Kansspelautoriteit enforcement of foreign casinos 2026: Risks, Rules & Strategy

The Kansspelautoriteit's enforcement of foreign casinos in 2026 focuses on tackling providers without a Dutch license. Players are not subject to these sanctions. The KSA uses administrative penalty payments and ISP blocks against illegal operators. For Dutch players, playing at foreign sites is not criminal, but it does carry risks. You lose out on Cruks control, must declare winnings yourself (37.8% gambling tax), and have less consumer protection in case of disputes.

The Kansspelautoriteit's enforcement strategy in 2026

The 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit shifts from reactive fines to proactive technical exclusion. The Kansspelautoriteit uses the Remote Gambling Act to keep illegal providers out via ISP blocks and high administrative penalty payments. Cooperation with the Ministry of Justice and Security and the Advertising Code Commission reduces the visibility of these parties.

In 2026, enforcement is no longer a paper tiger, but a digital network of controls. The focus previously lay on retroactive fines, but now the emphasis is on prevention. By technically blocking access to illegal domains and cutting off financial flows, the regulator makes the 'gray market' inaccessible to the average Dutch consumer. This strategy requires alignment between legal frameworks, technical infrastructure, and international cooperation.

Tools: from penalty payments to internet blocks

The Kansspelautoriteit (KSA) is the national regulator enforcing the Remote Gambling Act against providers without a Dutch license. When foreign casinos actively target the Dutch market, the KSA intervenes with heavy financial sanctions. The regulator distinguishes between two tools: the compliance order (Last onder dwangsom) and the administrative penalty payment (Bestuursdwangsom). A compliance order is a remedial sanction. The provider must cease the violation (such as offering services to Dutch IP addresses) within a set period, otherwise a monetary amount is forfeited. The administrative penalty payment is an administrative fine imposed directly for the violation itself, often escalating to high amounts for repeat offenders.

Alongside financial pressure, the KSA is investing in technical barriers. The ISP block is used in cooperation with internet service providers to restrict access to illegal domains. This method ensures that players in the Netherlands can no longer physically connect to servers of unlicensed casinos. Our analysis shows that this combination of financial penalties and technical blocks puts pressure on the "gray market", although providers with licenses from jurisdictions such as Curaçao or Malta continue to try to circumvent the rules. Note: with these blocked providers, you cannot rely on the protection of the KSA or the CRUKS register.

The effectiveness of ISP blocks has further increased in 2026 through more advanced filtering techniques. Providers work with the KSA to more quickly identify and block domains that change frequently (so-called 'mirror sites'). This cat-and-mouse game forces illegal providers to make constant adjustments, increasing their operational costs and worsening the user experience for players due to frequent interruptions.

Focus on advertising and visibility

Enforcement focuses not only on the gaming platforms themselves, but also on marketing channels. The Advertising Code Commission plays a vital role here by monitoring the Online Gambling Advertising Code. Illegal providers are not allowed to target Dutch consumers with advertising, but this still often happens via social media and affiliate networks. The KSA reports detected illegal advertising directly to the relevant platforms to reduce visibility.

The Dutch Association of Online Gambling Providers (NOA) works with the regulator to promote self-regulation, but the focus remains on keeping out illegal competition. The Advertising Code Commission reviews complaints about misleading claims and can impose sanctions on members who violate the code. For unlicensed foreign casinos, any form of recruitment targeting Dutch people is a violation of the Remote Gambling Act (Wet KOA). The KSA encourages online platforms to proactively block illegal content, which has significantly reduced the visibility of these providers in 2026.

The fight against illegal advertising is essential because visibility is the first step toward conversion. By targeting influencers, affiliate websites, and social media advertisements, the KSA is cutting off the supply of new players to illegal casinos. In 2026, we see an increase in enforcement against 'soft advertising', such as sponsoring sports events or placing logos on shirts of teams popular in the Netherlands, even if the broadcasts themselves are not targeted at the Dutch market.

Cooperation with other regulators

Effective enforcement requires broad cooperation. The Ministry of Justice and Security is politically responsible for gambling policy and supports the KSA in tightening legislation. This cooperation is essential to adapt legal frameworks to new technological developments, such as the use of cryptocurrencies or decentralized platforms by illegal providers.

Additionally, the KSA works with international partners and the financial sector to cut off financial flows to illegal providers. By linking the Remote Gambling Act to international agreements, the Kansspelautoriteit aims to neutralize the appeal of foreign licenses. The Advertising Code Commission and the Ministry of Justice and Security, together with the KSA, form a triangle of oversight that addresses both the supply side (casinos) and the demand side (advertising and awareness). This integrated approach ensures that enforcement in 2026 is no longer an isolated action, but a system-wide effort.

Cooperation with De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) is crucial here. DNB supervises payment service providers and ensures that banks block transactions to unlicensed providers. This 'Payment Ban' is one of the most effective tools in the government's arsenal, as it directly confronts the player with the illegal status of the provider at the moment of deposit.

Legal position: Is playing at a foreign casino illegal?

For Dutch players, playing at a foreign casino in 2026 is not illegal, despite the strict 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit. The legislation focuses exclusively on the operator active without a license, not on the consumer. Therefore, players face no legal risk of prosecution, but they do lack the protection of the Dutch regulator and must declare winnings for tax purposes themselves.

The distinction between provider and player

The core of Dutch regulation lies in the distinction between the service provider and the consumer. the Gambling Act, the overarching legislation for gambling in the Netherlands, sets clear frameworks for offering games. This law, combined with the more specific Remote Gambling Act, prohibits targeting the Dutch market with gambling offerings without a valid license from the Kansspelautoriteit.

These prohibitions primarily affect the provider. The Kansspelautoriteit enforces these rules by imposing heavy fines on operators illegally targeting Dutch players, but there are no known cases where players have been prosecuted. For the player, this means that participating in a foreign casino is legally permitted, but comes with risks. For example, in case of disputes, the player falls outside the jurisdiction of the Kansspelautoriteit, as the regulator is only authorized for license holders.

Additionally, the player has tax obligations. Winnings from providers without a Dutch license are not automatically tax-free. The player is personally responsible for the declaration of gambling tax to the Tax and Customs Administration. Ignoring this duty can lead to fines, creating a financial risk that does not exist with legal providers.

The role of European legislation

The position of foreign providers is partly determined by the tension between national legislation and European rules. The European Commission monitors the correct application of EU law, including the freedom to provide services. However, the Netherlands invokes grounds of public order and consumer protection to regulate the market via the Remote Gambling Act.

Although a license from another EU member state, such as Malta, sets strict requirements, it is not automatically recognized in the Netherlands. The European Commission accepts that member states use their own licensing systems as long as they are non-discriminatory and proportionate. This means that providers with a European license must still comply with Dutch law if they target Dutch players. If they do not, the Kansspelautoriteit enforces based on national legislation, regardless of the foreign license.

Case law and precedents

The regulator's powers have been tested multiple times in case law. The Council of State has strengthened the position of the Kansspelautoriteit in various rulings by confirming that the prohibition on targeting offerings at Dutch people is lawful. These rulings underscore that the Gambling Act and the Remote Gambling Act provide sufficient legal basis for enforcement against foreign operators.

The Council of State ruled that the protection of players against addiction and fraud weighs heavier than the freedom to provide services of foreign providers. This legal precedent allows the Kansspelautoriteit to act forcefully against illegal providers, while the player's position as a consumer remains untouched. For players, this means that legal uncertainty primarily lies with the provider, not with themselves.

Tax implications: Gambling tax and the Tax and Customs Administration

When you win at a provider without a Dutch license, the 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit does not directly target you as a player, but you do have tax obligations. The Tax and Customs Administration requires you to declare your winnings yourself at a rate of 37.8% on the net monthly win. Unlike legal providers, which automatically withhold the tax, the administrative burden and risk of fines fall on you as an individual user.

The 37.8% rate on net monthly winnings

The calculation of the tax due at illegal or foreign providers differs fundamentally from the practice at licensed casinos. The starting point is the net profit per calendar month, not per session or per year. This means you must offset all winnings and losses within one month before applying the percentage. The fixed rate is 37.8% on this remaining positive balance.

For the player, this means a significant administrative burden. You must keep track yourself of which amounts were deposited, won, and paid out via platforms that do not fall under the Remote Gambling Act. The Kansspelautoriteit does not facilitate these processes for unlicensed providers, making you completely dependent on your own accounting and the casino's transaction statements. If this registration fails, you risk the Tax and Customs Administration viewing the entire payout as taxable income, without deducting any losses.

Filing yourself: procedure and risks

At a provider without a Dutch license, gambling tax is not withheld at source. The responsibility for a correct declaration lies entirely with the player. You must include the winnings achieved in your annual tax return under the category 'other income' or specifically for gambling, depending on the current guidelines of the tax authority.

Failing to file this declaration carries concrete financial risks. If the Tax and Customs Administration discovers that you have not declared your winnings, you can expect heavy fines and back taxes. This is a crucial difference from the situation with legal providers, where the tax authority directly claims from the operator. Additionally, the absence of a Dutch license offers no protection via the Kansspelautoriteit in disputes over payouts, further straining financial security. Keep in mind that if you are unsure about tax payments, you should always consult the official channels of the Tax and Customs Administration to avoid additional assessments.

Difference with licensed Dutch providers

The gap between playing at a licensed provider and a foreign site is greatest in terms of tax settlement and consumer protection. With Dutch license holders, such as Holland Casino or TOTO, the gambling tax is automatically paid to the state by the provider. For the player, the paid-out winnings are 'net'. There is no further tax aftermath.

At foreign casinos, this service is absent. Here, the player must navigate the 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit context by filing independently. This not only involves administration but also the risk of human error. Moreover, these providers fall outside the supervision of the Kansspelautoriteit and the Cruks register, meaning you waive the legal safety nets provided by the Remote Gambling Act. If you choose a foreign provider, you implicitly accept a higher degree of personal responsibility, both fiscally and legally.

Licenses and reliability: MGA, Curaçao, Anjouan and Kahnawake

In the context of the 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit, the focus is on distinguishing between legal and illegal providers. Players who choose platforms without a Dutch license must assess the reliability of the licensor themselves. The Malta Gaming Authority offers the highest certainty here, while jurisdictions such as Anjouan, Costa Rica, and the Kahnawake Gaming Commission vary in their level of consumer protection. It is essential to understand that not all foreign licenses are equivalent in terms of player protection and dispute resolution.

Malta Gaming Authority (MGA): The gold standard?

The Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) is generally considered the most reliable licensor within Europe for players outside the Dutch market. As a regulator, the MGA imposes strict requirements regarding financial solidity and fair play. Providers with an MGA license are required to keep player funds separate from corporate capital, minimizing the risk of bankruptcy for the player. Additionally, the authority guarantees transparent complaint procedures and regular audits of the game software.

For Dutch players who still want to play at a foreign casino, the MGA license forms the safest alternative. Although these providers are not connected to Cruks, the MGA does offer a level of player protection comparable to other European regulators. The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) applies similarly strict standards and is known worldwide as one of the most rigorous watchdogs. However, casinos with a UKGC license primarily target the British market and often block registrations from the Netherlands, making this option practically inaccessible for many Dutch players.

Kahnawake Gaming Commission: A North American alternative

Alongside European license holders, the Kahnawake Gaming Commission (KGC) plays a significant role in the international market. Based in the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake in Canada, this licensor is one of the oldest and most respected authorities outside Europe. The KGC is known for a balanced approach: strict requirements for integrity and fair play, but with a more pragmatic attitude toward operators than some European counterparts.

For players, a KGC license offers a reasonable level of certainty. The commission requires operators to physically host their servers in Kahnawake, providing an extra layer of technical control. Although consumer protection is not always experienced as robust as that of the MGA or UKGC, it is significantly safer than jurisdictions without real oversight. The KGC has an independent complaints body that can assist players in disputes, although legal enforceability for a Dutch player remains limited due to geographical distance and legal complexity. In 2026, we see renewed interest in KGC licenses because they are often more accessible to international players than the stricter European variants.

Curaçao and Anjouan: Risks and limitations

Unlike the MGA, the Curaçao Gaming Authority (CGA) is known for a lower entry threshold and less strict enforcement. The Curaçao eGaming license has historically been very popular due to low costs and quick issuance, but this comes at the expense of player protection. Complaint handling in this jurisdiction is less structured and payout guarantees are harder to enforce. Although reforms have been implemented since 2023 to tighten requirements, the supervision level remains moderate compared to European standards.

Even riskier are licenses from Anjouan and registrations in Costa Rica. A license from Anjouan offers very lenient supervision and minimal protection for the consumer. In Costa Rica, often only a local business registration is required, without specific oversight of gambling. This means there are hardly any mechanisms to protect players against unfair practices or non-payment of winnings. Players at these providers are completely dependent on the integrity of the casino itself, without intervention from an independent regulator.

The disappearance of the UKGC for Dutch players

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) was previously a popular choice due to its high reliability, but the position for Dutch players has changed. Due to strict regulations, UKGC license holders now target exclusively the British market. This means that Dutch players can no longer create accounts at many of these casinos or are rejected during registration.

This aligns seamlessly with the broader trend of the 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit, where access to non-Dutch markets is being restricted. While the MGA still accepts Dutch players, the UKGC opts for a closed market approach. For the player, this means that checking the license terms is essential before attempting to register, to avoid disappointment and potential blocks. Without a valid, accessible license for the Netherlands, the player lacks any form of legal protection in disputes.

Player protection: The absence of Cruks and limits

Foreign casinos operate outside the supervision of the Kansspelautoriteit, meaning they have no access to the Cruks register and have no legal obligation to impose playing or deposit limits. For Dutch players, this means that protective mechanisms such as automatic exclusion in case of problematic gaming behavior are missing. Instead of the strict rules that apply to providers like Holland Casino, TOTO, and BetCity, the responsibility for safe playing lies entirely with the individual user, without intervention from the Dutch legislator.

No connection to the Cruks register

The Central Register Exclusion of Gambling (Cruks) is a tool managed by the Kansspelautoriteit that allows players to exclude themselves from all licensed gambling providers in the Netherlands. With legal Dutch operators, such as Holland Casino, TOTO, and BetCity, a connection to this register is mandatory. Before a player can open an account or deposit money, their identity is checked against the Cruks list. If a player is registered here, access is denied to prevent further harm.

However, foreign casinos have no technical or legal connection to this Dutch system. This concretely means that a player registered in Cruks can still open an account and deposit money with an international provider. Although this may feel like an 'escape' for some players, the safety net provided by the government is thereby voided. The player then operates outside the protective framework that Cruks offers, significantly increasing the risk of worsening gambling problems. Organizations such as Stichting Speel Verstandig warn that circumventing Cruks is not a solution for underlying addictive behavior, but rather a dangerous step that makes professional help necessary.

Absence of mandatory playing and deposit limits

Another fundamental difference between domestic and foreign providers lies in the policy regarding limits. Under the Remote Gambling Act, Dutch casinos are required to actively prompt players to think about their gaming behavior by setting deposit limits and loss limits. Providers like BetCity and TOTO must offer these limits as standard and may not allow higher amounts than set by the player themselves, unless a cooling-off period has passed.

At foreign casinos, this legal obligation is missing. Players can often decide themselves whether they want to set limits at all, and if so, how high they are. This leads to a situation where the restraining factors prescribed by the Kansspelautoriteit are completely absent. Where Holland Casino, for example, mandates reality checks and maximum bets, international platforms can allow much higher bets per spin or round without intervention from a compliance department conforming to Dutch standards. This freedom may seem attractive to experienced players, but offers no protection against impulsive behavior or financial overruns.

Responsible playing: personal responsibility

Because the Kansspelautoriteit has no enforcement authority over foreign entities, the responsibility for responsible playing shifts entirely to the individual user. Dutch players must be vigilant for signs of problematic gambling behavior themselves, as there is no automatic intervention by the casino or the government. Tools that are available at international providers, such as voluntary self-exclusion options or deposit limits, are often implemented less strictly and easier to bypass than their Dutch counterparts.

Players who still choose a foreign platform would be wise to proactively use tools from independent organizations such as Stichting Speel Verstandig. This foundation offers support and advice regardless of where one plays, but cannot intervene in the account settings of a foreign casino. At a foreign casino, consumer protection depends on the licensor (such as the MGA or Curaçao Gaming Authority) and not on Dutch legislation. Without the mandatory frameworks of the Kansspelautoriteit, it is up to the player to show discipline and seek timely help if necessary.

Game offerings and features: Bonus buy, Gates of Olympus and Aviator

In the context of the 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit, the focus is on limiting risky game features that are prohibited in the Netherlands. Foreign providers operate outside these frameworks and therefore offer a significantly wider range of games and features, such as the controversial 'bonus buy' and extensive live casino lobbies from providers like Evolution and Pragmatic Play Live.

Bonus buy: Why is this prohibited in the Netherlands?

The 'bonus buy' is a specific game feature where a player directly purchases access to the bonus round of a video slot, instead of waiting for it through regular spins. This feature is popular at foreign casinos because it shortens playtime and increases volatility, but it is strictly prohibited in the Dutch market. The Kansspelautoriteit considers this feature too risky for player protection, as it lowers the threshold for high bets and can accelerate problematic gaming behavior.

Unlike a welcome bonus, which is financial in nature, bonus buy is viewed as an intrinsic game mechanism that changes the structure of the gambling game. At legal Dutch providers, this option is completely missing, while international platforms do utilize this freedom to make their offerings more attractive to experienced players. The absence of this feature in the Netherlands is a deliberate choice by the regulator to control gaming intensity, even though players sometimes experience this as restrictive.

Gates of Olympus and Sweet Bonanza: The impact of restrictions

Games like Gates of Olympus and Sweet Bonanza are known worldwide, but their availability differs per jurisdiction due to the presence of the bonus buy option. At foreign casinos, players can directly activate the bonus round with these titles, which fundamentally changes the game's dynamic compared to the Dutch version where only the base game is available. These games, developed by Pragmatic Play, illustrate how the same software is presented differently depending on local legislation.

For fans of high volatility, the difference between the Dutch and international versions of Gates of Olympus is significant. In the Netherlands, you must patiently wait for the scatter symbols to trigger the free spins, which can lead to long periods without wins. Abroad, you can bypass this tension by paying directly for the action. Sweet Bonanza follows a similar pattern, where the 'Ante Bet' option in the Netherlands is often restricted or works differently than abroad, where players have more control over their betting strategy.

Mega Moolah: Progressive jackpots without limits

Alongside these slots, progressive jackpots like Mega Moolah are often more widely available abroad, without the strict betting limits that apply in the Netherlands. Although Mega Moolah can also be found with Dutch providers, the maximum bets and potential payouts are often subject to stricter rules to prevent excessive losses. Players who choose foreign sites often do so for unrestricted access to these popular titles in their full, uncensored form.

The appeal of Mega Moolah lies in the life-changing jackpots, which can sometimes be higher abroad because the player pool is larger and not limited to the Dutch market. However, the chance of winning remains statistically small, and the lack of Dutch protection means you have fewer rights in case of technical issues with the jackpot payout.

Live casino and crash games: Aviator and more

The live casino offering forms another important distinction. Providers such as Evolution and Pragmatic Play Live deliver high-quality live dealer experiences that are often more extensive at foreign casinos than in the Netherlands. Evolution is known for its innovative game shows, while Pragmatic Play Live has a strong position in traditional table games. Both providers often offer more variants and higher betting limits at international operators.

A notable category that is completely missing in the Netherlands are crash games like Aviator. With Aviator, the player decides for themselves when to secure their bet before the plane 'crashes', a mechanic that the KSA views as too fast and addictive. These games are standard at foreign operators, where they are often combined with other fast games like Plinko. Although Pragmatic Play Live focuses on dealer interaction, crash games like Aviator fill the niche for fast, algorithmic gaming experiences that have no place in Dutch legislation. Note: the lack of Dutch supervision for these games means that fairness and payouts are entirely dependent on the integrity of the foreign license holder.

Payment methods and financial risks

When analyzing the 2026 enforcement of foreign casinos by the Kansspelautoriteit, it becomes clear that the financial infrastructure forms a crucial stumbling block. Dutch banks block transactions to illegal providers, forcing players to switch to alternatives such as crypto or e-wallets. This shift brings significant payment risks, including delayed payouts and the complete loss of playing funds in case of account blocks by the operator.

Why iDEAL is often unavailable

iDEAL, a Dutch open-banking payment system, is the standard method for legal domestic casinos, but is almost always missing at foreign providers. The reason for this is directly linked to enforcement by De Nederlandsche Bank and the Kansspelautoriteit. Banks are required to refuse transactions to parties without a Dutch license as part of the Payment Ban. This ban is an essential tool in the fight against illegal offerings. it cuts off the supply of money to operators who do not comply with the Remote Gambling Act.

For players, this means that iDEAL cannot be used for deposits at these sites. Attempts to pay anyway are often directly blocked by the bank or lead to inquiries from the financial institution regarding the nature of the transaction. This blockage is not a technical glitch, but a deliberate policy choice to shield the Dutch market from unlicensed providers. The absence of iDEAL thus forces players toward other, often less protected payment options, lowering the threshold for financially risky behavior.

Alternatives: Credit cards, e-wallets and crypto

Because direct bank transfers are blocked, players are looking for alternatives. Visa and Mastercard are still accepted by some foreign casinos, but here too we see increasing reluctance from card issuers due to compliance pressure. A more popular alternative is e-wallets such as PayPal, Skrill, and Neteller. PayPal acts as an intermediate layer here: the player deposits money to the e-wallet and from there to the casino. Although this offers privacy, PayPal is not available at all foreign providers and the platform enforces strict rules for gambling transactions, which can lead to frozen balances if the source of the money is not clear.

Additionally, cryptocurrency and prepaid methods are gaining popularity. Crypto offers anonymity and completely bypasses the banking system, but comes with high volatility and no chargeback options. When choosing a method, it is crucial to look at the reliability of the partner. Reliable foreign casinos work with well-known names, while obscure payment options are a warning signal. Players must realize that using these alternatives moves them further away from the protection that De Nederlandsche Bank offers for regular transactions.

Risks of payouts and account blocks

The greatest financial risk at foreign casinos is not depositing, but withdrawing. Without supervision from the Kansspelautoriteit, the player has no legal recourse if a casino refuses to pay out. Account blocks occur regularly, often under the pretext of 'violation of terms and conditions'. In such a case, the Payment Ban of Dutch banks is not a protection, but an extra obstacle: money still sitting in a blocked casino account is often inaccessible.

When using Visa or Mastercard, a chargeback is sometimes possible, but casinos often show that the player agreed to the rules, causing the bank to reject the claim. With cryptocurrency, recovery is technically impossible. The chance of success is also small with e-wallets like PayPal if the transaction is classified as 'gambling' and the operator shows a valid foreign license. Players therefore bear the full risk. It is therefore essential to only play with providers known for fast payouts, but even then, the absence of Dutch legal protection remains a real danger to playing capital.

About This Article - Editorial Standards

Author: Sarah Weber - Casino Tester & Bonus Analyst Factually reviewed by: Dr. Markus Hoffmann - Senior iGaming Compliance Analyst Last updated: 2026-07-02.

This article on "kansspelautoriteit handhaving buitenlandse casinos 2026" was written by Sarah Weber and factually reviewed by Dr. Markus Hoffmann. Both regularly update the content for changes in regulation, licensing and bonus terms. All references to licences, regulators and statutes link to public sources (the local gambling regulator, the applicable local gambling statute).

About the Author

8+ years reviewing casinos, 200+ personally tested platforms across the EU and globally. Former member of the eCOGRA Player Advocacy Program (2018-2022). Specialty: wagering requirements, withdrawal workflows, customer-support evaluation.

About the Reviewer

12+ years in the iGaming industry, including 5 years as a compliance consultant for licensed operators across multiple regulated markets. PhD in Economic Mathematics. Focus areas: bonus mathematics, wagering analysis, and player-protection systems.

Responsible Gambling

Gambling can be addictive. If you feel you are losing control of your play, please reach out to the relevant problem-gambling helpline or use the national self-exclusion register (the relevant national self-exclusion register). Set personal deposit and loss limits BEFORE you play with real money. Operator pauses and cooldown tools exist to keep play sustainable.

Legal Notice

The information in this article is provided for editorial and comparison purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Players are responsible for compliance with local regulations.