budget.

4) British Columbia: 7% net income BCLC - for 25 years to communities

Since 2020, the Long-Term BC First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing and Financial Agreement has been in effect: 7% of BCLC's net income (net income) is transferred annually to indigenous peoples until 2045; volume benchmark - about CA $3 billion for the term of the agreement. Funds are distributed by BC First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership (indicative ~ CA $200 million in the first 2 years).

Meaning: this is a predictable long-term flow to the budgets of BC communities under the control of the Indigenous structure (LP) itself, which strengthens self-government and transparency.

5) Ontario: OFNLP agreement and 1.7% of total GGR OLG

The Ontarian model provides for the Gaming Revenue Sharing and Financial Agreement, under which, since April 2011, indigenous peoples receive 1.7% of the total gross gambling income (GGR) of OLG. The First Nations Managing Party is Ontario First Nations Limited Partnership (OFNLP2008); long-term estimates assumed revenues of the order of ~ CA $2.97 billion to 2032/33 (actual volumes depend on market productivity). OLG reports regularly show annual payments under the agreement.

6) Alberta: FNDF and shares for Host Nations

Alberta operates the First Nations Development Fund (FNDF), a grant program supplemented by a percentage of revenue from provincially owned slot machines in indigenous casinos. Historically, the model distributes revenues between Host Nations, FNDF and Alberta Lottery Fund (for example, the proportion of 30/40/30 was indicated in the analyzes), while the FNDF is officially described as a tool for financing community projects.

7) What it gives communities: jobs, infrastructure, programs

Employment and business chains. Sovereign and provincial models create thousands of jobs (casino operations, security, F&B, IT, responsibility/compliance) as well as demand for local SMEs. Kahnawà example: ke - job creation through MIT and related services.

Community foundations and local projects. Through First Nations Trust/CDC (SIGA), LP in BC and OFNLP in Ontario, the money goes to infrastructure, education, culture, health, sports and development.

Fiscal sustainability of provinces. Models (e.g. SIGA 25% per province. fund; BC share - from BCLC net income) show that Indigenous and provincial participation complement each other rather than compete.

8) How does this compare to the online marketplace

In addition to terrestrial projects and revenue agreements, indigenous peoples also participate in the online ecosystem. Kahnawà: ke is the most famous example of its own regulation and infrastructure for interactive games, affecting not only locally, but also outside the territory. This has formed a unique indigenous place in the North American "online landscape."

9) Questions and nuances of politics

Different calculation bases. In British Columbia, the share is considered from net income BCLC, in Ontario - from GGR OLG; SIGA distributes net income to casinos. Compare correctly only within one technique.

Long-term. BC secured the agreement until 2045; Ontari agreement - many years with forecasts for the volume of payments.

Alberta. The FNDF institutionalizes refunds to community projects; shares and mechanics are the subject of provincial framework and evolution of agreements.

Short guide: who gets what (for today)

Kahnawà: ke - own regulation of interactive games (KGC) + MIT infrastructure and workplaces.

SIGA (SK) - 50 %/25 %/25% distribution net income: First Nations Trust/CDC/provincial. foundation.

British Columbia - 7% net income BCLC to First Nations for 25 years (until about 2045), runs Indigenous-LP.

Ontario - 1.7% GGR OLG via OFNLP2008 (long-term agreement with market dynamics).

Alberta - FNDF (a share of government car slot revenue in indigenous casinos) as a grant channel to community projects.

Indigenous peoples in Canada are not peripheral participants, but institutional partners of the gambling sector: from the sovereign online jurisdiction of Kahnawà: ke to large-scale provincial SIGA models and long-term revenue sharing agreements (BC - 7% net income of BCLC, Ontario - 1.7% GGR OLG, Alberta - FNDF) These mechanisms simultaneously support self-government, employment, local projects, and sustainable budgets - and thereby form Canada's unique architecture for First Nations participation in the gambling industry.