Europe’s Next Gambling Enforcement Model? Netherlands Targets the Infrastructure Behind Illegal Casinos

The Netherlands could soon change the way Europe tackles illegal online gambling.

On September 29, 2026, the Dutch House of Representatives approved several gambling measures. These include stronger player protection and a more technical approach to offshore casinos. Parliament supported raising the minimum gambling age to 21 for the riskiest products, creating a central list of illegal online gambling operators, and starting a pilot to disrupt the digital infrastructure behind unauthorized gambling businesses.

Lawmakers also rejected a proposal to ban gambling advertising entirely. This matters because, instead of adding more restrictions to the legal market, Dutch lawmakers are showing interest in targeting the systems that let illegal operators reach Dutch players.
This could make the Netherlands an important example for regulators in 2027.

Netherlands Backs Conditional 21+ Gambling Age

One key vote concerned the minimum gambling age.
The House approved a motion from MPs Diederik van Dijk and Mirjam Bikker calling for the minimum age for the highest-risk gambling products to rise to 21 once specific conditions are met.
The motion passed with 96 votes in favor.

However, the Netherlands has not yet raised the legal gambling age to 21.
The motion asks the government to establish clear and measurable objectives for tackling illegal gambling and preventing players from migrating toward the unregulated market. Once those conditions have been met, the government is asked to proceed with raising the minimum age for the riskiest gambling products.
This condition is important.

Dutch policymakers are concerned that if 18-to-20-year-olds are excluded from regulated products without enough control over illegal options, some may turn to offshore gambling sites.
In short, player protection and keeping players in the legal market are becoming more closely linked.

The Bigger Story: Attacking Illegal Gambling Infrastructure

Even more important for other countries is the decision to approve a pilot program that targets the infrastructure behind illegal online gambling.
The motion calls on the government to work with the Kansspelautoriteit [Dutch Gambling Authority], public prosecutors and police to disrupt the digital systems that enable illegal gambling operators to function.

It specifically identifies payment flows, online platforms, hosting companies and other facilitating parties. The motion also refers to wider infrastructure including cryptocurrencies and gaming platforms used by cross-border gambling networks.
This shows a new way of thinking about enforcement.

Traditionally, gambling enforcement focuses on the operator. Regulators find an illegal casino, tell it to leave the market, and may impose fines.
This approach is much harder when the company is based in another country, ignores orders, or changes its websites and domains.
Enforcing rules on infrastructure raises a different question:
What if regulators focus on the services that let an illegal casino operate, instead of only targeting the casino itself?
Payments could be stopped. Hosting services could be pressured. Advertising could be removed. Domains could be blocked. Online platforms might have to act if they keep promoting illegal gambling.
The Netherlands now seems interested in trying out parts of this approach.

A Central List of Illegal Gambling Operators

Parliament also approved a motion calling for a central public list of illegal online gambling operators.
The proposal says this list could help enforcement and let consumers check if an operator is legal in the Netherlands. More importantly, it could give payment providers, search engines, social media platforms, hosting companies, and others a shared reference point.
This could make a regulator’s decision that an operator is illegal easier to act on.
Instead of each company deciding on its own which gambling businesses to restrict, a central system could help coordinate action across the digital ecosystem.
It is still unclear how this system would work in practice.

Online Platforms Could Face Penalties

Another adopted motion targets illegal gambling advertising.
Lawmakers supported a proposal to change the Gambling Act so that an online platform that keeps showing illegal gambling ads after being asked to remove them could be committing an offense.

Under the proposal, the Kansspelautoriteit could ultimately impose an administrative fine or an order subject to penalty payments.
The motion notes that the Dutch regulator sends thousands of removal requests to Meta each month, but says the current system has not led to lasting results.
This issue is bigger than just advertising.
If this becomes law, some enforcement responsibility would move from gambling companies to the digital platforms that illegal operators use to find customers.

DNS Blocking Could Become Part of Player Protection

Parliament also backed a proposal connected to DNS blocking.
The Dutch government is considering a legal power that could make foreign illegal gambling sites inaccessible through DNS blocking. The adopted motion asks the government to examine how that authority should work and proposes that users who encounter a blocked gambling site receive information about gambling risks and be directed to Cruks [the Netherlands’ national gambling self-exclusion register] and appropriate support services.
This approach combines enforcement with harm prevention.

Instead of just blocking a domain, authorities could use this moment to explain why the site is restricted and guide players to safer, regulated options.

Parliament Rejects Total Gambling Advertising Ban

The September votes were not uniformly restrictive.
A proposal calling for a complete prohibition on advertising for all gambling products, both online and offline, was rejected.
The motion received 64 votes in favor, below the 75 required for passage.
This difference is important.
The Netherlands already operates under extensive gambling advertising restrictions, but Parliament did not support eliminating gambling advertising altogether in this vote.

The new policy direction is more complex than just adding more bans on the regulated industry.
Lawmakers chose stronger actions against illegal operators and their infrastructure, but did not support a total advertising ban.

Prediction Markets and Crypto Proposals Also Rejected

Two additional votes reveal where Parliament was less willing to move.
Parliament rejected a proposal asking the government to investigate whether and how prediction markets could be regulated. Parliament also rejected a proposal seeking a gambling-style duty of care for cryptocurrency service providers.

The vote on prediction markets is notable because platforms based on event contracts are raising international questions about whether they should be regulated as financial products, gambling, or under a different system.
For now, the Dutch House has declined this particular proposal to explore a dedicated regulatory approach.

Could Infrastructure Disruption Become Europe’s 2027 Gambling Trend?

The biggest change in the Dutch votes may be the move from focusing on operators to focusing on the whole ecosystem.
An offshore casino depends on far more than a website.
Offshore casinos may need payment processors, hosting providers, domain services, advertising channels, social media accounts, search visibility, cryptocurrency services, and other intermediaries to reach and make money from players.
This setup gives authorities several possible points to enforce the rules.

The Dutch infrastructure pilot explicitly recognizes this interconnected structure. It asks authorities to look beyond administrative action by the gambling regulator and, where criminal offenses are involved, consider cooperation with prosecutors and police.
If the pilot works, it could matter beyond the Netherlands too.

European regulators have spent years confronting the same fundamental problem: an online operator can serve consumers in one country while its company, servers, payments and supporting infrastructure are distributed across several others.
The Dutch approach suggests regulators may try harder to break these connections, instead of just fining operators.

The Channelization Problem Behind the 21+ Debate

A key challenge in the proposal.
Raising the minimum age could lower high-risk gambling among young adults in the regulated market. But lawmakers want to link this change to progress in fighting illegal gambling and stopping players from moving to offshore sites.
This makes the Netherlands a kind of policy experiment.

If the age increase happens, regulators can see if keeping younger adults out of high-risk products reduces harm without pushing more people to unlicensed operators.
But if more people move to illegal sites, it would show a main problem for strict European gambling markets: consumer protection only works for players who stay in the regulated system.

What Happens Next?

These parliamentary votes do not mean Dutch gambling law has changed right away.
The September 29 decisions are motions that set political direction and ask the government to act. The minimum age is not yet 21, and the infrastructure pilot does not give Dutch authorities unlimited power to close foreign casinos.
How these changes are implemented will show how important they really are.

Still, these votes give a good idea of where Dutch gambling policy might go in 2027.
The new model combines stronger protection for vulnerable players, central identification of illegal operators, DNS blocking, pressure on online advertising platforms, and disruption of payments, hosting, and other infrastructure.
This approach could have a bigger impact than just giving out more fines.
The bigger question for 2027 is whether the Netherlands can demonstrate that regulators do not necessarily have to reach an offshore casino directly to disrupt its business.

They may instead target the digital ecosystem that allows it to operate.

Our Featured Casino Partners

Also in Diva Jackpot News