VNLOK takes Meta to court over illegal gambling ads in the Netherlands

Dutch trade association VNLOK has taken legal action against Meta over what it describes as the continued appearance of illegal gambling advertisements on Facebook and Instagram. The proceedings bring the responsibilities of major online platforms into sharper focus as Dutch authorities and lawmakers examine how illegal gambling operators reach consumers through digital advertising.

VNLOK represents licensed online gambling operators in the Netherlands and says the issue is closely connected with consumer protection and enforcement of the country's regulated gambling framework. The association has asked the Amsterdam court to examine Meta's compliance with obligations arising under the European Digital Services Act (DSA).

The case remains an allegation at this stage and has not resulted in a judicial finding that Meta has violated the law. VNLOK is seeking court intervention and further measures concerning how illegal gambling advertising aimed at Dutch users is identified and addressed.

VNLOK brings legal action against Meta

The dispute follows months of concerns raised by VNLOK regarding gambling advertisements appearing across Meta's platforms. In June 2026, the association announced that it intended to pursue legal action and engage with European authorities over the issue. The latest step formalises that dispute before a Dutch court.

VNLOK's position is that removing advertisements only after they have been reported may not adequately address the problem when campaigns can remain visible for limited periods. The association is therefore calling for stronger preventive controls rather than relying solely on removal after an advertisement has already appeared before consumers.

Björn Fuchs, chairman of VNLOK, said:

“We have repeatedly pointed out the scale of the problem to Meta and asked them to cooperate structurally in finding a solution. That has yielded insufficient results. Therefore, we are now submitting the case to the Dutch courts.”

The statement reflects VNLOK's position in the dispute rather than an established finding of liability against Meta.

Research cited by VNLOK

VNLOK has published findings from its monitoring of gambling advertisements on Facebook. The association says more than 90% of the gambling advertisements reviewed were associated with operators that did not hold a Dutch licence.

Further figures cited in reporting on the association's May and June research put the proportion of illegal advertisements among the 65,000 gambling advertisements with the greatest reach at 96.5% in May and 93.7% in June. VNLOK also said Meta removed 11% of the identified advertisements in May and 15% in June.

Those figures are VNLOK's research findings and should be understood in that context. They describe the sample and methodology used by the association rather than establishing that every gambling advertisement on Facebook or Instagram was illegal.

The Dutch gambling regulator has separately reported significant volumes of illegal gambling advertising on social media. In April 2026, the Kansspelautoriteit said it had submitted more than 4,600 reports of illegal advertisements to Meta during that month. Its 2025 annual report also estimated that more than 50,000 advertisements for illegal gambling were appearing on social media each month during 2025.

Focus on the Digital Services Act

A central element of the dispute is the European Digital Services Act. The legislation establishes rules for online services concerning illegal content reporting, transparency and platform responsibilities. For very large online platforms, the DSA also introduces additional obligations concerning systemic risks and the way illegal content can spread through their services.

The DSA does not itself determine whether gambling activity or a particular gambling advertisement is legal under Dutch law. Instead, it establishes a European framework for how platforms address content that is unlawful under applicable national or European rules. The European Commission notes that platforms must provide accessible mechanisms for reporting illegal content and must process such reports in accordance with the DSA framework.

VNLOK is asking the Amsterdam court to consider whether Meta's approach meets those obligations in the context of illegal gambling advertising directed at Dutch consumers. The precise legal interpretation will ultimately depend on the pleadings, evidence and the court's assessment.

Dutch parliament considers platform responsibility

The court proceedings arrive as the Dutch House of Representatives considers a separate proposal concerning the responsibilities of online platforms.

A motion submitted on 23 September 2026 calls for the Dutch Gambling Act to establish that an online platform could itself commit an infringement when it repeatedly displays illegal gambling advertising after a removal request. The motion asks that the Kansspelautoriteit be able to impose an administrative fine or an order subject to a penalty payment in such circumstances.

The motion was submitted by VVD MP Bart Bikkers and co-signed by Tijs van den Brink and Mohammed Mohandis. A parliamentary record confirms Bart Bikkers as the first signatory.

A vote on the motion is scheduled for 29 September 2026. At the time of publication, the vote has not yet taken place.

The timing gives the legal dispute additional significance because both the court case and the parliamentary proposal address a similar underlying question: how far responsibility should extend beyond the gambling operator itself when illegal gambling advertisements are distributed through large digital platforms.

Current powers of the Kansspelautoriteit

The original claims concerning potential fines require an important legal distinction. The September 23 parliamentary motion does not state that platforms would automatically face a fine equal to 100% of annual turnover.

The Kansspelautoriteit's currently published information states that its administrative fines can, depending on the circumstances, reach the amount specified by Dutch criminal law or 10% of the turnover in the financial year preceding the fine decision. Its published enforcement framework also includes binding directions and orders subject to administrative enforcement.

The parliamentary proposal instead seeks a specific statutory basis for action against platforms that repeatedly display illegal gambling advertising after receiving removal requests. Whether such a provision becomes law depends on the legislative process and subsequent implementation.

Why the issue matters for the Dutch market

The dispute reflects a wider enforcement challenge facing regulated gambling markets. Licensed operators must comply with Dutch requirements while illegal operators can attempt to reach consumers without following the same licensing and consumer protection obligations.

VNLOK argues that large online platforms play an important role in the distribution of advertising and therefore should be subject to effective mechanisms for addressing illegal campaigns. The association has also pointed to the speed with which advertisements can be created, circulated and replaced.

Björn Fuchs said:

“Illegal gambling providers can only reach Dutch consumers by using the infrastructure of large online platforms.”

The statement represents VNLOK's position on platform responsibility. It does not establish, by itself, any legal finding against Meta.

The regulator's own 2026 communications demonstrate that social media advertising remains a significant enforcement area. The Kansspelautoriteit has said that illegal gambling operators frequently advertise on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram and may use names or logos associated with recognisable brands or public figures to make advertisements appear more credible.

The legal question ahead

The proceedings could place greater attention on the distinction between hosting or distributing advertising and directly providing gambling services. That distinction is particularly important under a regulatory system in which Dutch licensing rules apply to gambling operators while European digital rules establish separate obligations for online services.

For VNLOK, the objective is to obtain stronger measures against advertising for operators that lack the required Dutch authorisation. For Meta, the legal questions will concern the scope of its duties under the applicable legal framework and the adequacy of its systems for identifying and responding to reported illegal material.

At present, the outcome remains unresolved. The court will need to consider the evidence presented by the parties as well as the relevant provisions of Dutch and European law before reaching any decision.

Conclusion

The VNLOK action against Meta represents a significant development in the Netherlands' continuing effort to address illegal gambling advertising in digital environments. The case places platform responsibility alongside operator enforcement and regulatory oversight, while the Dutch parliament is separately considering whether a more explicit statutory mechanism should apply to platforms that repeatedly display illegal gambling advertisements after removal requests.

The available evidence demonstrates that illegal gambling advertising on social media is a recognised enforcement concern for Dutch authorities and the licensed sector. At the same time, the numerical findings cited by VNLOK should remain clearly identified as the association's research rather than treated as judicially established facts.

With the Amsterdam proceedings now underway and the parliamentary vote scheduled for 29 September 2026, the debate is moving from industry criticism toward formal legal and legislative scrutiny. The eventual decisions could help define how responsibility is allocated between gambling operators, advertising intermediaries, online platforms and regulators within the Dutch market.

FAQs

What is VNLOK?
VNLOK is the association representing licensed online gambling providers in the Netherlands. It says its role includes supporting a safe, fair and responsible regulated online gambling market.

Why has VNLOK taken Meta to court?
VNLOK says it believes illegal gambling advertisements continue to reach Dutch consumers through Meta's platforms and is asking the Amsterdam court to examine Meta's compliance with relevant Digital Services Act obligations.

Which Meta platforms are involved?
The dispute concerns Facebook and Instagram, both of which are operated by Meta. Meta identifies Facebook and Instagram among its consumer technologies and services.

What does VNLOK claim about illegal gambling advertisements?
VNLOK says more than 90% of the gambling advertisements it reviewed on Facebook were associated with operators without a Dutch licence. Its published research also reported high proportions of unlicensed advertising in its May and June samples.

Did Meta remove the advertisements identified by VNLOK?
According to figures cited by VNLOK, Meta removed 11% of the identified advertisements in May and 15% in June. These figures are attributed to VNLOK's monitoring and do not represent a court finding.

What is the Digital Services Act?
The Digital Services Act is an EU framework governing digital services and establishing obligations related to issues including illegal content reporting, transparency and additional risk management requirements for the largest online platforms.

Who regulates gambling in the Netherlands?
The Kansspelautoriteit is the Dutch gambling regulator. It has administrative enforcement powers under the Dutch Gambling Act, including the ability to issue fines and other measures within its statutory authority.

Who proposed the parliamentary motion on platform fines?
The motion submitted on 23 September 2026 was introduced by VVD MP Bart Bikkers and co-signed by Tijs van den Brink and Mohammed Mohandis.

When is the motion due to be voted on?
The parliamentary record shows that a vote is scheduled for 29 September 2026. The result was not yet available at the time of publication.

Does the motion automatically introduce new fines for Meta?
No. The motion asks the government to establish a legal basis under the Dutch Gambling Act for action against online platforms that repeatedly display illegal gambling advertisements after removal requests. Any new legal power would depend on the legislative process.