No-deposit bets in New Zealand: who can take them, who cannot, and what they are worth

Updated October 2026

Licensed

Available in US

Fast payouts

18+ Only

A no-deposit bet is the proposition every punter has heard at least once: place a wager without putting any of your own money on the line first. In New Zealand the answer to that proposition is unusually short, and unusually final. Since an amendment to the Racing Industry Act 2020 took effect on 28 June 2025, TAB NZ and its online sister brand Betcha are the only operators allowed to take online sports and racing bets in New Zealand, and the Department of Internal Affairs told unlicensed providers to withdraw with immediate effect. The page below closes every other door the question opens — what a no-deposit offer really pays back, why the stake disappears when you win, which New Zealand rules govern the size of a bonus, and what a player loses by betting with a bookmaker that has no New Zealand licence.

Data current as of 27 October 2026, checked against the Department of Internal Affairs public guidance, the Racing Industry Act 2020 (as amended), and TAB NZ’s own published terms.

The statute: who may take a bet in New Zealand

The law sits at the centre of every other answer on this page, so it goes first. The Racing Industry Act 2020 establishes TAB NZ as the sole betting provider for racing and sports in New Zealand. The Racing Industry Amendment Act 2025 inserted section 74AAA, in force since 28 June 2025: no person other than TAB NZ may offer racing betting, sports betting, or other racing or sports betting to a person in New Zealand, regardless of where that person is resident or incorporated. The Department of Internal Affairs is the gambling regulator under the Gambling Act 2003 and monitors compliance with the prohibition.

There is no licence to apply for and no licence register for bookmakers, because there is only one lawful provider. TAB and Betcha are the two online brands of that provider, run by Entain NZ under a 25-year partnership signed in 2023. Entain takes a 50/50 share of gross profits, with at least $150m a year going to TAB NZ for the first five years, and Entain pledged a one-off $100m payment to the racing sector. Never treat Betcha as a rival bookmaker to TAB; they are one operator group with two skins.

The offshore side of the law is precise. An overseas bookmaker taking sports or racing bets from a person in New Zealand is breaking New Zealand law. The penalty for breaching section 74AAA is not stated in the section itself, and no prosecution of an offshore bookmaker was found. New Zealand does not geo-block bookmaker sites; the law puts liability on the operator, not on the customer’s internet provider. On the player side, section 19(4) of the Gambling Act 2003, inserted in 2025, says an individual may not be convicted for placing a bet with an offshore betting operator in breach of section 74AAA, and no source states a penalty for a player. The honest framing: the law targets the operator, the regulator warns players of the risks, and the published position is that no penalty attaches to the punter.

Greyhound racing is closing in stages from 1 August 2026, and from that date offshore operators may not take bets on greyhound races either. The Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 licenses online casino gambling only, and does not extend the betting monopoly — TAB New Zealand winning the right to apply for a casino licence is a separate matter that does not put a second sports bookmaker into the market.

What may be bet on

TAB NZ takes fixed-odds and tote (pool) bets. Its published betting rules cover Win, Place, Each Way, Quinella, Exacta, Trifecta, First Four, Double, Treble, Daily Double, Running Double, Quaddie, Big6, Multis, and Same Game Multis (a multi whose legs come from one event). Live betting is listed in the TAB NZ apps; no statutory restriction on in-play markets has been published. There is no lawful New Zealand betting exchange, and spread betting sits outside TAB NZ’s sports-betting definition. TAB NZ does not list politics or novelty markets. There is no statutory per-bet cap; any limit comes from TAB NZ’s own terms.

Advertising and inducements

The Advertising Standards Authority’s Gambling Advertising Code applies to betting advertisements. Ads must not target children (under 14) or young people (14 to under 18), judged by context, appeal and expected audience, where 25% or more of the audience counts as significant where accurate data exists. Ads must not encourage harm and must be truthful, with terms available. Because only TAB NZ may offer betting here, the Department of Internal Affairs reads the prohibition as covering promoting or taking such bets for another operator, so the page describes the monopoly and never invites readers to sign up with an offshore brand. No New Zealand equivalent of a “whistle-to-whistle” advertising ban was found. TAB NZ runs “bonus bets” promotions; no New Zealand rule on bonus size or wagering terms was found, so every figure on this page comes from TAB NZ’s own terms rather than from a statutory ceiling.

Tax, in two lines

For the punter, Inland Revenue guidance says recreational gambling winnings are generally not taxable, and prize money from TAB horse, dog and trotting races is not taxable; a person who bets as a business sits in a different case and is advised to consult Inland Revenue or an accountant. For the operator, TAB NZ pays the Problem Gambling Levy (0.74%, in force from 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2028), and overseas operators supplying New Zealand residents pay online gambling duty (12% of profits since 1 July 2024, rising to 16% from 1 January 2027). A duty being payable does not make an offer lawful: never write that tax payment shows a bookmaker is legal in New Zealand.

Safeguards: harm minimisation, age checks, and where to get help

The age for TAB NZ betting is 18. Betting under 18 is an offence under section 89 of the Racing Industry Act 2020, distinct from the land-based casino age of 20. TAB NZ accounts need a verified New Zealand address and ID; account opening is the point at which the platform checks the customer against its own exclusions, and the verification step is what the offshore brands named later on this page do not run for New Zealand residents at all.

TAB NZ provides safer-gambling tools in its app, namely deposit limits, time-outs, and self-exclusion. An exclusion applies across its two brands, TAB and Betcha, so a punter who has chosen to step away from one is not met with a working account at the other. There is no single national online-betting exclusion register in the materials reviewed; the register the casino law will require is for online casinos only and does not extend to sports and racing betting.

For help outside the operator, the free Gambling Helpline (0800 654 655) and the text line 8006 are listed by TAB NZ in its app, alongside Safer Gambling Aotearoa. These are the routes the regulator and the operator both name. The block belongs in any serious review of what a no-deposit offer costs, because the cost of a free bet is never only the wagering rule; it is the frame around play, and the frame is what a New Zealand punter keeps when the offer expires.

The arithmetic of a no-deposit offer: what the bonus bet is really worth

The marketing word for what a no-deposit offer gives the punter is “free bet”. Two of the words are right, and the third one is the part that decides the offer’s actual value. On a free or bonus bet, the stake is not paid back with the winnings — only the profit lands in the account. That is the rule on TAB NZ’s Bonus Cash and Mega Multi bonus in the same way it is the rule on every offshore bookmaker reviewed later in this page.

A worked example shows the gap. Take an illustrative two-way market at decimal odds 1.90 against 1.90, with a $10 free bet. The return on a winning $10 stake at 1.90 is $19. On the free bet, the $10 stake is not paid back, so the punter collects $9 of profit. The same logic, scaled, is what makes a free bet a smaller thing than its face value. As a band rather than a single number: on a market priced around 1.90 with no house margin assumed, the free bet is worth roughly 50% of its face value, because the formula for a non-returned-stake free bet is value ≈ stake × (odds − 1) ÷ odds, and (1.90 − 1) ÷ 1.90 is about 0.47. Pull the price to 2.50 and the share rises to about 0.60; pull it to 1.50 and the share falls to about 0.33. Read across that range, the typical no-deposit bonus bet on a competitive two-way line is worth somewhere between a third and three-fifths of its headline figure, before any minimum-price rule or expiry deadline is applied.

The honest reading of “free” in “free bet” is in reality: the offer is a credit, not a gift, and the punter pays for it by accepting that the stake is forfeit on a win. A real-money refund pays the stake back as well as the profit. A non-returned-stake free bet pays only the profit, and that is what every number on this page is calculated against.

The arithmetic also shows why the marketing of “100% bonus” lands softly. If a $50 Bonus Cash offer is locked to a market priced at 1.50, the expected take sits at about 0.33 of $50, or roughly $16 of expected value to the punter. The headline number sounds twice as generous, and the actual number is closer to a third. This is the move the rest of the page makes: the headline is the marketing word, the number underneath it is the calculation, and the gap between them is the cost of the offer.

The ten bookmakers New Zealand players meet, ranked against the same criteria

TAB and Betcha come first as the two online brands of the only lawful provider, followed by eight offshore bookmakers a New Zealand punter may encounter while searching for a no-deposit offer. The offshore group is not a recommendation and not a ranking of substitutes. The criteria are the same across all ten, and the result is the same in one respect: only the first two are licensed to take a bet in New Zealand, and only those two sit inside the New Zealand harm-minimisation framework.

TAB (tab.co.nz) — the lawful provider

TAB is the established brand of TAB NZ, the only operator licensed to take racing and sports bets from people in New Zealand. The TAB NZ app carries Trackside live race streaming with in-app betting, racing form, Blackbook and Jockey Challenge tools, and a simplified wallet for deposits and withdrawals. The promotion referenced in the app store listing is Bonus Cash that can be split across multiple bets, alongside a Mega Multi bonus of up to $50 in Bonus Cash when a multi of four or more legs falls short by a set number of legs, with terms and conditions applying. Safer-gambling tools — deposit limits, time-outs, and self-exclusion — sit inside the same app. There is no published minimum-price rule for Bonus Cash in the materials reviewed, and no published expiry window, so the punter reads the app terms before staking.

The verdict is the easiest on the page. TAB is the only operator the New Zealand statute puts inside the country, and every other name on this list is judged against it. For a punter who wants a no-deposit-style promotion in New Zealand, TAB is the only place the offer comes with a New Zealand regulator, a New Zealand complaints route, a helpline, and a self-exclusion that travels across TAB and Betcha together.

Betcha (betcha.co.nz) — TAB NZ’s digital sister

Betcha is the other online brand of TAB NZ and the one the Amendment Act 2025 specifically names as one of the two online brands lawfully able to take online sports and racing bets from people in New Zealand since 28 June 2025. It runs on the TAB NZ wallet and the TAB NZ safer-gambling tools, so an exclusion at TAB closes Betcha as well. The Betcha product is positioned as the digital-first experience, with a sportsbook built around the same racing and sports catalogue TAB carries.

The verdict: Betcha is TAB under a different label, and the punter who opens a Betcha account opens a TAB NZ account. For a no-deposit-style offer, the terms are the TAB NZ terms, and the only decision is which of the two skins a punter finds easier to use.

Thunderpick — Curaçao licence, not licensed in New Zealand

Thunderpick names a Curaçao licence (OGL/2024/677/0722), held by Paloma Media B.V., which gives no right to take bets from people in New Zealand. The English site advertises a 100% deposit bonus up to EUR 600 and recommends crypto for fast deposits, with other payment methods also available. The terms prohibit use from Curaçao, the Netherlands (and the other parts of the Kingdom of the Netherlands), the USA, UN-sanctioned countries, and FATF-blacklisted countries; New Zealand is not named, so the prohibition does not block a New Zealand resident by name, but the section 74AAA prohibition runs from the New Zealand end.

The verdict: a Curaçao licence does not make Thunderpick lawful to take bets in New Zealand, and the operator has no New Zealand harm-minimisation framework, no New Zealand complaints route, and no entry in a New Zealand register. For a punter who wants a no-deposit-style offer inside New Zealand, Thunderpick is one of many offshore sites and one that does not clear the section 74AAA test.

BillyBets — no New Zealand licence

BillyBets includes cashback and reload bonuses on sports, and a coin shop where coins collected by depositing, betting, tournaments, and challenges can be exchanged for free bets and free spins; the VIP programme has five levels. As with every other name in the offshore group, no New Zealand complaints route or harm-minimisation framework reaches it.

The verdict: the coin-shop structure looks generous, but the value of the offer is in the terms attached to each coin redeemed, and those terms are BillyBets’s own. The page cannot say what the wagering factor is from the materials reviewed, so the punter reads the coin-shop terms before staking. The brand is one to know about, not one to default to.

Millioner — no New Zealand licence

Millioner states that e-wallet deposits and payouts are fast while credit card transactions take longer because a bank processes them. It holds no New Zealand licence, so the New Zealand punter sits outside any of the consumer safeguards the licence may or may not confer on a different customer base. The materials reviewed carry no no-deposit promotion specific to a New Zealand account.

The verdict: speed of payment is a real point in Millioner’s favour where speed matters, and the offshore group as a whole is faster on withdrawals than TAB NZ on some methods. That is the practical reason a New Zealand punter opens an offshore account, and the section 74AAA reason why they are advised not to, and the two sit on the page in the same paragraph because they are the same decision looked at from two sides.

Golden Panda — no New Zealand licence

Golden Panda offers a Sports section with a sportsbook, esports and virtual sports, alongside casino, live casino, crash games, rewards, cashback, a VIP Club, Golden Goals, and Prediction Markets. This operator holds no New Zealand licence, so the New Zealand punter is once again outside the consumer safeguard the licence might otherwise carry.

The verdict: a wide catalogue is not a New Zealand case for using the platform. The catalogue is a reason an offshore punter might use it, and the catalogue does not move the section 74AAA position.

RoyalistPlay — Tobique e-gaming licence, not licensed in New Zealand

RoyalistPlay names a Tobique Gaming Commission e-gaming licence (No. 0000002), held by Novatrix SRL in Costa Rica, which gives no right to take bets from people in New Zealand. The materials reviewed carry no no-deposit offer specific to a New Zealand account.

The verdict: a Tobique e-gaming licence is a Canadian First Nations gaming commission, not a New Zealand regulatory authorisation. The page records the licence and the holder, and the verdict is the same as the rest of the offshore group.

Winz.io — Anjouan and Tobique licences, not licensed in New Zealand

Winz.io names Anjouan and Tobique licences in its footer, held by Novatrix SRL. Neither gives a right to take bets from people in New Zealand. The materials reviewed carry no no-deposit offer specific to a New Zealand account, and the Anjouan / Tobique footprint does not change the section 74AAA position.

The verdict: the same as RoyalistPlay, with the same holder behind two skins, and the same New Zealand-side reasoning at the close.

Spinbara — no New Zealand licence

Spinbara advertises a first-deposit bonus of 100% up to EUR 100 and a sport crypto welcome bonus of 100% up to 200 USDT on its English site, alongside a casino welcome bonus of 100% up to EUR 500 plus 200 free spins. The materials reviewed carry no New Zealand version of these terms.

The verdict: the headline numbers are large, and the calculation in the previous section shows why a large headline on a non-returned-stake free bet lands at a fraction of its face value. The same arithmetic applies to every offshore brand on the page, and Spinbara is the cleanest illustration of the gap between headline and calculation.

FunBet — no New Zealand licence, New Zealand not on the excluded list

FunBet’s terms do not list New Zealand among the excluded jurisdictions in section 2.3, and the NZD is in the withdrawal-limits table, with limits up to 3,000 per day and 35,000 per month at level 5. This site holds no New Zealand licence, so the operator may be open to a New Zealand punter, but section 74AAA still runs from the New Zealand end. The materials reviewed carry no no-deposit offer specific to a New Zealand account.

The verdict: the NZD on the withdrawal page is the one practical reason a New Zealand punter might consider FunBet, and the section 74AAA point is the practical reason not to. The two sit together because they are the same page in the operator’s terms read from two sides, and the page’s job is to show the reader both.

The no-deposit offer across the market: what the table actually shows

The table below uses the same criterion the rest of the page uses: is the operator licensed to take a bet from a person in New Zealand, and what does the operator’s own terms say about a no-deposit-style credit. The first column is the brand as the punter meets it. The second column is the New Zealand status, settled by the section 74AAA test. The third column is what the operator’s own terms say about a no-deposit-style offer, where the materials reviewed record one.

The column that matters most is the second. Two brands are licensed in New Zealand; eight are not. The third column is not a ranking of generosity, because the materials reviewed record different terms for different brands and the wagering factors and minimum-price rules behind the bonuses are not all on the page. The third column is what the operator says about its own offer, in the operator’s own words, and the punter reads the wagering rule and the minimum-price rule in the operator’s terms before staking.

Why the headline price on a “free bet” sits next to a smaller number

The arithmetic block above worked the calculation as a band. The reason it is a band, and not a single number, is the reason a punter reads the offer’s terms. A free bet is not paid back with the winnings, so the punter’s take is the profit, not the return. The expected take is value ≈ stake × (odds − 1) ÷ odds on a market at the price the punter selects. The punter’s actual take depends on three numbers the operator controls: the face value of the free bet, the markets the free bet is allowed on, and the minimum price the operator sets as the qualifying line. Each of those three numbers moves the result, and each is on the operator’s terms page rather than on the marketing page.

The wagering factor is the other number the punter looks for, and the materials reviewed do not state one for every brand on the page. Where a wagering factor is named, it is a multiplier on the bonus that must be turned over in qualifying bets before the bonus is withdrawable, and it is set by the operator. Where the materials reviewed do not name one, the punter reads the terms page directly, because a wagering factor of 5× on a $50 bonus means $250 of qualifying bets, and a wagering factor of 10× on the same bonus means $500, and the two are different offers under the same headline.

The minimum price is the other rule the marketing page tends to leave out. A wagering factor of 5× on bets at minimum odds 1.50 is a different offer from a wagering factor of 5× on bets at minimum odds 2.00, because the second one narrows the markets the bonus can be cleared on. A free bet whose qualifying line is 1.50 can be turned over on most two-way and three-way markets; a free bet whose qualifying line is 2.00 forces the punter up the price ladder, and a higher price on the same event is a smaller payout on the same outcome.

The expiry window is the third rule, and the one the punter usually meets after the wagering rule. A free bet that expires in seven days is a different offer from a free bet that expires in thirty, because the punter has to find the bet in time, and the operator’s catalogue of events in that window is what determines whether the wagering rule can actually be met. Where the materials reviewed do not name a window, the punter reads the terms, and the page cannot speak for the operator.

What a New Zealand punter checks before claiming a no-deposit offer

A no-deposit offer in New Zealand is, in practice, an offer from TAB NZ, because the other eight brands on this page sit outside the section 74AAA permission. The punter who meets one of those eight names from an affiliate link, a search result, or a sports sponsorship sees the offer and asks three questions in this order.

First, is the operator licensed to take a bet from a person in New Zealand. The answer in the materials reviewed is “yes” for TAB and Betcha, and “no” for the rest. The second question is what the operator’s terms say about the offer, which the table above sets out by what the operator’s own terms record. The third question is what the punter loses by betting with a bookmaker that has no New Zealand licence, which is the regulator’s warning: overseas operators may be in jurisdictions with minimal consumer safeguards, may not return unspent credits, and may not pay out large wins. The Department of Internal Affairs has stated the warning; the page records it; the punter makes the call.

The four-point check the punter runs on a no-deposit-style offer

1. Licence. Is the brand licensed to take a bet from a person in New Zealand. In the materials reviewed, only TAB and Betcha are.
2. Stake-returned rule. Is the stake paid back with the winnings. On a free bet, the rule is “no”; on a real-money refund, the rule is “yes”. The expected value calculation on the non-returned-stake assumption is the smaller number.
3. Wagering factor. How many times the bonus must be turned over. The punter reads the operator’s terms, because the number is on the terms page, not on the marketing page.
4. Minimum price and expiry window. What is the minimum odds a qualifying bet must be at, and when does the offer expire. Both are on the terms page.

A punter who runs the four-point check before claiming an offer knows what the offer is worth before the wagering begins, and the value sits inside the band the arithmetic section set out, not on the marketing line.

The 100% bonus as a case study in the gap between marketing and arithmetic

The marketing number on a no-deposit offer is rarely the arithmetic number. A 100% bonus up to $100 on a non-returned-stake free bet at a 1.90 line is a calculation: $100 × (1.90 − 1) ÷ 1.90, which is about $47 of expected value to the punter. Pull the price to 1.50, and the expected value drops to about $33. Pull it to 2.50, and the expected value rises to about $60. The “100%” in the marketing is a multiple on the deposit, not a multiple on the punter’s take, and the punter’s take is the only number the offer actually delivers.

The same arithmetic applied to a wagering rule shows the cost of the offer to the punter. A 5× wagering factor on a $100 bonus means $500 of qualifying bets, and the bookmaker’s margin on those bets is the punter’s expected cost. On a market with a 5% margin, the expected cost of clearing the wagering is about $25, and the net expected value of the bonus after clearing is the bonus’s expected value minus the clearing cost. A punter who reads both numbers sees the offer for what it is, and the offer is rarely the headline.

The wagering rule and the margin interact. A high wagering factor on a market with a high margin is more expensive than the same wagering factor on a market with a low margin, because the punter is giving the bookmaker a cut of every turnover bet. A punter who can pick the market on which the wagering is cleared has a real choice, and the choice is the difference between an offer that pays for itself and an offer that costs the punter in expected value.

The market in one paragraph

New Zealand is a one-operator market for online sports and racing betting. TAB and Betcha are the two online brands of that operator, and the section 74AAA prohibition makes the rest of the market a reference set rather than a substitute. The no-deposit offer in New Zealand is consequently a TAB NZ offer, in TAB NZ’s terms, and the arithmetic of the offer is the arithmetic of any non-returned-stake free bet. The punter who wants a no-deposit-style promotion in New Zealand gets one from TAB, and the punter who meets an offshore brand on a search result page reads the section above before claiming.

The comparison at a glance

For a punter who wants a no-deposit-style offer, the comparison reduces to two questions: which operator is licensed to take the bet in New Zealand, and what does the operator’s terms say. The first question is settled by the Racing Industry Amendment Act 2025: TAB and Betcha, and no one else. The second question is settled by TAB NZ’s own terms on Bonus Cash and Mega Multi, which the table above records. The arithmetic section above shows what those offers are worth in expected value, and the four-point check is what the punter runs before claiming. The other eight names on the page are reference points: brands a New Zealand punter meets, each with a different offshore licence, each outside the New Zealand harm-minimisation framework, and each named on this page so the punter knows the page has seen them.

What the page is honest about

The materials reviewed name no New Zealand rule on the size of a betting bonus, no New Zealand rule on the wagering factor of a free bet, no New Zealand rule on the minimum price of a qualifying bet, and no New Zealand rule on the expiry window of a free bet. The page consequently quotes no statutory ceiling on any of these numbers, and the wagering factors, minimum prices, and expiry windows behind each offshore offer are not all on the page because the materials reviewed do not name them all. The punter reads the terms on the operator’s own page, and the page records the gap rather than the guess.

The page is also honest about the offshore side. The materials reviewed name Curaçao, Anjouan, Tobique, and Comoros licences for the offshore group, and none of those licences authorises the operator to take bets from people in New Zealand. The punter who opens an offshore account does so outside the New Zealand regulatory frame, with the regulator’s warning attached, and the page records the warning as the Department of Internal Affairs has stated it.

New Zealand rules on the size of a betting bonus

There is no New Zealand rule on the size of a betting bonus. The Racing Industry Act 2020 and the Racing Industry Amendment Act 2025 establish the betting monopoly but do not set a ceiling on the bonus a bookmaker can offer; the Gambling Act 2003 covers gambling more broadly and does not address the size of a sports-betting bonus. The Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 imposes a $100 / 200% inducement cap on licensed online casinos, and that cap applies to casino gambling only and does not govern betting. The punter who reads the law and finds no bonus ceiling has read the law correctly. The ceiling on a TAB NZ bonus is the operator’s own terms, and the page records those terms without inventing a statutory line.

Why the stake of a free or bonus bet is not paid back

The stake of a free or bonus bet is not paid back because the offer is a credit, not a gift. On a TAB NZ Bonus Cash bet, the punter’s account is credited with Bonus Cash rather than real money, and the credit is used in the same way as real money on the bet, but a winning bet returns only the profit. The reason is the structure of the offer: the bookmaker is funding a bet, and the funding covers the cost of the bet, not the cost of the bet plus the original stake. A real-money refund, by contrast, returns the stake and the profit, and the difference between the two is the difference between a free bet and a refund.

The expected-value calculation captures the difference. On a market at 1.90 with a $10 free bet, the punter’s expected take is about $4.70 over many bets at that price. On a market at 1.90 with a $10 real-money refund, the punter’s expected take is the same as a $10 real-money stake at 1.90, which is about $9 of profit per win. The two offers are different by design, and the design is the rule the punter reads before claiming.

The verdict, in one line

A no-deposit bet in New Zealand is a TAB NZ offer in TAB NZ’s terms, and the value of the offer sits in the band the arithmetic section set out, and the punter who wants a no-deposit-style promotion inside New Zealand has one lawful option. The eight offshore brands named on the page are reference points for what the wider market advertises, and the wider market does not include New Zealand as a licensed customer base. The page’s job is to record the law, the offers, and the arithmetic, and to leave the punter with a four-point check that runs in any market.

Frequently asked questions

Are there New Zealand rules on the size or terms of a betting bonus?

No. The Racing Industry Act 2020 and its 2025 amendment establish the betting monopoly but set no ceiling on the size of a sports or racing bonus. The $100 / 200% inducement cap in the Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 applies to licensed online casinos only. The terms of a TAB NZ bonus — face value, wagering rule, minimum price, expiry — are the operator’s own terms and sit on TAB’s app and terms page, not in a statute. The punter reads the operator’s terms before claiming.

Why is the stake of a free or bonus bet not paid back with the winnings?

Because the offer is a credit, not a gift. A free bet funds the bet; it does not fund the bet and the original stake. On a $10 free bet at 1.90, the punter collects $9 of profit on a win and nothing on a loss; the $10 stake is the bookmaker’s cost and is not returned. A real-money refund returns stake and profit, and the two are different offers by design. The expected value of a non-returned-stake free bet is roughly half its face value on a competitive two-way line.

Which bookmaker may lawfully take sports and racing bets in New Zealand?

TAB and Betcha, the two online brands of TAB NZ, are the only operators allowed to take online sports and racing bets from people in New Zealand. Section 74AAA of the Racing Industry Act 2020, in force since 28 June 2025, makes any other bookmaker unlawful to serve a New Zealand resident. There is no licence to apply for and no licence register for bookmakers. The Department of Internal Affairs monitors compliance and told providers serving New Zealand to withdraw with immediate effect on the change taking effect.

How is the return on a bet worked out from the stake and the odds?

Return = stake × odds; net profit = stake × (odds − 1). A $10 bet at 1.90 returns $19 if it wins, for a net profit of $9. On a combination bet the odds of the legs multiply into one price, so a two-leg multi at 1.90 and 1.80 is a single price of about 3.42. On a TAB NZ fixed-odds or tote bet the rule is the same: stake times the displayed odds is the return on a win, and the stake is not paid back on a free bet.

Which tools for controlling play do TAB and Betcha offer, and who can be called for help?

TAB and Betcha provide deposit limits, time-outs, and self-exclusion in the TAB NZ app, and an exclusion at one brand closes the other. The free Gambling Helpline is 0800 654 655 and the text line is 8006; Safer Gambling Aotearoa is the other route named in the materials reviewed. Help is free, confidential, and outside the operator, so a punter who wants a frame around play that does not depend on the platform has one to call.

What does a player lose by betting with a bookmaker that has no New Zealand licence?

The Department of Internal Affairs warns that overseas operators may be in jurisdictions with minimal consumer safeguards, may not return unspent credits, and may not pay out large wins. There is no New Zealand complaints route, no entry in a New Zealand harm-minimisation register, and no regulator the punter can write to. The section 74AAA prohibition runs from the New Zealand end, so the operator is in breach of New Zealand law, and the punter’s recourse is whatever the operator’s own licence in its own jurisdiction provides. The plain reading of the regulator’s warning is the starting point for any decision to bet offshore from New Zealand.

Written by the editors at Nzgolfodds.