Comparison with Antigua, Barbados and SVG (St Kitts and Nevis)

Full article

1) Brief map of differences

St Kitts and Nevis (SKN): The offline market is regulated by the Gaming (Control) Act, 2021 and the Commission (FSRC). Tourist focus of resort casinos; online - a separate circuit on Nevis.

Antigua and Barbuda: one of the oldest Caribbean online hubs: Interactive Gaming & Wagering Regulations (licenses for iGaming/sports) are in effect.

Barbados: casinos are prohibited, but lotteries and individual machines are allowed under profile acts.

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG): the law allows casinos since 1968, but historically the industry has not formed (there were facilities, closed; now there are virtually no casinos). Online is not directly regulated by a separate act.

2) Law and regulators

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Basic Law: Gaming (Control) Act, 2021 → established Gaming Commission (represented by FSRC), annual licenses, inspections, reporting.

Antigua and Barbuda

Regulatory Framework for iGaming: Regulations Concerning Interactive Gaming & Wagering (administered by Gaming Division/FSRC).

Barbados

Outright prohibitive logic for casinos combined with betting/lottery laws; the national lottery and fiscal fees are regulated by separate acts.

SVG

Source: Gambling, Lotteries and Betting Act (1968); the online sector is not highlighted by a special law.

3) Offline product and tourism

SKN: "resort + casino" model (casino as evening anchor in hotel clusters), strong link to F&B and entertainment; Oversight - FSRC/Commission.

Antigua: there are resort casinos, but the main thing is an online export license (see below).

Barbados: no land-based casinos; lotteries and limited gaming devices are developed according to the allowed modes.

SVG: the law allows casinos, historically facilities have opened and closed; there is no "live" industry now.

4) Online modes and positioning

SKN: federal act of 2021 - about offline; the online vector develops through Nevis (since 2025 - its own online circuit/power), so part of the consumer traffic remains offshore.

Antigua and Barbuda: full Interactive Gaming/Wagering licenses; historical case - disputes with the United States in the WTO on market access, which emphasizes the "online identity" of the jurisdiction.

Barbados: no online casino mode; focus on lotteries and ground resolutions.

SVG: online is not directly covered by a separate frame - practices are "gray/export" in nature, without a local consumer circuit.

5) What it means for investors/operators

(See blocks above for sources.)

6) Risks and opportunities

St Kitts and Nevis: plus - predictable offline framing and tourist traffic; minus - the gradual nature of online contours (through Nevis), which is why part of the demand goes offshore.

Antigua: plus - mature license for iGaming; minus - high international visibility/compliance requirements (historical disputes with the United States).

Barbados: plus - low social risks; minus - the casino and iGaming market is closed (opportunities only around lotteries).

SVG: plus - "clean slate" if you want a restart; minus - the actual lack of operating casinos and the specifics of online supervision.

7) Conclusion

• Saint Kitts and Nevis - a bet on a tourist casino-core with modern supervision (FSRC) and neat online through Nevis.
• Antigua and Barbuda is an online Caribbean licensing center with an established standard for iGaming.
• Barbados is a casino-free model, with lotteries and controlled formats.
• SVG - the right allows, the market does not work: formal resolution without existing casinos and without a separate online framework.

For investors, this means: choose jurisdiction for the task - offline and tourism (SKN), large-scale iGaming business (Antigua), lottery/retail format (Barbados) or "greenfield" approach for possible reforms (SVG).