The Kansspelautoriteit, the gaming authority covering the Netherlands, has issued further fines for offering games of chance to consumers within the country.

Stressing that “online gambling is currently prohibited,” Royal Panda and LeoVegas are the two organisations to have fallen foul of the KSA, and were subsequently handed fines of €400,000 and €350,000 respectively.

This follows research undertaken the authority during the second half of last year and the early stages of 2019, which it states showed that both Royal Panda and LeoVegas “despite this prohibition, still focused on the Netherlands with their offer”.

Providing examples of actions that constituted the receival of the two penalty fees, the KSA firstly emphasised that the websites of both companies were accessible with a Dutch IP address.

Furthermore, it was also possible on both sites to pay with the Dutch iDEAL payment method, with it also stressed that numerous games of chance were offered on the sites of the companies, including casino titles, virtual slot machines and sports betting.

These are the latest punishments issued by the KSA, after imposing a €400,000 fine on TSG Interactive Gaming Europe last month for offering consumers in the country the potential to play poker via the portal.

Considered a game of chance by the Netherlands Supreme Court in 1998, only Holland Casino is allowed to permit the play of poker for real money in one of its physical locations, with all other physical or online offerings illegal.

Providing an update on the impending change to Dutch law the regulator commented in a media statement:” In February this year, the Senate passed the Remote Gambling Act (Koa). The law is currently being worked out in more detail. It will soon be possible to obtain a license under strict conditions for offering games of chance via the internet. Supervision is then possible, allowing players to play protected. 

“The Ksa takes action against illegal gambling providers because there is no check on the fairness of the game. It is also impossible to check whether vulnerable groups, such as minors, are being excluded from participation.”