Belgium imposed millions in gambling fines: this is what actually came in 

Between 2020 and 2025, less than 6% of the €10.1M in Belgian gambling fines was collected by the GC. The regulator is now shifting focus toward rapid domain blocking and cutting off financial transactions to illegal operators. 

Between 2020 and 2025, the Belgian Gaming Commission imposed over €10.1 million in administrative fines. Of that total, merely €598,428 was registered as collected. Collecting fines from foreign illegal gambling sites proves particularly challenging. 

The Belgian Gaming Commission (GC) imposed a total of €10,140,402 in administrative fines between 2020 and 2025. According to its 2025 annual report, only €598,428 of this amount was collected—a meager 5.9 percent of the total figure. 

An amount of €9,541,974 remains registered as uncollected by the Gaming Commission. These figures illustrate the vast discrepancy between issuing a penalty and actually receiving the funds. Foreign operators of illegal gambling websites, in particular, prove difficult for Belgian authorities to reach. 

Over 94 percent of fines remain uncollected 

The collection issues were most severe in 2022 and 2024. In 2022, the GC handed out €4,274,406 in fines, but collected only €238,032. According to administrative records, over €4 million went unpaid. 

In 2024, the total amount of imposed fines surged once again, reaching €4,325,700 in administrative penalties, of which only €30,500 was brought in. Gambling Club previously reported on the Gaming Commission’s 2024 financial figures, which already highlighted the growing pressure exerted by the illegal market. 

In 2023, €1,111,250 in fines was imposed, with €86,450 collected. Results for 2020 and 2021 were less extreme: in 2020, €26,758 was collected out of €71,758 imposed, while a year later, €139,688 was paid out of €276,188 in penalties. 

According to the GC, these figures may differ from amounts published in earlier annual reports due to accounting and technical adjustments. 

Important nuance regarding the millions outstanding 

The €9.54 million figure should not automatically be considered permanently lost. In most cases, uncollected fines are forwarded to the Federal Public Service (FPS) Finance for further recovery. 

However, the Gaming Commission notes that it lacks insight into the amounts FPS Finance subsequently manages to collect. Consequently, the actual sum that ultimately reaches the Belgian treasury may end up higher than the €598,428 registered by the GC. 

Furthermore, specific circumstances prevent certain files from being forwarded immediately. This includes cases where a company has gone bankrupt or where appeal proceedings remain ongoing before the Court of First Instance. When dealing with foreign corporate entities, the GC must compile and transfer a fully documented case file containing all supporting evidence. 

Nevertheless, the ratio remains striking: less than six percent of all fines imposed since 2020 are registered as collected by the regulator. 

Foreign illegal casinos prove hard to trace 

According to the Gaming Commission, a major part of the issue stems from foreign providers of illegal online gambling. These companies frequently operate outside the European Union and utilize complex corporate structures to obscure their true beneficial owners and business locations. 

Once an operator cannot be clearly identified, serving legal notice and subsequently enforcing a sanction becomes exceptionally difficult. While the GC can levy administrative fines, its legal powers to seize assets or compel payment outside Belgian jurisdiction remain severely constrained. 

GC Chair Magali Clavie previously highlighted this obstacle during an exclusive interview with Gambling Club regarding Belgian gambling legislation. She stated at the time that recovering fines is rarely straightforward because many illegal operators are headquartered outside Europe. 

This challenge is hardly unique to Belgium. Illegal online casinos can target players across multiple European nations from a single offshore location. In doing so, they leverage social media, search engines, affiliates, and continuously changing domain names to bypass regulatory blocks. 

GC issued significantly fewer fines in 2025 

In response, the Gaming Commission pivoted its enforcement strategy in 2025. The regulator chose to redirect its resources away from imposing heavy financial penalties on foreign illegal gambling sites when it was clear beforehand that collection would prove virtually impossible. 

This strategic shift is clearly reflected in the annual metrics. In 2025, the GC issued twenty administrative fines totaling €81,100, of which €77,000 was successfully collected. Just €4,100 remained recorded as unpaid. 

Although the total monetary value of penalties dropped sharply compared to previous years, the collection rate increased dramatically. Nearly 95 percent of the effective fines issued in 2025 were collected, compared to less than one percent in 2024. 

The lower yield in financial penalties does not imply that the Gaming Commission recorded fewer infringements. In 2025, 92 new sanction proceedings were initiated, comprising 70 procedures concerning potential administrative sanctions and 22 concerning potential administrative fines. 

141 sanction decisions rendered 

The Gaming Commission rendered a total of 141 sanction decisions in 2025. Among these, 74 decisions pertained to case files opened in 2024, while an additional 65 stemmed from procedures launched during 2025. 

In 55 files, no sanction was ultimately imposed. Reasons included unproven allegations, infractions being regularized in the interim, or operators voluntarily surrendering their licenses. 

Cases that did lead to sanctions resulted in 32 formal warnings, 22 license suspensions, twelve license revocations, and twenty administrative fines. Furthermore, 68 case files were dismissed prior to initiating formal sanction proceedings. 

The annual report explicitly underscores the regulator’s persistent staffing shortage. At year-end 2025, the GC secretariat employed 42 staff members against a target workforce plan of 57 employees. Due to long-term sick leave and absences, only 33.4 full-time equivalents (FTEs) were operationally available. 

Blacklisting takes priority over financial penalties 

Rather than pursuing drawn-out fining procedures, the GC is increasingly prioritizing measures designed to swiftly cut off access to illegal websites. In March 2025, the procedure for placing illegal gambling websites on the official blacklist was streamlined. 

Between January and March, six formal reports were drawn up under the legacy framework, resulting in five URLs being blacklisted. Following the implementation of the simplified approach between March and December, an additional 155 URLs were successfully blocked. 

This continuous proliferation of new domain names persisted into 2026. For instance, the GC added another 28 illegal gambling sites to its blacklist in April 2026 alone. Several of these platforms improperly used the brand names or visual identity of established, licensed Belgian operators. 

However, blocking a URL does not offer a permanent solution. Operators can quickly mirror their platform and relaunch under a new web address, resulting in an ongoing game of cat-and-mouse between the regulator and foreign gambling companies. 

Partnership with DNS Belgium aims to accelerate domain blocks 

To address this, the GC signed a formal cooperation agreement with DNS Belgium on December 15, 2025. According to DNS Belgium’s documentation on tackling illegal gambling sites, .be domain names can be acted upon rapidly following an official notification. 

DNS Belgium disables the name servers of a reported domain within one business day, redirecting visitors to an official warning page. If the registrant fails to cease the violation, the domain name can be revoked entirely. 

This operational approach impacts an illegal operator far more directly than a fine that might never be recovered. It enables the GC to immediately prevent the platform from remaining accessible via Belgian country-code top-level domains. 

For international top-level domains, the landscape remains far more complex, requiring cross-border cooperation with foreign domain registries, web hosting providers, internet service providers (ISPs), search engines, application stores, and social media platforms. 

Digital Services Act offers new legal avenues 

The GC is also working to leverage the European Digital Services Act (DSA). This EU framework establishes clear accountability rules for intermediary services, including web hosts, social networks, online platforms, and internet access providers. 

The Digital Services Act empowers competent authorities to act against illegal online content. When an intermediary receives a legally valid order to act against illegal material, it must inform the issuing authority of the corrective measures taken. 

For the Gaming Commission, this mechanism provides a legal basis to report illegal gambling portals or prohibited gambling advertising directly to relevant online service providers, who must then take action or formally justify their refusal to do so. 

Nonetheless, the GC observes that illegal gambling advertisements frequently remain online or resurface shortly after removal. In 2025, the enforcement team had to submit requests to Meta to take down over 8,500 ads originating from illegal operators—many of which unauthorizedly displayed logos and branding belonging to licensed Belgian operators. 

GC targets financial flows powering illegal platforms 

Another critical line of action involves blocking payment channels. Commercial banks, credit card issuers, and payment service providers can play a pivotal role by intercepting deposits directed to illegal gambling platforms. 

Within the Gambling Regulators European Forum (GREF), the Gaming Commission actively participates in a dedicated project analyzing payment blocking mechanisms. The Belgian regulator is coordinating discussions among European authorities and engaging directly with payment service providers. 

Magali Clavie previously identified cooperation with banking institutions as one of the regulatory authority’s primary challenges. Blocking an illegal casino’s ability to process customer deposits can prove far more effective than levying fines against a corporate entity hiding behind complex offshore structures. 

Meanwhile, the necessity for international regulatory coordination is growing urgent. Previous research revealed that illegal online gambling deprives European nations of billions in tax revenues. Many offshore entities continue targeting European consumers without complying with domestic licensing requirements, advertising bans, or mandatory player protection standards. 

Ultimately, the 2025 annual report demonstrates that impressive paper fines provide little indication of a regulator’s true enforcement capabilities. While Belgium handed out over €10 million in gambling penalties over a six-year span, less than €600,000 was registered as collected. As a result, the GC is permanently shifting its focus toward rapid domain blocking, tech sector partnerships, and severing the financial pipelines supporting black-market gambling operators.