Whilst there are requirements as to the type of payment methods which can be used, particularly that no anonymous methods are permitted, there are no mandatory methods. For example, whilst iDEAL was seen as an indication that an offer was targeted at the Netherlands under the prioritisation criteria, in the context of enforcement prior to the introduction of the remote gambling licensing regime, licence holders are not obliged to used iDEAL. Payment service providers who process payments from Dutch players on behalf of remote gambling operators unlawfully present on the Dutch market currently do so in breach of Article 1(1)(b) BGA. Prior to amendments entering into force in April 2021 this was not the case. As part of the registration process players must nominate a so-called “contra account”; all withdrawals from the player’s player account held with that operator must be made to this account. The operator must verify that this account is held in the name of the player. Deposits can be made from other payment instruments, once the initial deposit has been made from the contra account. All payment instruments must be unambiguously traceable to the player as an individual person, and must be provided by either a credit institution or payment services provider licensed in the EU/EEA.
Netherlands · Question 06 of 11
Netherlands Gambling — Payments and banking: Can we move player money?
Mixed · Probable · Expert approved · 3 post-review updates · Not reviewed · In expert review scope · Back to full Netherlands report →
Key section parameters
| Jurisdiction | Netherlands (NL) |
|---|---|
| Regulator | KSA |
| Favourability | Mixed |
| Confidence | Probable |
| Review status | Expert approved · 3 post-review updates · Not reviewed · In expert review scope |
| Last collected | 4 Nov 2026 |
Summary answer
Whilst there are requirements as to the type of payment methods which can be used, particularly that no anonymous methods are permitted, there are no mandatory methods. For example, whilst iDEAL was seen as an indication that an offer was targeted at the Netherlands under the prioritisation criteria…
Not reviewed Read update
Two related Ksa developments define the payments picture. First, the regulator published new guidance clarifying the requirements for verifying players' bank accounts and other payment methods at registration, issued after an investigation found that some operators' existing checks were not always adequate. Second, the Ksa addressed licensee 711 B.V. over a playthrough condition that required some players to wager deposited funds before being permitted to withdraw them, a structure lawful only under bonus-wagering terms and not as a general withdrawal restriction; 711 took remedial action. Together these developments tighten the compliance standard across both ends of the payments chain that a Dutch-licensed operator must manage: verification of funds coming in at registration, and the lawful handling of conditions attached to funds going back out at withdrawal.
Not reviewed Read update
Under the Beleidsregels vergunningverlening kansspelen op afstand 2026, applicants for remote-gambling licence renewal must establish an exit plan that provides for the payout of player funds via a Dutch Third Party Funds Foundation should the operator's licence lapse or be revoked. This mandatory player-fund payout mechanism is a new addition to the payments-and-money-flow obligations attaching to licence renewal, ensuring an independent, jurisdictionally-anchored route for returning player balances in the event of licence discontinuation, and forms part of the broader renewal-cycle compliance package alongside the AML risk-analysis requirement.
Not reviewed Read update
KSA enforcement pressure is now extending to payment service providers that enable access to illegal gambling operators, alongside hosting companies and social-media platforms, as part of a coordinated crackdown on offshore operators soliciting Dutch players. This represents a material development for payments exposure this cycle: Netherlands-based payment processors handling transactions connected to unlicensed operators face increased regulatory attention, though the underlying finding rests on a single tier-four source carrying uncertain confidence and no distinct new payments-specific instrument was confirmed.