For a betting brand and a vape brand, the UK rules do not start with the video. For gambling they start with who presents it and who follows the presenter; for nicotine vapes they do not look at the video at all, because a paid advertisement online is prohibited regardless of what it shows.
Alcohol, the third category where the audience is the regulated object, has its own guide to alcohol brand rules for UK creators, and this guide does not repeat its method for reading audience data. What it does is set out what differs: for gambling, a test that turns on the creator's own profile and following, on top of the audience of the post itself; for nicotine vapes, a flat prohibition with a second, wider one on the statute book and not yet switched on.
Gambling: strong appeal is about the presenter, not the product
Since 1 October 2022, rule 16.3.12 of the CAP Code says gambling advertisements must not be likely to be of strong appeal to children or young persons, especially by reflecting or being associated with youth culture, and must not include a person or character whose example is likely to be followed by those under 18 or who has strong appeal to them. The test replaced an older one of "particular" appeal and is stricter. The rule has two limbs, content that reflects youth culture and people whose example under-18s are likely to follow; in a creator video the second limb is the one that decides, because the creator is the person in it.
The regulator's published decisions show how the test is applied. In a ruling of 27 May 2026 against Oddschecker, posts featuring high-profile current footballers on widely accessible social media were found to be of strong appeal to under-18s, and the posts were treated as advertisements even though the account did not offer gambling itself, because its content encouraged bets with bookmakers. In a ruling of the same date involving Betway, a complaint about an advertisement featuring Thierry Henry was not upheld: he had retired years earlier, was recognised as a pundit, and had a relatively low proportion of UK under-18 followers.
The question in each case is whether this presenter, with this audience across these platforms, has strong appeal to under-18s. A creator's follower age breakdown, per platform, is evidence in that test, and an operator is expected to have obtained it before the post runs. A creator with a young following can be off limits for a betting brand however adult the script.
Under 25 in shot, and what differs from alcohol
Rule 16.3.14 says no one who is, or seems to be, under 25 may be featured gambling or playing a significant role in a gambling advertisement, and that nobody may behave in an adolescent, juvenile or loutish way. The alcohol rules contain a similar threshold, applied on set as the guide linked above explains. The gambling version differs in one respect: the person playing the significant role is usually the creator, so the creator's own apparent age is the first thing an operator assesses, before any question of who else is in the frame.
Who answers: the licensee, and the creator too
A gambling operator holds a licence from the Gambling Commission, and condition 5.1.6 of the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice makes compliance with the CAP and BCAP codes a condition of that licence. A creator video that breaches rule 16.3.12 is therefore a licence matter for the operator, which is why operators ask for audience data and approval rights a beauty brand never would.
The creator carries a separate exposure that has no equivalent in most categories. Section 330 of the Gambling Act 2005 makes it an offence to advertise unlawful gambling, and gambling is unlawful for this purpose if it would need a licence that is not held. The offence is committed by the person who advertises. A creator paid, or paid by affiliate commission, to send followers to an offshore site with no UK licence is the person advertising, and the absence of a licence is not something the creator can discover from the site's design. The Act gives a defence to someone who reasonably believed the gambling was lawful, which is exactly why the register check matters: a creator who never looked cannot claim it. The first check before any gambling brief is the operator's entry on the Gambling Commission's public register; the guide to contract clauses UK creators should read covers indemnities, but no indemnity covers an offence.
Nicotine vapes: there is no audience question
Regulation 43 of the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016 provides that no person may, in the course of a business, include or procure the inclusion of an electronic cigarette advertisement in an information society service provided to a recipient in the United Kingdom. An information society service is, in practice, any online service, social media platforms included. The regulation exempts services intended exclusively for the trade, and nothing else: not influencers, not gifted products, not content the brand did not script.
The CAP Code reflects the regulation in rule 22.12: marketing communications with the direct or indirect effect of promoting nicotine-containing e-cigarettes and their components that are not licensed as medicines are not permitted in online media. Factual claims remain permitted on a marketer's own website and, in certain circumstances, in other non-paid-for space online under the marketer's control. A creator's channel is neither.
The consequence is a category with no brief to write. "Procure the inclusion" is aimed at the brand that arranges the post; "include" at whoever publishes it. There is no audience threshold to meet, no age gate and no wording that fixes it. Brands point out that the product is legal to sell to adults, and it is; the advertising rule does not turn on that.
What the Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 adds, and when
The Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 goes further. Section 118 makes it an offence for a person acting in the course of business to publish in the United Kingdom an advertisement whose purpose or effect is to promote a tobacco product, a herbal smoking product, cigarette papers, a vaping product or a nicotine product, knowing or having reason to suspect that it is one. The Act defines a vape as a device that vaporises substances other than tobacco for inhalation, with no reference to nicotine, so the offence reaches nicotine-free vapes that the 2016 regulations leave alone. The penalty on indictment is up to two years' imprisonment, a fine, or both.
Section 118 was not in force at Royal Assent. Under section 176, section 118, with most of Part 6, comes into force on a day the Secretary of State appoints by regulations, and no such day had been appointed when this guide was checked. Until then the 2016 regulation is the operative prohibition for nicotine products online, and the Code's rules in section 22, which carry their own 25% audience threshold and an under-25 rule, apply to nicotine-free vapes. A brand planning creator content for a nicotine-free product is planning against a provision that can be switched on by regulation, and should read the commencement notes on legislation.gov.uk rather than rely on the current gap.
Two categories, two logics
| Category | Governing text | What is regulated | What a creator can lawfully do |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gambling | CAP Code section 16; LCCP condition 5.1.6; Gambling Act 2005 section 330 | The presenter's appeal to under-18s, the apparent age of anyone in a significant role, the operator's licence | Present for a licensed operator, if their own audience data and profile do not give them strong appeal to under-18s and they appear over 25 |
| Nicotine vapes | TRPR 2016 regulation 43; CAP Code rule 22.12 | The placement of any advertisement in an online service, whoever pays and whatever the content | Nothing on their own channel; factual content on the brand's own site is the brand's, not the creator's |
| Nicotine-free vapes | CAP Code rules 22.1 to 22.11 today; Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 section 118 when commenced | Content and placement under rules 22.1 to 22.11: no particular appeal to under-18s, nobody under 25 in a significant role, no medium with more than 25% of its audience under 18; then placement, as for nicotine, once section 118 is switched on | Content within those rules, on a channel whose audience data passes rule 22.11, knowing the permission can end by regulation |
Gambling leaves a creator a lawful path, audience evidence in hand; nicotine vapes offer none, and a creator offered one should assume the person offering it has not read regulation 43.
What to check before accepting or commissioning
For a gambling brief, four checks come before the script: the operator's licence on the Gambling Commission register, in the name on the contract; the creator's follower age data on every platform where the content will run, exported and dated; the creator's own apparent age against rule 16.3.14; and the channel, because a post on the creator's account is judged on that account's audience while a boosted or whitelisted post is judged on the operator's targeting, and the operator answers for both.
For a vape brief, one check: whether the product contains nicotine. If it does, the online advertisement is prohibited and the brief ends there. If it does not, rules 22.1 to 22.11 apply, audience threshold included, and section 118 of the 2026 Act sits behind them.
The affiliate link that turns a video into an ad
Creators sometimes present tipping content as editorial and add an affiliate link in the description. In the Oddschecker decision the regulator treated posts as advertisements because their content encouraged users to bet with bookmakers, regardless of the account's own business. An affiliate link to an operator does the same for a creator's post, and an affiliate link to a vape retailer places an electronic cigarette advertisement in an online service.
Refusing without losing the client
A gambling operator that cannot use a creator for betting content can still use them for content that contains no gambling advertisement: match-day atmosphere, sport without odds or calls to bet, the operator's sponsorship of a club. The line is whether the content has the effect of promoting gambling, and an operator's compliance team will draw it.
A nicotine vape brand has less room. Content on its own site is its to make, and cessation content that promotes no product is not an electronic cigarette advertisement, but a creator's video about quitting that names the brand's device is. The honest answer to such a brand asking for creator content for social media is that the format does not exist for the product, and a creator who says so is protecting the brand from procuring an advertisement the law prohibits.
Sources
- CAP Code, section 16, gambling
- ASA, Gambling, betting and gaming: appeal to children
- Gambling Commission, Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice, condition 5.1.6, compliance with advertising codes
- Gambling Act 2005, section 330, unlawful gambling
- The Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, regulation 43, no advertising of electronic cigarettes in information society services
- CAP Code, section 22, electronic cigarettes
- Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026, section 116, interpretation of Part 5, definitions of vape and vaping product
- Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026, section 118, publishing advertisements
- Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026, section 176, commencement of Parts 5 to 8
Checked on 19 September 2026. This guide is not legal advice. Where this guide and the official source disagree, the official source prevails.
