Where every fact on these pages comes from

What was not read

This list is worth exactly as much as the previous one.

The ministry pages on the mfin.gov.hr domain were not opened, so we nowhere name the exact organisational unit responsible for games of chance.

The secondary legislation the Minister of Finance adopts under article 35, paragraph 2 was not read. The Act mentions it, and its content stays outside these pages.

Case law on article 8 of the Act on Offences against Public Order and Peace was not reviewed, so there is no claim here about how that provision is applied; only its text was read, as the page about gambling in a public place shows.

Opinions of the Tax Administration on the taxation of winnings were not read, nor was the rulebook accompanying the Income Tax Act. The text of the Act itself was read and nothing above it, so no percentage and no tax threshold is written here.

The regulations of Curaçao and Anjouan were likewise not read. We checked that a licence record exists and which company it belongs to, but there is no assessment of the protection those systems offer; the reach of such a check is described on the page about foreign licences.

Three dates of reading, not one

A date beside a claim is not a formality, because sources change at different speeds.

26 August 2026 is when the terms of ten operators and their records in the issuers’ registers were read. That is the shortest-lived layer: terms change by a house’s decision, and a register status independently of it.

1 September 2026 is when the texts of both offence statutes were read, the gaming one and the public-order one, together with the pages of the Tax Administration and of the Croatian Institute of Public Health.

2 September 2026 is when the tax statute was read and articles 3, 5 and 9 of the Gaming Act were supplemented, which the page about Hrvatska Lutrija rests on.

A claim from the first layer ages fastest. Anyone reading these pages months later should repeat the check on the terms first, and everything else after that.

A blank field and two special cases

A blank cell in the table means we did not read that fact. Never zero, never the absence of a limit and never a claim about more favourable terms. An unpublished payout ceiling read as non-existent turns a gap in the data into an advantage for the house, which the page about payout limits covers.

Two cases are worth naming.

At the brand Empire.io we reached the terms page through an archived version, because the original was not available at the time of reading. The figure from clause 5.4 comes from there and was recorded that way.

At the tenth operator the row is almost empty, because not one of the columns could be filled from a document. A blank field in that row means the same thing it means everywhere else in the table, no more and no less; the facts other houses do publish are compared on the page about identity checks.

What will never be here

The sentence “we tried it”. We hold no account with any operator and have not deposited a single euro, so any measurement of payout speed would be invented.

Rankings, star ratings and counters that push people to hurry. A table ordered by the documents we managed to read says more than an invented percentage.

Technical instructions of any kind. What happens here is reading documents and noting clause numbers, and the tool that is genuinely available to a player is described on the page about the register of excluded players.

And there is not a single figure read somewhere without a mark of the place it stands in. An amount without a clause number and a date without a source are not recorded here, so some questions on these pages end with the sentence that we have no answer. Such a sentence is more useful to a reader than a borrowed figure.

We correct a mistake on the page where it arose and record the date of the correction beside it. Anyone who finds an inaccuracy can point to it by clause number; that is the only form of objection these pages can answer with a check.