Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), the Gambling Authority of the Netherlands, has called for ‘greater uniformity’ in the risk assessment of games offered by licensed Dutch operators.

The conclusion follows its latest investigation into how operators conduct risk analyses under the Remote Gambling Act (KOA), a regime currently under review by the Ministry of Justice.

The report reveals widespread inconsistencies in how operators conduct mandatory risk analyses, a process intended to protect players from gambling addiction and ensure responsible play. Introduced with the legalisation of the KOA Market in 2021, key risk assessments form a key part of the duty of care imposed on all licence holders.

Inconsistent Undermine KSA scrutiny

A major issue uncovered in the KSA’s study is the inconsistent nature of the risk assessments performed across the sector. The Authority identified five different methodologies in use, including well-known tools such as Asterig, Gamgard, and Neccton. Despite the widespread adoption of these tools, the outcomes vary significantly — even when applied to the same game types by different operators or even by the same external consultants.

For example, games like slot machines, poker, and virtual sports were assigned risk ratings ranging from low to very high, depending on the methodology and operator. Some licensees apply risk scores at the category level rather than evaluating each game individually, which may result in high-risk games being inappropriately classified as lower risk.

“The risk analyses do not lead to consistent results, even when conducted by the same party… The outcomes of all the conducted analyses are difficult to compare. One reason for this is that some licensees take mitigating measures into account, while others do not. This raises the question of whether licensees are correctly assessing the risk of the games they offer.” — KSA Report, p. 10

Regulatory Gaps Fuel Fragmentation

The report also points to key regulatory shortcomings that have enabled these inconsistencies. The KOA framework currently provides no clear requirements for how often risk assessments should be conducted, what level of granularity is required (game vs. category), or who is qualified to carry them out.

In practice, some analyses are performed by internal staff whose “independence or expertise cannot be guaranteed”, while others are outsourced to third parties with varying levels of transparency or scientific credibility. 

In many instances there are inconsistencies on the application of player safety measures such as pop-up reminders, deposit limits, or behavioural feedback tools should be factored into risk calculations.

Difficulty in Comparing Results 

Due to inconsistencies, KSA states that it is not possible to compare risk levels across operators, limiting the regulator’s ability to enforce the duty of care effectively. 

At present, many licensees reduce risk scores by accounting for protective features, while others do not, leading to a patchwork of scores that are not directly comparable.

The lack of standardisation also weakens public trust and accountability, as neither players nor regulators can rely on the consistency of the risk data being reported. Without reform, the KSA warns that the current system provides little added protection for players despite being resource-intensive for operators.

Towards Uniformity 

In response to the report’s findings, the KSA is working with the Ministry of Justice and Security to establish a new, standardised framework for risk analysis. This will likely include:

• Mandatory per-game risk assessments

• Clear definitions for when and how mitigating measures are factored in

• Standardised assessment methods and scoring scales

• Independent oversight to ensure objectivity and expertise

“The current system does not work effectively… while seeming to provide little additional protection for the player.” — KSA Report, p. 10

These reforms aim to strengthen player protection and ensure the risk analysis process serves its intended purpose: preventing gambling-related harm before it escalates.

KOA overhaul to end 2025

As it stands, the Dutch House of Representatives (Kamer) expects to receive a new bill by the end of 2025 that will outline proposals to overhaul the KOA regime. The agenda remains on track despite the recent resignation of State Secretary for Legal Protection, Teun Struycken, who had served as the lead architect of the reform initiative before stepping down ahead of the country’s snap election in October.

Before his departure, Struycken made it clear that the revised gambling act must place consumer protection at its core, especially for players under the age of 24. He supported the introduction of universal affordability checks, deposit limits, and stricter advertising restrictions, with a specific focus on online slots, which he described as the highest-risk vertical in the Dutch market.

The minister also argued for tailored safeguards for vulnerable groups, stating that legislation must be adapted to the real-world risks of high-intensity gambling products.