Polymarket: payment blocking considered in Belgium 

Banned in Belgium since January 2025, Polymarket nevertheless continues to attract thousands of visits from the country. Facing this reality, the federal government is considering a new measure: preventing payments to illegal betting platforms. This approach directly targets their funding, as the simple blocking of websites shows its limitations. 

Belgium aims to hit illegal sites where it hurts 

Blocking a website is not always enough to stop internet users from accessing it. Belgian authorities are experiencing this firsthand with Polymarket, an American platform that allows users to wager money on future events. 

Despite the ban, the site continues to draw interest from Belgian users. The government is therefore exploring an alternative solution: preventing players from sending money to platforms operating without authorization in Belgium. 

In a parliamentary reply reported by La DH, the Minister of Justice raised the possibility of collaborating with banks. The idea would be to block specific financial transactions to make using illegal betting sites substantially harder. 

However, nothing has been decided yet. The government is studying this option without having announced an implementation date or detailing precisely how the mechanism would function. 

Why is Polymarket banned in Belgium? 

Polymarket does not look quite like a standard sports betting website. On this platform, users can wager on elections, sporting competitions, economic trends, and international developments. 

The concept is straightforward: participants take a position on the outcome of an event. Prices then fluctuate based on trades and predictions made by other users. 

The platform describes itself as a prediction market rather than a traditional betting operator. For Belgian authorities, however, this distinction does not resolve the issue: wagering money on a future event can fall under gambling legislation. 

Moreover, Polymarket holds no Belgian license. 

On January 30, 2025, the Gaming Commission added the website to its blacklist. Internet service providers then introduced restrictions to block Belgian web users from accessing the platform. This ban produced visible initial results, without eliminating site traffic altogether. 

Belgian users return despite the blockade 

Figures shared by the Gaming Commission reveal how the situation has evolved. 

In January 2025, just before the impact of the block was felt, Polymarket recorded slightly over 200,000 visits from Belgium. One month later, that number fell to roughly 79,000. 

The decline continued through September 2025, reaching fewer than 40,000 monthly visits. 

Eventually, the trend reversed. 

In January and February 2026, available data pointed to a rebound to nearly 117,000 visits. The Commission links this revived interest notably to Polymarket’s growing prominence during major international events. 

These figures, provided in response to a parliamentary inquiry from MP Anthony Dufrane (MR), should nevertheless be viewed with nuance. A visit does not necessarily correspond to an active gambler. The same individual can visit the website multiple times without ever placing a wager. 

The block can be bypassed, but not without limits 

How does a banned site continue to attract so many visitors? 

Part of the explanation lies in tools designed to bypass internet restrictions. Virtual private networks (VPNs), which conceal a user’s connection address, can make it appear as though they are located in another country. 

Yet reaching a website does not mean one can place bets on it. 

Polymarket also enforces its own geographic restrictions. Belgium is listed among the territories where the platform prohibits transactions. It also explicitly forbids using VPNs to circumvent access policies. 

For regulators, the challenge extends beyond preventing a page from loading. They must also stop money originating from Belgium from reaching unauthorized platforms. This is precisely where the proposal for a banking block becomes relevant. 

Will blocking payments actually prove effective? 

On paper, the solution appears straightforward: if players can no longer send money, participating in betting becomes far more difficult. 

In practice, matters are considerably more complex. 

Polymarket relies on decentralized ledger technology and digital assets to process its transactions. Payments do not necessarily travel directly from a Belgian bank account to an account registered in the platform’s name. 

Authorities will need to identify the financial intermediaries involved and determine the legal grounds under which they can intervene. 

This complexity explains why the initiative remains under study for now. 

No general bank-level block on payments toward Polymarket has been announced as currently active. 

Suspicious bets surrounding the Ballon d’Or 

The debate around Polymarket now reaches beyond the question of unlicensed sites. The integrity of certain betting markets has also sparked concern. 

A recent case involves the 2026 Ballon d’Or, awarded on October 26 to Harry Kane. 

According to an investigation by financial outlet Upside, twelve accounts created shortly before the ceremony placed approximately $265,000 on various outcomes tied to the final ranking. 

These accounts reportedly predicted, in exact order, the top five finishers: Harry Kane, Kylian Mbappé, Lamine Yamal, Rodri, and Lionel Messi. 

The wagers reportedly yielded nearly $200,000 in winnings. 

The Amaury Group, owner of France Football and organizer of the award, announced steps toward filing a legal complaint to determine whether confidential information was leaked. 

These remain allegations and not established acts of fraud. 

The affair illustrates why regulators are wary of markets where individuals could obtain an outcome prior to its official release. 

Belgium is not acting alone 

Several European nations are likewise seeking tighter oversight over these emerging betting formats. 

In June 2026, nine regulatory bodies—including the Belgian Gaming Commission—announced plans to enhance cooperation against illegal operators. 

The Netherlands imposed an enforcement order on Polymarket’s operator, featuring penalties of up to €420,000 per week, capped at €840,000. 

In France, authorities ordered the site blocked in July 2026 after noting the limitations of earlier restrictions. 

Belgium is adjusting its regulatory framework as well. Effective June 1, 2026, a structural reform provided for the transfer of gambling regulatory responsibilities to the Federal Public Service Economy. 

The goal is to better regulate an industry where the boundaries separating betting, digital technology, and financial services are becoming increasingly blurred. 

How much money do Belgians actually wager? 

This remains the major unknown. 

While authorities track Polymarket visit metrics, they lack exact figures on the amounts potentially wagered from Belgium. 

Unlike licensed operators, the platform does not submit the operational activity reports required by Belgian law. 

It is therefore impossible to confirm the number of active players, their stakes, or their winnings. 

This lack of data complicates regulatory supervision of a market operating outside national player protection rules. 

The government is also considering expanding public awareness campaigns on the risks of illegal gambling. 

For now, Polymarket remains banned in Belgium. With the potential implementation of payment blocks, authorities may soon have an additional lever to enforce that prohibition. 

It remains to be seen how effectively this can be applied to a platform whose transactions do not always rely on conventional banking rails.