Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers: rules & risks

There are no Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers targeting the Dutch market. Every operator needs a license from the Kansspelautoriteit, wherever they are established. Players at illegal sites must file their own gambling tax returns and miss out on protection via Cruks and the duty of care.

The scope of the Koa Act for foreign parties

Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers do not exist. Every party targeting the Dutch consumer falls under the Remote Gambling Act. Whether a provider is located in Malta, Curaçao or elsewhere, a valid license from the Kansspelautoriteit is the only legal access. Without this license, a platform operates illegally, even if it has foreign certifications.

The "targeting" criterion is decisive here. Does a foreign party use Dutch, offer iDEAL, or tailor marketing campaigns to Dutch residents? Then this falls directly under the jurisdiction of the Remote Gambling Act. The Kansspelautoriteit strictly enforces these rules. Activities without a Dutch license are considered illegal.

The Ministry of Justice and Security deliberately chose this broad scope. Consumers must be protected against unreliable parties and money laundering must be prevented. By focusing on targeting the market, providers cannot evade Dutch legislation through legal structures abroad. With illegal providers, the player enjoys no legal protection. This entails risks for payouts and data security.

Legal basis and EU law

Often, the EU principle of the free provision of services is cited. However, the Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that member states may impose restrictions to protect public policy and consumers. In the Netherlands, this translates into a closed system. Only licensed parties are allowed to operate. Providers without this specific Dutch authorization are classified as illegal providers, even if they are legal in their home country. The Council of State confirmed in various proceedings that this national prohibition is proportional. It is necessary to combat gambling addiction and crime.

A license from the Malta Gaming Authority does not grant access to the Dutch market. These foreign licenses do not offer an exemption from Dutch regulations. Every provider must possess a separate license granted by the Kansspelautoriteit to be legally active.

The role of the cooling-off period when entering the market

The cooling-off period was a temporary measure for providers that were already active before the law came into effect. To qualify for a license, these parties had to refrain from targeting Dutch consumers for at least two and a half years. This period served as a punitive measure for prior illegal operations. It was not an exemption, but a condition for the reliability assessment.

During this cooling-off period, providers were not allowed to use their built-up customer base for the new, licensed entity. They had to build up a new database in accordance with the strict requirements of the Remote Gambling Act. The Council of State played an important role in ensuring the legal validity of this transitional arrangement. The useful effect of the previously built-up customer base had to be neutralized. For new entrants after the market opening, this historical context is less relevant, but it does illustrate the regulator's strict attitude towards parties that previously ignored the law.

Tax consequences: gambling tax at foreign casinos

Players who win at foreign providers without a Dutch license are themselves responsible for paying gambling tax. With legal market parties, the provider deducts the tax. Here, the player must file a monthly tax return with the Tax Administration. The Gambling Tax Act does not provide for an automatic exemption for these online activities. Every positive outcome is taxable. This tax obligation applies regardless of the casino's place of establishment within the EU.

Filing a tax return yourself using form KSB-1

Are you playing at a provider that does not fall under Dutch legislation? Then the administrative burden shifts to you as the consumer. The Tax Administration requires you to bundle and report your winnings. This process takes place via form KSB-1, a specific document for gambling tax declarations by individuals. You must submit this form within one month after the end of the calendar month in which the prize was paid out.

The calculation basis differs from what many players expect. The tax authorities do not look at your net profit (winnings minus stake), but at the total amount of the prize. This means that the gambling tax can end up higher than your actual financial gain. The staked amount is not deducted from the taxable sum. For foreign providers, they have no access to the Dutch systems to automatically deduct and pay this tax. Hence the individual obligation to declare. Failure to submit form KSB-1 on time can lead to fines and additional tax assessments by the Tax Administration.

This strict enforcement stems from the choice of the legislator. The tax burden lies not directly on illegal or unlicensed foreign entities, but on the participant. As a result, the Gambling Tax Act also remains effective for cross-border services. Players must be aware that every payout, no matter how small, is potentially subject to declaration when it comes from a party without a Ksa license.

Does the exemption of 449 euros lapse on foreign sites?

Although Article 1, paragraph 3 of the Gambling Tax Act provides for an exemption, its scope is limited. This exemption of 449 euros per game applies exclusively to domestic lotteries, bingo, and similar games where the prize is paid out in cash or in kind. For online casinos, sports betting, and other digital games of chance, this threshold value does not apply.

Concretely, this means that a win of, for example, 50 euros on an online slot at a foreign provider is fully taxed with gambling tax. There is no minimum amount under which you are exempt from filing a return for these forms of gambling. Whether the provider is established in Malta, Curaçao, or elsewhere, the nature of the game (online casino versus lottery) determines the tax treatment, not the amount of the prize. With legal Dutch providers such as Holland Casino or the Staatsloterij, these rules are applied differently or handled by the provider. At foreign providers, the full responsibility rests with the player to know that the exemption does not apply.

The rate calculated over the entire positive balance currently stands at 29.5 percent. Because the exemption does not apply, you therefore pay tax on the very first euro of profit. This makes playing at unlicensed sites fiscally significantly less attractive than is often assumed. The Tax Administration is checking these entries increasingly often, especially now that data exchange between international agencies is improving.

European jurisprudence and double taxation

Many players wonder if EU rules offer protection against double taxation. The European Commission monitors compliance with internal market policy but recognizes that member states have sovereign rights in the areas of tax policy and public order. The Court of Justice of the European Union has repeatedly ruled that restrictions on the free movement of services can be justified to protect consumers and combat crime. This means that a license from another EU country does not grant an automatic right of access to the Dutch market without compliance with the KOA Act.

Regarding double taxation: there are few to no treaties that specifically regulate gambling tax for individual players between the Netherlands and popular gambling jurisdictions. If a foreign provider also levies tax in its own country, you generally cannot offset these costs against the Dutch tax assessment. The European Commission does not facilitate a standard mechanism for the refund of gambling tax to individual consumers in this context. Players are therefore often left with a double burden, while the Dutch tax authorities maintain their claim based on the winner's place of residence.

Jurisprudence emphasizes that the absence of a Dutch license often renders the agreement null and void. Recovery of losses is made more difficult, but the tax liability on winnings remains. The Court of Justice of the European Union supports this national enforcement policy as long as it is applied proportionally and in a non-discriminatory manner. For the player, this means there is no legal 'escape route' via European law to evade tax obligations at foreign providers. If in doubt about complex situations, always consult a tax specialist.

Enforcement and blocking of illegal market parties

Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers do not legally exist. Every operator targeting the Dutch market without a license is considered illegal. The Kansspelautoriteit actively enforces these rules. This is done through fines, DNS blocks, and cooperation with payment providers to stop transactions. Players at unlicensed parties run risks of fraud and miss out on protection through Cruks. Providers are barred through amended terms of use of banks and supervision by the Authority for the Financial Markets.

How does the Kansspelautoriteit enforce the KOA Act?

The Kansspelautoriteit is the national regulator that enforces the Remote Gambling Act against illegal operators. A crucial instrument in this regard is Domain Name System blocking. This technical measure ensures that domain names of illegal casinos become inaccessible to internet users in the Netherlands. Access to the offer is thus cut off. In addition, the authority is expanding its capacity. Employees are allowed to participate as players to find information about illegal providers and their payment service providers.

In addition to technical blockades, the regulator imposes administrative fines for violations. Think of offering games of chance without a license or ignoring addiction prevention. Illegal online providers that specifically target the Dutch market or allow minors to play are tackled with priority. Regulation creates a safer gambling offering. The remaining illegal offer can be combated in a more targeted manner because a part of the market is now served by license holders.

Cooperation with banks and payment providers

Payment service providers play a key role in isolating illegal providers. Based on binding instructions from the Kansspelautoriteit, banks and providers such as iDEAL must cease their services to these parties. This is facilitated by amended Payment Services Terms of Use, which explicitly prohibit facilitating transactions to unlicensed casinos. The Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) monitors compliance with these financial rules by the banking sector. In this way, payment flows are effectively cut off.

The Advertising Code Committee also contributes to enforcement by keeping advertisements of illegal providers out of the media. Media companies and advertising service providers also receive binding instructions to end cooperation with illegal parties. Without access to Dutch payment systems and advertising channels, it becomes virtually impossible for foreign providers to operate profitably on the black market.

Criminal prosecution and administrative fines

When administrative enforcement is insufficient, the government switches to criminal law measures. The Public Prosecution Service is responsible for the criminal prosecution of large-scale illegal exploitation of games of chance. In doing so, justice works closely with the Fiscal Information and Investigation Service (FIOD). The FIOD investigates financial flows and possible money laundering practices. Illegal gambling is often accompanied by criminal activities such as money laundering.

The new legislation obliges license holders to strictly monitor identity and payment behavior. This makes money laundering more difficult. With illegal providers, this control database and connection to Cruks are lacking. Players cannot appeal to a duty of care or recourse in case of fraud. The combination of administrative fines by the Kansspelautoriteit and criminal action by the Public Prosecution Service and FIOD forms a closed enforcement chain against Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers that do not exist in reality.

Risks for the player at unlicensed providers

When looking for Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers, it is important to understand that no legal exemption exists for players who choose a site without a Dutch license. Although the provider operates illegally, the player himself bears the full financial and legal risks. These illegal providers fall outside the supervision of the Kansspelautoriteit. Essential protection mechanisms such as the duty of care and connection to Cruks are missing. As a result, players face increased risks of addiction, fraud, and complex tax assessments. The regulatory safeguards of the Remote Gambling Act do not apply.

No access to Cruks and self-exclusion

One of the most critical shortcomings at unlicensed casinos is the lack of connection to Cruks (Central Register for Exclusion from Games of Chance). Legal license holders are legally required to consult this register before admitting a player. People with a gambling problem are thus effectively blocked. Foreign providers without a Dutch license do not have access to this database. They therefore do not check whether a player has self-excluded. This directly undermines the duty of care that is central to addiction prevention in the Netherlands.

The Dutch Institute for Preventive Addiction Care has been warning for years about the dangers of unregulated offerings. Players can easily slide into riskier behavior without intervention from a helpful agency. Without the mandatory duty of care, monitoring of gaming behavior is also missing. Legal providers must signal and report suspicious patterns. Illegal providers have no incentive to do so. The Consumers' Association emphasizes that players at these parties are completely on their own if there is problematic gambling behavior. No Dutch complaints desk or disputes committee intervenes.

Risk of money laundering and fraud

Illegal platforms operate outside the scope of the Wwft (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Prevention Act). Strict identification and verification procedures, as required for legal providers, are often omitted or are merely a sham. This makes these sites attractive to criminals who want to launder money via fake accounts or collude with each other. For the honest player, this creates an unsafe environment where money laundering and fraud go hand in hand with a lack of transparency.

The Wwft obliges legal providers to monitor all transactions and report suspicious activities to the authorities. This forms an important barrier against criminal abuse of the customer base. With illegal providers, this control database is missing. Player data and financial flows are unprotected. The risk of personal data being misused or payouts being refused under false pretenses of 'fraud prevention' is significantly higher. There is no regulator monitoring the integrity of the platform.

Is gambling at foreign sites illegal for the player?

Although playing itself is not made a criminal offense for the consumer, it does entail serious legal and financial consequences. The legislation primarily targets the provider, but the player falls through the safety net. For example, in the event of a win on a foreign site, the full obligation to declare gambling tax rests on the player. Legal providers deduct and pay this automatically.

The Consumers' Association points out that in the event of conflicts with illegal providers, players cannot appeal to Dutch consumer law. Recovery of money is virtually impossible. In addition, ignoring the obligation to declare can lead to high fines from the Tax Administration. The latter uses international treaties to trace undeclared income. In short, although there is no threat of imprisonment, the financial and legal position of the player at unlicensed sites is extremely vulnerable.

Bonus terms and promotions: a pitfall with illegal providers

In addition to the direct tax and safety risks, bonus terms form an often underestimated danger with foreign providers without a Dutch license. Legal providers in the Netherlands are bound by strict rules regarding advertising and bonuses. For example, encouraging excessive gambling behavior is prohibited. Foreign providers often use aggressive bonus structures with high wagering requirements (turnover requirements) that are hardly achievable in practice.

At legal providers, bonus terms must be clear, comprehensible, and not misleading, in accordance with the Advertising Code for Games of Chance. At illegal sites, this review is missing. Players often accept bonuses without reading the fine print. Afterwards, it turns out that payouts are blocked because the wagering requirements have not been met. Because these providers operate outside the Dutch legal system, there is no possibility whatsoever to object to an independent disputes committee. The player is on their own against a party that does not have to render any account to the Kansspelautoriteit.

In addition, bonuses can be used to lure players to riskier games or to bypass betting limits. Legal providers must apply betting limits that match the player's risk profile. Illegal providers could not care less about this. Through bonuses, they can induce players to make bets far beyond their financial means. This increases the risk of problematic gambling behavior, all the more so because the connection with Cruks is missing.

Safe alternative: choosing licensed providers

There are no Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers targeting the Dutch market. Every operator must possess a license from the Kansspelautoriteit to operate legally, regardless of origin. Players who choose unlicensed sites run significant tax and safety risks. Legal parties offer strict consumer protection.

Identifying legal providers in the Netherlands

Distinguishing between legal and illegal platforms is crucial for your safety. Only providers with an explicit license from the Dutch Gaming Authority (Ksa) are allowed to offer online games of chance. Well-known brands such as Holland Casino and Toto have obtained this license. They operate fully within the framework of the Koa Act. These parties are mandatory members of the Central Register for Exclusion from Games of Chance (Cruks). This protects players from addiction.

The Staatsloterij also falls under this strict supervision. It offers a safe, regulated alternative to traditional lottery games. When visiting a website, you can check whether a provider is legal. Look for the "Vergunninghouder Kansspelautoriteit" logo. Although illegal sites sometimes use this logo fraudulently, the official register of the Ksa offers definitive certainty. International names like Unibet and Bet365 have also acquired their Dutch licenses. They meet the local requirements for identity verification and transaction registration.

Difference from Malta and Curacao licenses

Many players wonder why licenses from other jurisdictions are not sufficient. A license from the Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) or Curacao eGaming does not grant access to the Dutch market. It does not comply with the Koa Act. Providers that only hold an MGA or Curacao license fall outside Dutch supervision. They do not have to adhere to the strict rules for addiction prevention.

From a compliance perspective, this means that players at these foreign providers are themselves responsible for declaring gambling tax. This often happens via form KSB-1. Legal Dutch providers automatically deduct the tax. This prevents administrative burdens. The absence of a Dutch license at MGA or Curacao casinos also implies that they are not connected to Cruks. Essential protection mechanisms are missing.

Where can you find the overview of legal casinos?

For an up-to-date and reliable overview, we refer you to the website of the Kansspelautoriteit. Here you will find the list of all licensed providers that are allowed to be legally active in the Netherlands. By playing exclusively with these registered parties, such as Holland Casino, Toto, or the Staatsloterij, you guarantee yourself fair play and legal protection.

Always check whether the provider carries the Ksa logo and verify this in the public register. Remember that Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers do not exist. Every site without a Dutch license operates illegally and carries high risks. Consciously choose safety by only playing with providers that are under direct supervision of the Dutch authorities.

About this article - Editorial guidelines

Author: Sarah Weber - Casino Tester & Bonus Analyst

Fact-checked by: Dr. Markus Hoffmann - Senior iGaming Compliance Analyst

Last updated: 2026-08-26.

This article about "Koa Act exceptions for foreign providers" was written by Sarah Weber and fact-checked by Dr. Markus Hoffmann. Both regularly adapt the content in the event of changes in regulations, licenses, and bonus terms. All references to licenses, regulators, and laws link to public sources (the local gambling regulator, the applicable local gambling law).

About the author

8+ years of experience reviewing casinos, 200+ personally tested platforms in the EU and worldwide. Former member of the eCOGRA Player Advocacy Program (2018-2022). Specialization: wagering requirements, payout processes, and customer service evaluation.

About the reviewer

More than 12 years of experience in the iGaming industry, of which 5 years as a compliance consultant for licensed providers in multiple regulated markets. PhD in economic mathematics. Focus areas: bonus mathematics, bet analyses, and player protection systems.

Responsible gambling

Gambling can be addictive. If you feel you are losing control of your gaming, please contact the relevant 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. Breaks and cooling-off tools from the provider are there to keep gaming responsible.

Legal notice

The information in this article is intended solely for editorial and comparison purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Players are themselves responsible for complying with local regulations.