What the dates mean
Original research cutoff: . Original publication remains . A bounded review on checked the sources below; later material is identified explicitly. This is not a complete current-law consolidation, individual licence check or legal advice.
The material corrections are important: the inspected Penal Code marks article 271 repealed; article 352 concerns a public-entry gambling venue; and the Civil Code's three-year recovery rule is in article 739, not article 740.
Egypt at a glance
On a narrow screen, scroll this table sideways. With a keyboard, focus the table and use the arrow keys.
| Question | Documented position | Important limit |
|---|---|---|
| Online poker | The documents below address different activities and legal consequences. | They do not establish blanket permission for an offshore poker service or settle every participant's liability. |
| Tourism establishments | Article 24 of the 2022 law uses non-Egyptian nationality and ministerial conditions. | A foreign passport, hotel booking or general casino description does not establish the relevant authorization. |
| Civil disputes | Article 739 addresses invalid gambling agreements and recovery; article 740 contains defined exceptions. | A civil remedy is not a licence, a criminal-law defence or a guaranteed refund. |
| 2026 developments | Dated interviews describe intended blocking and proposed legislative changes. | An announcement, blocking decision, enacted law and court outcome require different evidence. |
The provisions and publication dates are linked below. A reachable website is not evidence of Egyptian authorization.
The national framework: what the provisions address
Penal Code: a venue offence is not a universal player rule
The Public Prosecution Information Centre's March 2019 Penal Code compilation, reflecting amendments through 2018, marks article 271 repealed. In article 352, the subject is a person who prepares a place for gambling and makes it ready for public entry, together with the venue's cashiers. The provision carries criminal penalties and confiscation. A separate legal archive's text corroborates that wording.
That is materially different from saying every Egyptian who plays any form of poker automatically commits the same offence. Organizing a public-entry venue, promoting a service, handling money and participating in a game are not interchangeable facts. But correcting the citation is not a finding that online play is lawful: the inspected compilation is historical, and this review does not exclude other offences or later legislation.
Civil Code: invalid agreements, recovery and exceptions
The Civil Code copy hosted by the Egyptian Tax Authority places the relevant provisions together on PDF page 62. Article 739(1) makes a gambling or betting agreement invalid. Article 739(2) allows the losing party to recover what they paid within three years of payment, despite an agreement to the contrary, and permits proof by all means.
Article 740 supplies the exceptions. Its first paragraph concerns wagers between competitors personally participating in sporting games, with judicial power to reduce an excessive stake; its second concerns legally authorized lotteries. It is not the source of the recovery rule and does not expressly create a general poker exception.
These are rules about agreements and recovery, not a licence or an automatic criminal-law defence. Applying a civil remedy still involves procedure, jurisdiction and enforcement, especially across borders. The linked file is an older WIPO-formatted compilation; its 2024 upload directory must not be mistaken for a legislative update.
Law 8 of 2022: nationality and establishment conditions
The Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities hosts the Gazette text of Law 8 of 2022 on hotel and tourism establishments, published on 6 March 2022. Article 24 restricts gambling in the establishments to non-Egyptians, subject to conditions and controls set by the competent minister. The ministerial decision must identify the establishments where the games may take place.
Nationality is not the same as possession of a foreign passport. The article does not itself set out a passport-only test or resolve a dual national's position. Nor does non-Egyptian nationality dispense with establishment-specific conditions: this is not permission to organize games anywhere or an authorization for offshore online poker.
On a narrow screen, scroll this table sideways. With a keyboard, focus the table and use the arrow keys.
| Part of the law | What the text addresses | What still needs evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Article 24 | Non-Egyptian nationality, ministerial conditions and identification of establishments. | The applicable decision and the establishment and activity it covers. |
| Articles 7 and 8 | Licensing of establishments and their management, with identifying details. | A particular permit's terms and validity; a hotel's name alone is insufficient. |
| Promulgating article 1 | An exclusion for establishments owned or managed by the Defence or Interior ministries or their affiliated bodies. | The separate framework for an excluded establishment; exclusion is not general gambling permission. |
| Article 24 levy | A ministerially determined levy capped at half of gaming revenue. | The actual applicable rate, distinct from a player's taxes. |
A casino's marketing page may describe admission policies or games, but it is not the underlying ministerial instrument. A house-banked game using “poker” in its name is also not evidence of a player-versus-player cash table or tournament. Current poker availability and authorization are separate checks; neither is certified here.
The 2026 announcements: distinguish intention from implementation
The identifiable broadcaster report is dated 4 February 2026, not a law enacted on 9 February. Its subject is electronic betting generally, not a judicial decision classifying every poker product.
On a narrow screen, scroll this table sideways. With a keyboard, focus the table and use the arrow keys.
| Date and source | What was reported | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|
| Sada El-Balad's report of its interview attributes intended blocking of betting applications and pursuit of promoters to MP Ahmed Badawy, the parliamentary communications committee chair. | An enacted statute, an actual blocking order, verified implementation across networks or a court outcome. | |
| In direct comments to Al-Shorouk, Badawy describes preparations to discuss proposed amendments to the Information Technology Crimes Law addressing electronic betting. This is later than the original cutoff. | That those amendments had passed, their final wording, commencement or application to a particular player. |
These are primary records of what the interviewee said, not primary legislation. Proposed penalties should not be reported as enacted ones. Conversely, a proposal does not prove that existing legislation is inapplicable: amendments may change, clarify or supplement an existing framework.
This review did not inspect an enacted 2026 amendment matching those descriptions, an individual blocking order or a relevant final judgment. That is a research limit, not an assertion that no such instrument, enforcement action or prosecution exists.
The gaming levy is not a personal poker tax
The “half of revenue” language in article 24 is a ceiling for a levy set by ministerial decision. It is not proof that every casino actually pays a 50% rate or that a player owes 50% of winnings. An operator's revenue, a person's income and a deduction from a payment are different tax bases.
The Tax Authority hosts both the original Income Tax Law 91 of 2005 Gazette text and a collection of subsequent income-tax legislation. Reading the original alone does not settle a current player's residence, source of income, classification, deductions or reporting obligations. The earlier guide's worldwide-income assertion, flat rate table and withholding assurances are therefore not retained.
No personal poker exemption or final liability is established here. An assessment needs the legislation applicable to the relevant period and facts, with qualified Egyptian advice where necessary. Payment of tax would not itself authorize a restricted activity.
A documented tournament in Sharm El-Sheikh
Egypt has a verifiable international poker event in its historical record. The organizer's 2 November 2010 Russian Poker Series report records a Sharm El-Sheikh tournament with 212 runners. Its 6 November final report names Friederich Dollenz as the winner. These are dated tournament accounts, not an inference from a generic casino listing.
The result documents a past event, not a continuing series, a 2026 calendar or today's cash games. It does not establish that this was Egypt's last tournament. National earnings lists also change and are not player-population censuses; they should not be used to infer the size or current availability of the domestic poker scene.
Useful records and safer research
For a licensing claim, ask which instrument, issuing authority, establishment, activity and date support it. For an alleged new offence, ask for the enacted text and commencement date. For a tournament claim, look for a dated organizer record that identifies the actual poker format. These questions are more useful than a foreign licence logo or an undated venue list.
If seeking advice about a dispute, preserve dated correspondence and transaction records without publishing account details or identity documents. A Civil Code recovery provision is not a guarantee of repayment or a reason to pay a supposed recovery agent. Our general resources explain the warning signs:
Frequently Asked Questions
Is online poker legal in Egypt?
The reviewed sources do not support blanket permission for online poker. The tourism law's conditional treatment of gambling in covered establishments is not an offshore online-poker authorization. Equally, the older guide's Penal Code citations did not establish its claimed universal player offence. An individual's position needs the applicable current legislation, activity and facts; this guide does not certify an operator or provide legal clearance.
Does Penal Code article 271 prohibit Egyptians from playing poker?
That is not what the inspected text says. The Public Prosecution Information Centre's March 2019 compilation, reflecting amendments through 2018, marks article 271 repealed. Article 352 instead addresses preparing a gambling venue for public entry and the venue's cashiers. Those corrections do not establish that no other offence or later provision could apply.
Does a foreign passport automatically permit casino gambling?
No automatic permission follows from article 24 of Law 8 of 2022. It uses non-Egyptian nationality, not a foreign-passport formula, and requires ministerial conditions and identification of the establishments concerned. This review does not determine a dual national's position or authenticate an individual venue's authorization.
Which Civil Code article concerns recovery of gambling payments?
In the Tax Authority-hosted copy, article 739(2), not article 740, allows the loser to recover a payment within three years of making it, notwithstanding an agreement to the contrary. Article 740 sets out exceptions for wagers between participants in sporting games and legally authorized lotteries. Procedure, jurisdiction and enforcement remain separate questions; recovery is not guaranteed.
Did a February 2026 interview enact a new online-betting law?
No. The 4 February broadcaster report records MP Ahmed Badawy's statements about intended blocking. In a separate 26 May interview, he describes proposed amendments to the Information Technology Crimes Law. Neither interview is a gazetted enactment or an inspected blocking order. They do not establish the final legislative or enforcement position for all of 2026.
Does the tourism law set a 50% player tax?
No. Article 24 describes a levy on gaming revenue to be set by ministerial decision, capped at half that revenue. It does not itself set every establishment's actual rate or a player's income-tax liability. This review does not establish a flat personal poker tax, exemption or withholding guarantee.
Has an international poker tournament taken place in Egypt?
Yes. The organizer's reports document a Russian Poker Series event in Sharm El-Sheikh in November 2010, with 212 runners and Friederich Dollenz winning. That historical record does not establish a present series, a current cash-game schedule or that this was Egypt's last tournament.
Sources, corrections and remaining limits
The bounded review on distinguishes an original Gazette, a dated code compilation, an interview and an organizer's result.
- Public Prosecution Information Centre, Penal Code compilation, March 2019: a third-party-hosted copy reflecting amendments through 2018. Article 271 is on PDF page 96 and article 352 on page 115. The Manshurat archive corroborates the wording; neither is presented as a complete 2026 consolidation.
- Tax Authority-hosted Civil Code copy: articles 739 and 740, PDF page 62. An older WIPO-formatted compilation, not a legislative update dated by its upload directory.
- Ministry-hosted Law 8 of 2022 Gazette: promulgating article 1 on PDF page 1; licensing provisions on pages 8–9; article 24 on page 15, printed page 16. Individual ministerial decisions and venue permits were not authenticated.
- Sada El-Balad, 4 February 2026, and Al-Shorouk, 26 May 2026: direct interview reporting, used for attributed statements and dates, not as enacted law.
- Tax Authority's original 2005 income-tax text and later-law collection: insufficient by themselves for a personal poker rate or withholding conclusion.
- Russian Poker Series opening report and final report, November 2010: organizer accounts of a historical event, not current availability.
What changed in this review
We corrected the statutory references, replaced the foreign-passport shorthand with the law's nationality and establishment conditions, and separated announcements from enactments. Unsupported tax figures, player rankings, venue-wide poker claims, broad religious-law comparisons and detailed cryptocurrency claims were removed. The previous illustration was withdrawn because it repeated unverified legal assertions.
Remaining gaps include a full current-law consolidation, authenticated gambling decisions and individual permits, a personal tax determination, a complete enforcement survey and a current tournament calendar. Those limits establish neither blanket permission nor a claim that nothing has happened.
Related country research
Each country has its own legal framework and research dates.