Netherlands Bans Polymarket Over ‘Illegal Gambling Services’

The Netherlands Playing Authority (Ksa) has imposed a penalty order on Journey One QSS Inc., the operator of prediction market platform Polymarket, for providing what it referred to as unlawful playing companies within the nation with no license. It marks the newest authorized setback for the corporate as regulators worldwide intensify scrutiny of the sector.

In a press release revealed Tuesday, the Ksa stated it had ordered Polymarket to instantly stop providing companies to Dutch customers. If the corporate fails to conform, it will likely be fined €420,000 ($462,000) per week, as much as a most of €840,000 ($924,000).

“Prediction markets are on the rise, together with within the Netherlands,” stated Ella Seijsener, director of licensing and supervision on the Ksa. “All these corporations supply bets that aren’t permitted in our market below any circumstances, not even by license holders.”

Citing the “social dangers” of prediction market choices, “for instance, the potential affect on elections,” Seijsener stated that the platform “constitutes unlawful playing.” She added that, “Anybody with no Ksa license has no enterprise in our market. This additionally applies to those new playing platforms.”

Prediction markets world wide

The enforcement motion comes amid a pointy rise within the recognition of prediction markets globally. Platforms corresponding to Polymarket and its most important competitor Kalshi have seen explosive progress over the previous two years, notably round main political occasions such because the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Mixed month-to-month buying and selling volumes on main platforms exceed $13.5 billion, with greater than 43 million transactions processed, in response to a November 2025 report by Dune and Keyrock.

The controversy surrounding the sector facilities on a core dispute the place prediction market operators insist they aren’t playing platforms, whereas regulators in a number of jurisdictions argue that permitting customers to stake cash on unsure real-world outcomes quantities to betting. As these markets develop into politics, sports activities and macroeconomic occasions, authorities are more and more questioning whether or not they fall inside current playing legal guidelines.



The regulatory headwinds haven’t slowed Polymarket’s business ambitions. On Wednesday, the corporate introduced a partnership with Substack that may enable authors on the publishing platform to combine stay information from Polymarket into their newsletters, saying that “journalism is healthier when it’s backed by stay markets.” It additionally scored a partnership with Main League Soccer on the finish of January, whereas rival Kalshi has struck offers with each CNBC and CNN.

Polymarket didn’t reply to a request to remark.

Polymarket and Kalshi have repeatedly argued that their merchandise are structured as monetary devices moderately than wagers. Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour stated final April that the corporate presents “occasion contracts,” not bets, describing the platform as “an open monetary market” the place customers commerce towards one another moderately than towards a bookmaker.

“If we’re playing, then I believe you’re mainly calling your complete monetary market playing,” he stated on the time.

Regulatory headwinds

Regardless of these claims, prediction market corporations are dealing with mounting authorized strain. Kalshi is presently defending a category motion lawsuit within the Southern District of New York alleging it operates as an “unlawful and unlicensed sports activities e book.” Polymarket and different platforms have encountered authorized or regulatory challenges in U.S. states, the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Australia, Singapore, Portugal, Hungary, Thailand and now the Netherlands, amongst others.

Dozens of lawsuits are ongoing towards prediction markets within the U.S. alone from federal authorities, Native American tribes, traders who’ve misplaced cash and playing regulators.

Jan Scheele, board member on the Blockchain Netherlands Basis, stated the Dutch motion is according to the nation’s historically strict regulatory posture. “This could not be thought-about uncommon within the Dutch context,” he stated, including that the Netherlands has “a status for making use of comparatively strict requirements on the subject of licensing necessities and regulatory compliance, together with in rising sectors corresponding to crypto and digital belongings.”

Authorities typically count on corporations to safe the suitable permissions earlier than providing companies to Dutch customers and to reveal ongoing compliance with client safety and anti-money laundering guidelines, he added.

Dutch regulators are likely to undertake a proactive enforcement stance the place they imagine corporations are working with out authorization or in breach of authorized obligations, Scheele stated. “It displays a regulatory tradition that prioritises client safety and systemic integrity over a extra permissive, innovation-first method.”

From a regulatory standpoint, he added, authorities usually give attention to what a product permits customers to do moderately than how it’s labeled. If customers can stake worth on unsure real-world occasions and obtain a monetary return if they’re appropriate, that may resemble a wager in financial and behavioral phrases, even when the interface resembles a buying and selling platform and transactions are settled through crypto-assets.

On the similar time, Scheele famous that some prediction markets could serve informational functions by aggregating dispersed data and signaling expectations about future developments. In principle, such markets might help decision-making or threat administration past leisure wagering. Nevertheless, below present Dutch regulation, the potential informational advantages don’t override licensing necessities if the exercise qualifies as playing.