Dutch Gambling Tax Hike Misses Revenue Target
The Dutch gambling tax increase has not delivered the revenue boost expected by the government. A monitor prepared by the Ministry of Finance and the Kansspelautoriteit shows that the higher rate has brought in only a small part of the planned extra income. The tax rate rose from 30.5% to 34.2% on 1 January 2025. It then increased again to 37.8% in 2026.
Tax Rise Brings Far Less Than Expected
The fiscal goal was precise. The government anticipated that the first phase would generate an additional €108 million in 2025 relative to the previous year. For 2026, the additional amount planned was €216 million.
The monitor presents a much less optimistic picture. Additional tax revenue amounted to €2 million in 2025. For 2026, the figure cited in the monitor is €57 million. This leaves a wide gap between the budget estimate and the latest figures for 2025 and the forecast for 2026.
Smaller Gambling Revenue Cuts the Tax Base
The key issue is the taxable base. Should operators generate less gross gaming revenue, a higher tax rate does not automatically bring more money to the state.
The monitor links the weaker result to several changes in the Dutch gambling market. Player-protection measures were among the factors leading to a lower gross gaming result for operators.
The tax rise itself may also have contributed to the smaller base. The monitor notes that some physical gambling locations may have closed because of weaker profitability. In this case, the state cannot collect tax on revenue that those venues no longer generate.
There is one more effect for the government’s budget. The higher tax burden also reduces corporate tax, contributions, and dividends linked to state-owned gambling companies.
Market Impact Is Hard to Separate
The report also examined market size, channelisation, and contributions to good causes and sport. However, in this case, the monitor is more reserved.
It does not draw firm conclusions because too many changes happened at the same time. The Netherlands introduced stronger player protection regulations and stricter advertising policies, but the taxation level was also increased. All these factors may influence operators in some way or other, and also customer behavior and gambling income.
This complicates the evaluation of the tax factor in particular. The lower gambling income can be explained by any combination of these factors mentioned above.
Higher Rates Create a Policy Problem
The Dutch example illustrates the problem with basing budget projections on headline tax rates. A higher number does not guarantee that the target will be met when the tax base decreases.
For operators, the regulated market now carries a heavier tax burden while advertising rules and player-protection measures limit commercial flexibility. For lawmakers, the next step follows logically. The tax rate will not guarantee the needed revenue if the regulated market is too small or too unstable to produce enough taxable income.
The monitor does not prove that the Dutch tax increase caused every negative effect now seen in the data. It does show that the revenue plan was too optimistic. Future tax changes will need a fuller view of market size, operator margins, retail closures, and channelisation before the state can count on extra income.