According to the Kansspelautoriteit, Adventure One QSS Inc., the company behind Polymarket, failed to comply with an earlier order to stop offering unlicensed games of chance in the Netherlands. The Dutch regulator is now seeking to collect €420,000 as a penalty payment.
This ruling has not changed anything about the KSA’s legal position regarding the case. However, a new, more specific point arose. A question to consider is how fast a company must block local users once a regulator orders it to leave.
Collection Follows Earlier Exit Order
The KSA first ordered Adventure One to stop offering unlicensed games of chance through Polymarket to users in the Netherlands. The penalty amount was determined to be €420,000 per week, with a maximum total of €840,000.
According to the regulator, the company did not comply with the requirement within the stated period. In checking on the platform, the KSA found that it was still possible to log in with an existing account and take part in a game of chance. As a result, the first penalty payment became due by operation of law. The regulator also said the €420,000 had not been paid.
Polymarket Disputes the Timing
Adventure One does not agree with the regulator’s interpretation of the situation. In reply to the KSA, the company stated that blocking actions were in process at the time of the regulator’s follow-up check.
Adventure One’s position is that a single test period cannot define the total amount of money collected when the blocking measures were still being rolled out. The company argued that the regulator had underestimated the significance of the technical and administrative efforts that should have been undertaken to block participation from a particular country.
However, the KSA did not agree with the company’s claims. According to the regulator, the deadline had already passed on 17 February 2026. Thus, the measures had to be fully implemented and operational before 18 February 2026. Had the company thought that the task was too complicated to perform in the given period of time, it should have raised the issue with the KSA before the deadline expired.
Prediction Markets Stay Under Pressure
The case keeps prediction markets under Dutch gambling scrutiny. The regulator defines the product as illegal gambling if it is accessible to users in the Netherlands without a KSA licence.
This distinction has become increasingly difficult for the platforms to manage. Event markets have a tendency to blur the lines between financial speculation, gambling, media engagement, and political forecasting. Regulators are getting more concerned with user access and stake-based participation.
For operators, the Dutch example makes it clear that geoblocking must be seen as an early compliance activity. The regulator may measure the result by users’ ability to continue engaging with the product.
This raises practical concerns. When a deadline for implementation is set, the company should be ready to provide evidence that access is already restricted. In markets like the Netherlands, a single day may change a warning into a payable enforcement case.
