ACMA Fines Tabcorp $2.7M Over Telemarketing Breaches

Tabcorp Holdings has paid more than AU$2.7 million, close to US$1.9 million, after ACMA confirmed a string of telemarketing and spam breaches. The Australian Communications and Media Authority examined how Tabcorp contacted customers between February 2024 and June 2025. Its findings point to a pattern of compliance failures that stretch across calls, texts, and emails. For a company already bound by one active undertaking, the case adds fresh pressure to fix systems that keep tripping the same wires.

The investigation was not a narrow one. ACMA looked at multiple channels Tabcorp used to reach customers, and it found problems in nearly all of them. That breadth is part of why the regulator has now demanded an independent review rather than accepting a quick fix.

What the ACMA Investigation Found

ACMA identified 351 telemarketing calls placed to VIP customers whose numbers sat on the Do Not Call Register. None of those customers had given the necessary consent to be contacted. A further 82 calls landed outside the hours permitted under Australian telemarketing rules, a straightforward breach with no gray area attached.

The caller identification failures were even more widespread. Close to 4,000 calls failed to properly identify Tabcorp as the source. Many also skipped explaining why the customer was being contacted in the first place, a basic obligation under the law.

On the electronic marketing side, Tabcorp self-reported a separate issue in 2025. Over just 16 days, the company sent more than 217,000 promotional emails and SMS messages. Every one of those messages went to customers who had already unsubscribed from those exact channels.

None of these customers had withdrawn consent for every type of marketing Tabcorp sends. They had opted out of specific channels, but Tabcorp kept using them anyway. That distinction mattered to ACMA when it weighed the penalty, though it did not excuse the conduct.

How ACMA Ties This Case to Tabcorp’s Earlier Fine

This is the second spam-related enforcement case ACMA has brought against Tabcorp. An earlier investigation into 2024 VIP messaging covered SMS and WhatsApp communications. It resulted in a penalty of more than AU$4 million, roughly US$2.8 million, and a separate spam undertaking from that case remains active alongside the new one.

ACMA authority member Samantha Yorke said the repeated nature of the breaches reflects deeper problems inside the company. She noted that customers make a clear choice when they join the Do Not Call Register or unsubscribe from marketing. Those choices, she added, carry extra weight given the risks tied to gambling marketing specifically.

Yorke also pointed to the scale and range of the failures as evidence of serious weaknesses in Tabcorp’s compliance systems. She said ACMA expects the company to correct the issues it uncovered. The regulator, she added, will continue watching Tabcorp’s performance closely.

New Compliance Requirements for Tabcorp

Beyond the financial penalty, Tabcorp now faces a court-enforceable undertaking tied specifically to its telemarketing operations. The company must commission an independent review of those systems. It must then act on whatever deficiencies the review uncovers and submit regular reports demonstrating its progress.

This new undertaking sits alongside the spam-related one already in place from the earlier case. Tabcorp is now operating under two separate compliance obligations tied to how it markets to customers. Both stem from the same underlying issue, a marketing operation that has struggled to respect the preferences customers explicitly set.

The case lands during a broader enforcement push against spam and telemarketing violations in Australia. Companies across sectors have paid more than AU$12 million in penalties for similar breaches over the past 18 months. Gambling operators have drawn particular scrutiny within that total, given the added risks tied to their marketing.

ACMA has made clear it intends to keep monitoring Tabcorp rather than treating this penalty as the final word. For a company managing VIP relationships worth real revenue, the message is straightforward. Opt-outs need to stick, and the systems meant to enforce that need to actually work.