Netherlands Bans Polymarket Over ‘Unlawful Playing Companies’ – Decrypt

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 known as unlawful playing providers within the nation with out a license. It marks the most recent authorized setback for the corporate as regulators worldwide intensify scrutiny of the sector.

In a press release printed Tuesday, the Ksa stated it had ordered Polymarket to right away stop providing providers to Dutch customers. If the corporate fails to conform, it is going to 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. “Some of these firms supply bets that aren’t permitted in our market underneath 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 out a Ksa license has no enterprise in our market. This additionally applies to those new playing platforms.”

Prediction markets all over the world

The enforcement motion comes amid a pointy rise within the recognition of prediction markets globally. Platforms comparable to Polymarket and its major competitor Kalshi have seen explosive development 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 line with 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 broaden 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 can enable authors on the publishing platform to combine dwell knowledge from Polymarket into their newsletters, saying that “journalism is healthier when it’s backed by dwell 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 slightly than wagers. Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour stated final April that the corporate provides “occasion contracts,” not bets, describing the platform as “an open monetary market” the place customers commerce towards one another slightly than towards a bookmaker.

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

Regulatory headwinds

Regardless of these claims, prediction market firms are going through mounting authorized stress. Kalshi is at present 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, buyers 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 is able to not be thought-about uncommon within the Dutch context,” he stated, including that the Netherlands has “a popularity for making use of comparatively strict requirements with regards to licensing necessities and regulatory compliance, together with in rising sectors comparable to crypto and digital property.”

Authorities typically anticipate firms to safe the suitable permissions earlier than providing providers to Dutch customers and to display 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 consider firms 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 strategy.”

From a regulatory standpoint, he added, authorities sometimes give attention to what a product permits customers to do slightly 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 identical time, Scheele famous that some prediction markets could serve informational functions by aggregating dispersed information and signaling expectations about future developments. In concept, such markets may assist decision-making or danger administration past leisure wagering. Nonetheless, underneath present Dutch legislation, the potential informational advantages don’t override licensing necessities if the exercise qualifies as playing.