The Remote Gambling Act regulates the offering of online games of chance. The government aimed to create a responsible, reliable, and controllable gaming offer and guide players towards this regulated offer without creating additional demand. This way, players can be better protected against gambling addiction and fraudulent practices than before, when only illegal online gambling was possible. Dialogic, commissioned by the WODC, has conducted an evaluation of the Remote Gambling Act to assess the state of affairs after the first three years of legal online gambling.
An evaluation after three years is not common, but due to the potential significant impact of online gambling, it was carried out earlier at the request of the House of Representatives. This makes it a challenging evaluation. The field of online gambling and the regulations surrounding it are constantly evolving. Strong restrictions have been introduced in the first three years on advertising, play limits have been established, and providers have been given clearer rules for implementing their duty of care. However, the consequences of gambling addiction only become clear later: on average, it takes five to eight years for an addict to seek help.
Facing these challenges, we divided the research into three parts: Testing the policy assumptions (policy theory), assessing how the policy plays out in practice, and, if possible, examining the policy's effects.
The policy theory: How should it work?
The policy theory is divided into three objectives: addiction prevention, consumer protection, and combating fraud and crime. These goals should be achieved by steering consumers from unsafe illegal to safer legal offerings (channeling). Based on the policy theory, we conclude a few things. Firstly, the objectives and measures were limited in their operationalisation: it is unclear when the goals of legalisation will be achieved. Additionally, certain (important) matters such as the duty of care that providers owe to consumers were narrowly defined: it was unclear what license holders needed to do precisely and when they were doing it adequately.
There are also contradictions in the policy, particularly regarding advertising. License holders are allowed to advertise to promote their offerings and steer players from illegal to legal options, but the advertising must not encourage gambling or lead to an increase in players. Encouraging gambling and attracting more new players could potentially result in more gambling addiction, as online games of chance are the most risky type of gambling, even within the safer legal domain. Therefore, advertising may pose problems for the addiction prevention objectives.
Lastly, it is questionable whether the expectations of license holders are contradictory. On one hand, the legislature expects license holders to compete for market share by offering an attractive product and, on the other hand, to actively address their players when they exhibit risky behaviour or gamble excessively. From a competitive perspective, it can be expected that providers will implement the duty of care in a way that minimally hinders players.
The practice in implementation: How is it playing out?
Based on the current implementation practice, especially concerning addiction prevention, it is not evident that consumers in the licensed offerings are being as well-protected as intended. The duty of care is formulated too broadly. Play limits do not provide sufficient protection (high-risk gamblers may struggle with these limits, and players can continue gambling at another licensed provider once the limit is reached), and players are still insufficiently familiar with available support options. However, it should be noted that the rules have been tightened further by the Ministry and the Gambling Authority following the evaluation (summer and autumn 2024).
The current implementation of measures related to recruitment and advertising also does not adequately contribute to consumer protection. Some advertising encourages excessive play behaviour and it proves difficult, or even impossible, to avoid reaching unintended vulnerable groups (young adults and individuals who have self-excluded from gambling).
The efforts to combat fraud and crime seem to largely align with expectations. However, categorising suspicious transactions under the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Prevention Act (Wwft) leads to information-sharing challenges in cases of match-fixing.
The effects: What can we see so far?
Measuring most of the effects of the Remote Gambling Act is currently challenging, as many aspects do not yet manifest in the data after three years. Additionally, no monitoring framework and methodology were established upfront to compare the observed effects with the intended ones. Based on population surveys and the number of gaming accounts, we conclude that more people have started gambling online since legalisation. However, it is still too early to evaluate the number of gambling addicts based on this assessment. Considering the implementation practice of addiction prevention measures, in conjunction with the increased number of players, it is expected that the number of individuals with a gambling addiction will rise, particularly among young adults.
We can see that the targeted canalisation rate of 80% has been achieved, based on both players and BSR data. Moreover, the Remote Gambling Act has resulted in some side effects such as an increase in the number of online gaming players, a normalisation of gambling, higher tax revenues from gambling, and a decrease in contributions to trotting and horse racing.
Conclusion: Looking back on three years of online gambling
We conclude that to date, the Remote Gambling Act has not yet contributed to a sufficiently responsible and controllable gaming offer that would indicate the policy objectives of online gaming policy will be achieved in the short or long term. Although the policy has led to a reliable offering and a level of control greater than unlicensed offerings, we cannot yet speak of a responsible offering. Additionally, the policy has attracted a large number of new players, including many young adults. Based on the policy and the current implementation practice, it is expected that, especially among this group, damage will occur as a result of the policy. 
