The political climate in the Netherlands has taken a decisive turn against the gaming industry. A new legislative offensive seeks to impose the strictest regulatory regime since online betting was legalized in 2021, with sanctions that could amount to an operator’s entire annual revenue.
The proposal that changes the rules of the game
The Netherlands bill, driven by deputies Mirjam Bikker and Sarah Dobbe, proposes a paradigm shift in how the Netherlands controls its digital borders. The most striking measure would empower the Netherlands Gaming Authority (KSA) to impose fines equivalent to 100% of an offending operator’s annual revenue.
This so-called “radical option” comes shortly after the KSA imposed a record fine of 25 million euros on a company for operating without a license, a signal that the era of moderate regulatory intervention would have come to an end. The proposal also demands the immediate closure of illegal platforms and a drastic reduction in gambling advertising in the country.
Why lawmakers believe current law is insufficient
The central argument of the bill’s proponents is the slowness of the current regulatory framework. According to Bikker and Dobbe, current regulation moves too slowly, allowing unlicensed operators to migrate their online operations and evade detection for months, all while continuing to generate significant revenue.
Beyond economic sanctions, the initiative aims to strengthen the Cruks self-exclusion system, the tool through which players can voluntarily disable their access to gambling platforms. Parliamentarians want vulnerable people to be blocked more quickly and sanctions for violations in this area to be more severe.
Market growth and its darker side
Since online gambling was legalized in 2021, the Dutch market has grown steadily. Data published by the KSA and the Research and Documentation Center record 450,000 new participants since then, a figure that reflects the commercial success of the regulated model.
However, that growth has a worrying consequence. Statistics from LADIS, the Netherlands’ addiction registry system, show a persistent increase in gambling addiction cases. This data is the main political fuel behind the new legislative offensive and what gives social backing to the deputies pushing for reform.
Read more Indiana moves to ban sweepstakes-based online casinos
The risk of over-regulation: the industry’s warning
Not everyone is convinced that more restrictions will produce the expected results. Critics of the proposal warn that excessive regulation could inadvertently trigger a massive exodus of players to unregulated and unsupervised sites.
VNLOK, the association representing licensed operators in the Netherlands, argues that legal advertising is the only mechanism available for consumers to distinguish between legitimate companies and fraudulent platforms based abroad. If authorized communication channels disappear, they argue, the channeling effect that directs players toward safe and taxed environments could collapse entirely.
The concern is shared from within the regulatory system itself. Michel Groothuizen, president of the KSA, has warned that a total advertising ban could prevent players from finding available legal alternatives, weakening precisely the objective that the reform seeks to achieve.
A path of hardening that does not stop
Despite industry resistance, the reform momentum appears irreversible. The coalition agreement signed in 2026 already contemplated concrete commitments: intensifying due diligence requirements for operators and reviewing the total number of licenses available in the market. The legislative proposal by Bikker and Dobbe is, in that context, the most recent step in a trajectory of increasing regulation that shows no signs of moderating.
The underlying debate, however, remains open: if the goal is to protect the most vulnerable players, the question is whether doing so through harsher sanctions and less advertising achieves that goal or simply displaces the problem to even less controlled spaces.
Read more UK warns about the growth of the illegal market during the Cheltenham Festival
