The Dutch trade organization VNLOK, along with other industry stakeholders, has petitioned the government to reassess its current gambling tax policy, following a reported €43.5 million decrease in tax revenue from the sector in 2025. This call to action, detailed in a joint letter with the trade body VAN, the Netherlands Lottery, and Holland Casino, highlights the consequences of recent tax hikes, which have led to casino closures and a rise in illegal gambling activities. The industry groups are urging for a tax policy review to be presented to parliament by the second quarter of the year, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of the balance between tax burdens, illegal market activity, player safety, and fiscal contributions.
The phased increase in gambling taxes in the Netherlands began in January 2025, introducing a rate of 34.2% on gross gaming revenue (GGR). Subsequent data from VNLOK indicated that the total GGR for the first half of 2025 had decreased by 25% compared to the previous year. A further tax increase took effect this January, raising the rate to 37.8% of GGR, positioning it among the steepest in Europe. The VNLOK letter warns that these tax hikes are inadvertently pushing players towards unregulated gambling platforms to avoid the financial and logistical burdens imposed by legal operators.
The correspondence underscores the negative repercussions of the tax increases on player protection measures, the proliferation of illegal gambling, and the financial support for sports and charitable organizations. This issue is slated for discussion shortly, with the government’s tax committee meeting on March 12. Additionally, data from the Dutch gaming authority, Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), revealed that in the first half of 2025, unlicensed gambling sites generated higher GGR than their licensed counterparts.
The Netherlands recently formed a new coalition government, comprising the centrist D66 Party, the conservative Christian Democrats, and the right-wing VVD Party. In its coalition agreement, the administration has committed to a stringent approach towards gambling, including a complete ban on gambling advertisements in the market. This position was articulated in February, stating intentions to enhance the regulatory obligations of online gambling providers, intensify efforts against illegal gambling sites, and explore the possibility of limiting online gambling licenses.
This hardline approach comes as the country grapples with balancing effective regulation and maintaining a competitive legal gambling environment. The government’s stance aims to protect consumers but also poses challenges for legal operators who face increased operational costs and competition from the unregulated market.
As debates continue, operators are concerned about the sustainability of the current regulatory and tax framework. The high taxation levels may deter new entrants from the market and could prompt existing operators to reconsider their investments in the Netherlands. The industry argues that a more balanced tax regime could help to reduce the allure of the black market by making legal gambling options more attractive and accessible to players.
Regulatory experts caution that while increased taxes aim to generate higher fiscal returns and curb gambling’s social costs, they have to be carefully calibrated to avoid unintended consequences, such as driving consumers towards unregulated platforms, which lack the consumer protections found in the legal market. As such, a review of the tax policy could align the government’s fiscal objectives with market realities, ensuring that the licensed sector remains viable and able to contribute to the economy and public welfare.
In the coming months, the focus will be on how the Dutch government responds to these industry concerns, particularly as it prepares for the parliamentary review. The outcome will significantly impact the operational landscape for both domestic and international gambling operators in the Netherlands. The industry is closely monitoring any legislative or regulatory changes that may arise from these discussions, with anticipation of a possible policy shift aimed at stabilizing the market and enhancing compliance.
4.2/5
