IBIA calls for changes to “counterproductive” Dutch regulations
Integrity body claims restricted betting regime adds “unnecessary administrative cost burdens” on operators
The International Betting Integrity Association (IBIA) has added its voice to calls for changes to proposed secondary regulations for the Dutch online gaming market.
The integrity body issued an eight-page response to a Dutch government request for stakeholder responses to the new regulations.
While it welcomed the regulation of the Dutch market, the IBIA claimed the proposed approach of prohibiting betting markets would prove “counterproductive” to achieving that aim.
Proposed Dutch regulations include banning betting on certain markets including tennis (winning or losing games and sets) and football (first throw in, yellow and red cards, first corner kick and fouls), together with betting on head-to-head contests.
The Dutch government’s stated aim of restricting these markets is to reduce the potential for match-fixing in events which are easy to manipulate.
However, in its response, the IBIA claims there is a “lack of clarity” throughout these specific regulations, opening the potential for different interpretations by operators and the Dutch regulator.
“Imposing product restrictions on Dutch licensed operators does not make it any less likely that the sporting events in that licensing jurisdiction will be any safer from betting corruption, which can take place with a multitude of operators around the world,” the IBIA said.
These sentiments echo earlier comments made by bet365 in its own consultation response. The Stoke-headquartered operator called on Dutch regulators to place “as little as possible restriction” on the Dutch sports betting market.
The IBIA said the prohibition of certain betting markets on integrity grounds is not supported by evidence and making these changes will create an “unattractive” market for consumers relative to other markets.
In addition, the IBIA claimed requirements to inform relevant sporting associations of the markets which it offers on matches added “unnecessary administrative cost burdens on operators and the regulator”.
Finally, the IBIA claimed imposing a high taxation model on the Dutch sports betting market will contribute to the development of a “sizable” offshore market of operators targeting Dutch players illegally.