 “Microtransactions” is the most common used term referring to in-game purchases or loot box purchases in esports industry.

(Source 1)
 Since 2017, this “microtransactions” activity had sparked legal troubles between developers and government regulators as the
latter likened loot boxes to slot machines. (Source 1)

BELGIUM

 In Belgium, legislation was enacted restricting loot boxes and if any game containing a loot box that conflicts with the new
regulations would cost the offending party $974,000. (Source 1)
 Punishment is doubled when a minor is found to have purchased a loot box. (Source 1)
 So far, three games such as FIFA 18 of Electronic Arts, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive of Valve, and Overwatch of
Activision Blizzard were reached out by the Belgian Gaming Commission to remove loot boxes from them. (Source 2)
 At least two of the implicated publishers, Valve and Activision Blizzard, have complied with the regulations. (Source 2)
 Meanwhile, Electronic Arts is reportedly facing criminal investigation by the Brussels public office prosecutor’s bureau into
FIFA 18's loot boxes for failing to comply with government’s demands. (Source 4)
 EA CEO Andrew Wilston has publicly disputed Belgium's ruling as recently as May 2018 when he said that FIFA 18's loot
boxes aren't gambling. (Source 4)

SOUTH KOREA

 On April 2018, three South Korean game developers, Nexon, Netmarble, and NextFloor, have been fined by South Korea's
Fair Trade Commission after allegedly duping their customers through loot boxes. (Source 3)
 The FTC subsequently fined the three game developers for a combined $945,000 on April 1 having Nexon Korea with the
largest penalty at $882,000. (Source 3)
 South Korea's esports industry has in the past been accused by South Korean politicians of delaying and discarding legislation
pertaining to in-game transactions. (Source 3)

NETHERLANDS

 The Dutch Gaming Authority had investigated ten popular games that feature loot boxes, and four of the games had items that
could be sold on for real currency via external trading portals. (Source 5)
 Game developers violating the new ruling could face fines up to €820,000. (Source 5)
 On April 2018, the four unnamed game developers has been demanded to remove loot boxes from their games within eight
weeks, or face punishment. (Source 2)
 However, according to a report from Dutch news site NOS named the game developers as FIFA 18, Dota 2, PlayerUnknown's
Battlegrounds, and Rocket League. (Source 8)
 So far, the government has already threatened game developers like Valve with criminal charges, leading to Valve shutting
down the in-game marketplace for Dutch Dota 2 and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive players. (Source 1)

JAPAN

 Japan was known to be the pioneer among the countries in regulating loot boxes. (Source 1)
 In 2012, the Japanese National Consumer Affairs Agency (NCAA) issued a blanket ban toward “complete gacha,” or “kompu
gacha,” a monetization method used by a specific subset of social games that were very popular in Japan. (Source 1)

CHINA

 In early 2017, China passed a new regulation that targets loot boxes in games. (Source 1)
 An excerpt from the new regulation in China reads: “Online game publishers shall promptly publicly announce information
about the name, property, content, quantity, and draw/forge probability of all virtual items and services,” which means that the
odds of receiving an item from a loot box must be shared with the game’s customers. (Source 6)
 The law imposed a total sales ban on any game that failed to show users the odds they have of receiving an item from a loot
box. (Source 6)
  Blizzard was able to get away from the new regulations by introducing a currency that players can use to purchase in-game
items. (Source 1)
 However, Valve failed to avoid the law as Chinese users were able to see the real drop rate of particularly rare items,
showcasing exactly how low the odds of receiving a certain item really are. (Source 1)

GREAT BRITAIN/UNITED KINGDOM

 In October 2017, a statement was issued from Tracey Crouch, Secretary of State for Sport, Tourism and Heritage, “Where
items obtained in a computer game can be traded or exchanged outside the game platform they acquire a monetary value, and
where facilities for gambling with such items are offered to consumers located in Britain a Gambling Commission license is
required.” (Source 9)
 However, reports said that UK ruled the loot boxes do not contradict their gambling regulations. (Source 10)

FRANCE

 French gaming regulator ARJEL launched a study into loot boxes in early 2018 however stopped short of labelling them
gambling, as there was no real-life value to the items. (Source 9)
 But ARJEL said“combined and coordinated” action plan was required to deal with loot boxes, according to translation and
analysis of the report by media law associate Sebastian Schwiddessen. (Source 9)

UNITED STATES

 The country has been quite active on trying to action on loot boxes, as politicians in five states working on legislation with
Hawaii State Representative Chris Lee drafted four bills to avoid young people from getting access to loot boxes. (Source 9)
 The states of California, Minnesota, Indiana and Washington are considering similar provisions. (Source 9)
 However, Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) believed that loot boxes do not constitute gambling as the items
obtained in loot boxes are virtual, and can only be used in-game and cannot be cashed out. (Source 9)

AUSTRALIA

 Following a Nature report, which found loot boxes in ten of the 22 games tested could be considered psychologically similar
to gambling, Australia’s Senate launched a loot box inquiry in June to examine whether loot boxes are gambling, with the
inquiry to be headed by Greens Senator Jordan Steele-John. (Source 9)

2018 GAMBLING REGULATORS EUROPEAN FORUM

 In response to Blizzard's statement as it disagreed with the Belgian Gaming Commission's "interpretation of Belgian law," and
Electronic Arts' complete refusal to remove loot boxes from FIFA in Belgium, 15 gambling regulators from Europe and one
from the US have together announced they will "address the risks created by the blurring of lines between gaming and
gambling". (Source 7)
 During the 2018 Gambling Regulators European Forum, 15 gambling regulators from Europe and one from the US had signed
in a coalition with a general framework context that said "declaration of gambling regulators on their concerns related to the
blurring of lines between gambling and gaming". (Source 7)

The list of signatories were the following: (Source 7)

 Austria: Alfred Hacker, Director, Federal Ministry of Finance

 Czech Republic: Karel Blaha, Director of the State Oversight Over Gambling Department
 France: Charles Coppolani, Chair of the French Online Gaming Regulatory Authority
 Gibraltar: Andrew Lyman, Executive Director, Gambling Division, HM Government of Gibraltar
 Ireland: Brendan Mac Namara, Principal Officer, Gambling Policy Division, Department of Justice and Equality of Ireland
 Isle of Man: Steve Brennan, Chief Executive, Gambling Supervision Commission
 Jersey: Jason Lane, Chief Executive, Jersey Gambling Commission
 Latvia: Signe Birne, Director of Lotteries and Gambling Supervisory Inspection of Latvia
 Malta: Heathcliff Farrugia, Chief Executive Officer, Malta Gaming Authority
 The Netherlands: Jan Suyver, Chair of the Board of Directors of the Netherlands Gambling Authority
 Norway: Henrik Nordal, Director Deputy General, Norwegian Gaming Authority
 Poland: Paweł Gruza, Undersecretary of State in the Ministry of Finance
 Portugal: Teresa Monteiro, Vice-President of Turismo de Portugal, I.P
 Spain: Juan Espinosa García, CEO, Directorate General for Gambling Regulation
 Washington State: David Trujillo, Director, Washington State Gambling Commission
 United Kingsdom: Neil McArthur, Chief Executive Officer, UK Gambling Commission