Good morning, I have recently been made aware of this post and I would like to offer some further insight - hopefully to be of assistance.
I work for a bank, and recently, came across a case where a customer had been making payments to a certain online casino with a Curaçao gaming license - where the funds intended to top up his balance had been paid via card in both attempts and successful transactions to at least 7 'different' payment destinations, all of which I believe to be shell companies operating on behalf of the casino.
I believe the reasoning for these shell companies operating is quite simple, and also extremely unethical at best.
By disguising the payment destination, this is a measure that can be employed to try and evade measures such as Gamstop, as the system will fail to trigger that the payments - made to shell companies who offer kitchen supplies, baby clothes/items, online games design courses (all evidenced examples from the particular casino I am looking into) - are for a completely different purpose.
At the end of the day, disguising the payment destination is always a suspicious move - but I believe that this is being done specifically by the casino in order to evade protective measures that customers can put on their bank accounts - which I believe puts particularly vulnerable customers (who are doing what the can to protect themselves) at incredibly high risk
This is something that I have raised as part of my role, and I hope that the bank that I work for can take appropriate action to protect our customers