Dutch Regulator Fines EOD Code Record €37.25 Million

The Netherlands Gambling Authority, Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), has imposed a record €37.25 million fine on Costa Rica-registered EOD Code SRL for offering online gambling without a Dutch licence.

Announced on October 22, the penalty covers 12 gambling websites. Investigators were able to access the company’s services and gamble from the Netherlands without measures preventing their participation.

The sanction exceeds the previous record of €24.846 million imposed on Novatech Solutions N.V., the operator behind Qbet and 55Bet, announced in March 2026. 

Investigation Expanded Across Twelve Brands

The investigation initially focused on InstantCasino before extending to Skyhills, SlotMonster, Betiro, BetBlast, FastSlots, GoldenPanda, SambaSlots, Winningz, Incognito Casino, FoxyGold and LuckyPays.

The KSA identified several aggravating circumstances, including the absence of visible age verification and the availability of cryptocurrency and anonymous payment methods. The regulator said those payment arrangements increased money-laundering risks.

EOD Code had previously received an order requiring it to stop its unlicensed Dutch offering. The regulator said its enforcement approach also includes cooperation with payment providers, hosting companies, banks and major technology businesses. 

Revenue Estimates Determined the Fine

EOD Code did not supply financial information requested by the KSA. The regulator therefore used a methodology based on search volumes to estimate the company’s 2025 gross gaming revenue.

It estimated Dutch GGR at €108.374 million. Applying its penalty framework and aggravating factors produced a calculation equivalent to 270% of that amount, rounded to €292.6 million.

Dutch law capped the sanction at 10% of estimated worldwide annual turnover. Using a global GGR estimate of €372.989 million, the KSA calculated a ceiling of €37.2989 million and rounded the final penalty down to €37.25 million.

These revenue figures are regulatory estimates rather than company-reported accounts. 

Self-Exclusion Terms Put Player Balances at Risk

The regulator also identified contractual provisions it considered harmful to consumers.

One clause reserved the operator’s right to take a customer’s remaining balance following a request for permanent self-exclusion. Another imposed a €5 monthly inactivity fee from the thirteenth month without account activity.

Other findings included charges for withdrawing deposits that had not been wagered at least once and inadequate protection of customer balances in the event of bankruptcy.

The decision was dated October 6 and sent on October 7. EOD Code can challenge the sanction; the published decision is not yet final.