Crypto Betting in the Netherlands After the 2026 Tax Change

On 1 January 2026, the Dutch gambling tax reached 37.8% GGR, meaning 37.8% of gross gaming revenue. Add the 1.95% KSA levy and the burden sits close to 40%, among the highest anywhere for a regulated market.

The interesting part is not the rate. It is that the increase produced almost none of the revenue it was designed to raise, and it created a tax obligation most Dutch crypto bettors do not know they have.

Four Consequences Worth Understanding

The rise came in two steps: 30.5% in 2024, then 34.2% on 1 January 2025, then 37.8% a year later.

The Money Did Not Arrive

The Ministry of Finance and the KSA projected additional revenue of €108 million in 2025 and €216 million in 2026.

Actual figures came in at roughly €2 million for 2025, with about €57 million projected for 2026. KSA research confirmed that estimated gambling tax revenue for 2025 ended up lower than 2024, not higher.

A trade body called the increase ineffective, inefficient and counterproductive on both budgetary and policy grounds. The numbers make that a description, not a complaint.

Most Players Are Legal, Most Money Is Not

This is the finding that explains everything else, and it depends entirely on which figure you read.

• Player-based channelisation holds near 91%. Roughly nine in ten Dutch people who gamble online use only licensed sites, and that rate has been stable for years.

• Revenue-based channelisation tells a different story. It was 58% in the first half of 2024, fell to 50% in the second half, and by 2026 sits around 53%, meaning more gambling money now flows to illegal operators than to licensed ones.

Both numbers are true, and they describe different people. The KSA's own explanation is that higher-value players moved offshore to avoid deposit interventions, taking a disproportionate share of the money with them while leaving the headcount broadly intact.

The Licensed Product Got Thinner

Predictable and visible in the figures.

Licensed market revenue was €600 million in the first half of 2025 and €602 million in the second, putting the second half roughly 18% below 2024.

An operator paying close to 40% of gross revenue in tax and levies has less margin for bonuses, promotions and generous terms. That is the mechanism by which a tax decision reaches a player as a smaller welcome offer, and it is not a coincidence that the squeeze coincided with players leaving.

The Obligation Almost Nobody Mentions

The most important thing in this article for anyone betting with crypto, and it is a personal financial matter, not an industry one.

• Winnings from a KSA-licensed operator are not taxed for the player. The operator pays; you do not.

• Winnings from a foreign or unlicensed operator flip to a self-declaration obligation. The player must report and pay the 37.8% themselves.

So the tax does not disappear when a Dutch player goes offshore. It moves from the operator's books to the player's.

Anyone who has assumed offshore winnings are untaxed because licensed winnings are untaxed has assumed something specific and wrong, and this is a question for a Dutch tax professional, not a betting article.

Platforms Dutch Players Use, and the Caveat Attached

Because licensed operators cannot accept cryptocurrency, betting with crypto from the Netherlands means an unlicensed site. Ordered by what each offers against that backdrop.

1. Dexsport is non-custodial, so settled funds return to a wallet you hold and no operator sits on your balance between sessions. It publishes over 100 markets on major matches with event-tiered limits and a $1 minimum. The caveat applies here as everywhere: the self-declaration obligation above attaches to the winnings, not to the quality of the platform, so a well-run offshore operator does not change your position with the tax authority. Anjouan licence, lighter than Curacao or Malta.

2. Cloudbet has traded since 2013 with its company named on a Curacao licence, and higher limits suit the player profile the Dutch deposit interventions pushed offshore.

3. Stake holds market-specific licences in several jurisdictions alongside its offshore position, with custodial balances and a large sportsbook.

4. BC.Game operates under reformed Curacao licensing with named beneficial owners and wide coin support at the cashier.

5. Vave covers the main markets with thinner published documentation than the platforms above.

Platforms tested on odds and fees differ considerably, and comparison matters more when no domestic regulator stands behind either party.

Where This Leaves a Dutch Bettor

The tax change made the licensed product less generous without reducing the amount Dutch people gamble. That is the policy outcome the figures describe, and it is why the offshore question is live in the Netherlands in a way it was not five years ago.

For an individual, the decision now involves a variable it did not used to:

• Licensed play carries protections and no personal tax obligation

• Offshore play carries neither

Comparing prices across books is worth doing either way, and it is a smaller factor than the two above.

Confirm what is legal where you live, keep stakes within a set budget, and play only if you are of legal age, since KYC or AML checks may apply.

Responsible gambling deserves particular attention here, because the players the data shows moving offshore are precisely the higher-value ones who were encountering deposit interventions, and an intervention avoided is not an intervention that was unnecessary.

Disclaimer: The information here is provided for general purposes only and is not legal, tax, investment, or financial advice. Tax treatment depends on individual circumstances and on current Dutch law, and self-declaration obligations should be confirmed with a qualified tax professional. Rates and rules change. Betting carries risk, and rules vary by country, so check the law where you live. Please gamble responsibly, within your means, and only if you are of legal age.