Crypto Casino
Torrent Gear
Comparison with France and the Netherlands
Belgium, France and the Netherlands are three "strict" European jurisdictions, but their approaches to the online and offline market differ. Below is a practical comparison on key blocks: what is allowed, how licenses are arranged, what restrictions apply to players and operators, and where this or that scenario is more comfortable.
1) What is allowed online
Belgium
Online casinos (A +), online slots (B +), betting (F1 +) - allowed, but only for operators tied to offline licenses ("online follows offline").
Age: 21 + for casinos/slots, 18 + for betting and lotteries.
France
Sports betting, mutual betting on horse racing and online poker are allowed.
Online casinos/slots are prohibited (lotteries - state operator).
Age: 18 +.
Netherlands
Online casinos/slots, bets, poker are allowed under the KSA (Remote Gambling Act) license.
Age: 18 +.
In short: in terms of the "breadth" of the NL ≈ BE online assortment (both allow casinos/slots/bets), France is the most limited (without online casinos).
2) Regulators and license architecture
Belgium: Belgian Gaming Commission (BGC). "Plus-licenses" A +/B +/F1 + are issued only to offline-A/B/F1 holders. The market is deliberately "narrow" in terms of the number of operators.
France: Autorité Nationale des Jeux (ANJ). Betting/poker licenses; lotteries - state monopoly (separate circuit).
Netherlands: Kansspelautoriteit (KSA). Full online licenses without reference to offline objects; hard entry and constant supervision.
Conclusion: Belgium is the most "offline-centric" model; Netherlands - independent e-licenses; France - allows fewer verticals.
3) Responsible play and self-exclusion registers
Belgium: EPIS (unified registry for online and offline); check in and on play.
France: centralized self-withdrawal, conducted by the regulator; online and offline.
Netherlands: CRUKS (national registry), mandatory for online and terrestrial halls; real-time scanning.
Practice: all three countries use "hard" centralized block lists; Belgium and the Netherlands are especially deeply integrating verification into every login.
4) Limits and financial control
Belgium: by default there is a weekly deposit limit of €200 per player and per website (online casino/slots); increase - only after checking solvency.
France: there is no single state deposit limit for everything; operators use their own RG frames (limits, timeouts, reality checks) and verification.
Netherlands: mandatory personal limits that the player sets before the start of the game (deposits/losses/time); you can't play without it. For operators - "duty of care" and behavior analysis with interventions.
Bottom line: Belgium is a rare example of a hard default limit; The Netherlands relies on pre-established personal limits and intervention protocols; France - on a combination of local operator policies and ANJ control.
5) Sports advertising and sponsorship
Belgium: sharp tightening in 2023-2024: restriction of mass advertising, strict formats and warnings, reduction of sports sponsorship.
France: strict ANJ framework: banning aggressive incentives, targeting restrictions on minors/vulnerable, controlling the tone of campaigns.
Netherlands: Banning "non-targeted" advertising on most channels; additional bans on the use of "roll models" and large-scale restrictions on sports sponsorship with phasing out.
Bottom line: in all three countries, advertising is heavily squeezed; The Netherlands is one of the toughest brands in mass visibility.
6) Offline scene: casinos and gaming halls
Belgium: 9 licensed casinos (class A) + a network of machine rooms (class B). The format is elegant, compact venues without "show megaresorts"; historical kurzals (Spa, Ostend), the capital complex in Brussels, the poker hub of Namur.
France: a large network of municipally licensed casinos throughout the country (Côte d'Azur, Deauville, Aix-en-Provence, etc.), a strong resort tradition and stage spaces.
Netherlands: Holland Casino network (land casino monopoly), a modern format with strong RG practice; playrooms are authorized separately.
How the experience differs: Belgium - "chamber salon"; France - a wide variety of resort halls; The Netherlands is Holland Casino's unified standard.
7) Taxes and fiscal burden (in general terms)
Belgium: regional taxes on games (online - about 11-15% GGR, "land" higher and more progressive), annual license fees, VAT on most online services, CIT.
France: taxes vary in verticals (betting/poker/lotteries), strong state share through lottery operator; "casino-land" - separate scales.
Netherlands: gambling tax (GGR base) for online and "land," plus corporate taxes; high administrative burden of RG/reporting.
Moral: everyone has "expensive and strict," Belgium adds offline binding, France has a narrow online showcase, the Netherlands has powerful KSA oversight.
8) What's best for the player
Want a full online set (slots + live + rates) and hard insurance with limits? - Belgium (default €200/week, EPIS).
I play responsibly and am ready to set personal limits in advance, I love pure UX and strong supervision? - Netherlands (CRUKS + mandatory limits).
I need bets and poker, but for the "casino-feeling" I go offline to the sea/to the resort? - France (there is no online casino, but the offline scene is wide).
9) What is better for the operator
Belgium: high entry threshold due to offline connection; less competitors - higher requirements for compliance and responsible UX.
France: the online portfolio is limited (without casinos/slots) - simpler in assortment, but heavier in unit economy and aquisition.
Netherlands: a full-fledged online portfolio, but the most "tight" regulatory supervision and advertising restrictions are a bet on retention and product quality.
10) Brief summary of differences
Online assortment: BE≈NL (full), FR (without casino/slots).
Self-exclusion: EPIS (BE), CRUKS (NL), ANJ Centralized Registry (FR).
Limits: default €200/week/site (BE) vs. mandatory personal limits (NL) vs. operator framework controlled by ANJ (FR).
Advertising: tough everywhere; NL is one of the strictest bans on "non-targeted" advertising.
Offline DNA: BE - chamberness and history; FR is a large resort chain; NL is Holland Casino's unified standard.
Bottom line: Belgium, France and the Netherlands have chosen three different but "responsible" trajectories. Belgium - offline anchor + strict online with limits, France - online betting/poker and strong offline scene, Netherlands - full online with maximum supervision and personal limits. This gives players predictable and secure conditions, and operators a high entry threshold and product maturity requirements.