Dutch Regulator Orders Polymarket to Halt Betting Services

TheNewsCryptoPubblicato 2026-02-21Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-21

Introduzione

The Netherlands Gambling Authority has ordered Polymarket's Dutch affiliate, Adventure One, to immediately halt its unlicensed betting services in the country. The platform, which allowed users to place bets on events like local elections, faces potential fines of up to $990,000 for non-compliance. This action highlights the regulatory clash surrounding prediction markets, which offer wagers not permitted under Dutch law, even for licensed operators. The enforcement occurs amid broader debates on digital asset regulations in the Netherlands, including a proposed capital gains tax on cryptocurrencies. This case underscores the ongoing tension between rapidly growing prediction markets and national gambling frameworks across various jurisdictions.

The Netherlands Gambling Authority has ordered its Dutch affiliate, Adventure One, to put a stop to providing betting services to natives without permission, marking a move against prediction markets platform Polymarket.

As per the notice released on February 17, the regulator mentioned that the company must ban its activities quickly or risk penalties of up to $990,000. Officials mentioned that the platform permitted users in the Netherlands to place bets banned under national law, comprising contracts associated with local elections, and had not replied to previous requests from authorities to address the issue.

Ella Seijsener, the director of licensing and supervision of the authority, said that prediction markets are increasing, including in the Netherlands. She also mentioned that such operators offer wagers that aren’t permitted in the Dutch market under any circumstances, even for licensed gambling firms.

At the beginning of this year, the CLO of the company, Neal Kumar, mentioned the company was open to discussions with regulators while US federal courts look for questions over oversight of prediction markets.

The Hold of The Operations

The debate reflects wider regulatory tension around event-based contracts. In the US, platforms providing similar products have drawn investigation from state authorities, many of which claim the services look like sports betting.

Meanwhile, leadership at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has pushed back against state interference, saying it has federal jurisdiction over prediction market activity. The enforcement action also comes as Dutch policymakers debate tighter regulations impacting digital assets.

The House of Representatives of the country has progressed a proposal rolling out a 36% capital gains tax on some investments, a measure anticipated to cover cryptocurrencies if approved.

Currently, the order of the regulator has placed Polymarket’s operations in the Netherlands on hold, underscoring how quickly increasing prediction markets are hitting with national gambling frameworks over various jurisdictions.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

OFFICIAL TRUMP (TRUMP) Slides to $3: Hold the Line or Head for Deeper Losses?

TagsDutchNetherlandsPolymarket

Domande pertinenti

QWhat action did the Netherlands Gambling Authority take against Polymarket's Dutch affiliate?

AThe Netherlands Gambling Authority ordered its Dutch affiliate, Adventure One, to stop providing betting services to Dutch residents without permission.

QWhat potential financial penalty does Polymarket face for non-compliance with the order?

APolymarket faces potential fines of up to $990,000 if it does not quickly ban its activities in the Netherlands.

QAccording to the regulator, what type of bets did Polymarket allow that are prohibited under Dutch law?

AThe platform permitted users to place bets banned under national law, including contracts associated with local elections.

QHow has the regulatory action affected Polymarket's operations in the Netherlands?

AThe order has placed Polymarket's operations in the Netherlands on hold.

QWhat broader regulatory development in the Netherlands is mentioned alongside this enforcement action?

ADutch policymakers are debating tighter regulations impacting digital assets, including a proposal for a 36% capital gains tax on some investments that would cover cryptocurrencies if approved.

Letture associate

Bitcoin Withdrawals Continue: 8 Years of Storage in a Coldcard Cold Wallet Ended in Zero

Coldcard Hardware Wallet Hacked: Losses Mount Due to Vulnerable Seed Generation A critical vulnerability in Coldcard hardware wallets has led to a continued wave of fund thefts. According to Galaxy Research, the total stolen has reached 1,367.05 BTC (approx. $88.6 million) from 4,585 addresses, a significant increase from the initial 594.5 BTC reported on July 30, 2026. Most of the stolen funds remain on the attackers' addresses. The issue is not with the current firmware, which Coinkite has updated, but with seed phrases generated on vulnerable devices between March 2021 and the release of fixed firmware versions. Due to a programmer error, devices switched from using a hardware random number generator to the software-based Yasmarang generator, which was initialized with publicly accessible data like the chip's serial number. This made the seed phrases predictable through offline brute-force attacks, meaning wallets remain at risk until funds are moved to a new wallet generated with the patched firmware. Affected devices include Mk2/Mk3 with firmware 4.0.1–4.1.9 (and up to 5.0.3), Mk4/Mk5 up to version 5.6.0, and Q models up to 1.5.0Q. The only exceptions are seeds created with a high-entropy method like at least 50 independent dice rolls or a strong unique BIP-39 passphrase. All other owners must generate a new seed on the fixed firmware and transfer their assets. A case highlighting the human impact involves a 39-year-old long-term investor who lost 2 BTC (approx. $130,000) in minutes. He had accumulated the Bitcoin over eight years through physical labor, viewing it as a financial lifeline and a retirement plan in a country suffering from hyperinflation. His story underscores that even conservative "buy and hold in cold storage" strategies can be compromised by such underlying technical flaws. From a technical perspective, this incident echoes historical failures where weak random number generators undermined cryptographic security, challenging the assumption that offline storage is automatically foolproof.

cryptonews.ru2 h fa

Bitcoin Withdrawals Continue: 8 Years of Storage in a Coldcard Cold Wallet Ended in Zero

cryptonews.ru2 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片