A firm passports into the Netherlands, files the notification, starts running Dutch language campaigns, and finds out later that conduct of business in the host state is not covered by the home state licence in the way the founder assumed. The Dutch model makes that easy to get wrong, because supervision is split.
Twin peaks, and what each peak wants
The Netherlands operates a twin peaks structure. The Autoriteit Financiële Markten supervises conduct: how products are designed and sold, what you tell clients, how you handle complaints, how you advertise, and whether the client is being treated fairly. De Nederlandsche Bank supervises prudential soundness: capital, liquidity, and whether the institution can meet its obligations. Both maintain public registers, and Dutch clients are told to check them.
For a Dutch authorised investment firm you deal with both. For a firm passporting in from another EEA state under the EU framework, prudential supervision stays with your home regulator, while a defined set of host state conduct rules and general good provisions apply locally. That split is the practical content of passporting, and misreading it is the most common cause of a host regulator making contact.
The Netherlands was early on leveraged retail products
Dutch authorities moved on the marketing of high risk leveraged retail products before the EU wide measures arrived, and the country has consistently been at the strict end of the conduct spectrum on CFDs, binary options and similar instruments. When the EU wide product intervention framework took over, the direction of travel was already set: restrictions on leverage available to retail clients, mandatory risk warnings, negative balance protection and limits on incentives such as bonuses.
What that means for an operator is simple. Any acquisition strategy built on aggressive incentives, implied returns or promotional offers is outside what Dutch conduct supervision tolerates, and the mechanism that catches you is usually a complaint or an advertisement, not a licence review. Our notes on CFD marketing restrictions and bonus bans cover the specific practices that draw attention across Europe.
One detail worth pricing in: complaints in the Netherlands can reach a financial complaints scheme as well as the supervisor, and a firm passporting in is generally expected to be reachable through a route Dutch consumers can use in their own language. Support in English only, with a ticket queue nobody answers at Dutch business hours, is a conduct exposure rather than a cost saving.
Reverse solicitation is not a strategy
Founders serving Dutch clients from outside the EEA sometimes rely on the idea that the client approached them, so no local permission is needed. The exemption exists in EU law, and it is genuinely narrow: it turns on the client's own initiative, and any marketing, advertising or outreach directed at that market undermines the claim. Running paid campaigns in Dutch and then invoking reverse solicitation is not a defensible position. The reverse solicitation article sets out where the line sits and what happens when a supervisor tests it.
Descriptive, not advice. Dutch conduct requirements and the scope of host state rules for incoming firms are technical and change over time. Take Dutch legal advice on your specific model and distribution plan.
Who accepts what, in the Dutch context
Dutch banks and payment institutions apply the same know your business machinery as everywhere else, with a particular sensitivity because the AFM publishes warnings about firms operating without the required permission. A firm named on a supervisor's warning list becomes very hard to bank, and the effect travels: warning lists are cross referenced by compliance teams in other countries and by payment providers regardless of where the account is held. That is the single most expensive consequence of getting the permission question wrong, and it is not reversible by later obtaining a licence somewhere else.
Card acquirers assess merchant category, chargeback ratios against scheme thresholds and the legality of the activity in the customer's country. That last test matters here. An acquirer underwriting European consumer flow will ask whether the product may lawfully be sold to those consumers, and the answer for a non EEA firm with no passport and no local permission is not one that survives underwriting. Payment approval rates then reflect issuer level risk decisions on top, which is a separate mechanism covered in payment approval rates.
Ad platforms and app stores run financial services verification per market. Advertising leveraged products to Dutch users generally requires demonstrating authorisation valid in the Netherlands, whether directly or by passport. There is no version of this where an offshore registration substitutes for it. Liquidity providers and technology vendors, meanwhile, look at your regulatory standing to satisfy their own onboarding, and a clean EEA authorisation with a proper Dutch passport notification reads well; an unclear position reads badly.
The realistic route in
If you want Dutch retail clients, hold an EEA authorisation with permissions covering what you do, notify properly, and build your marketing to Dutch conduct standards from the start rather than adapting after a complaint. If your model cannot survive without incentive driven acquisition and high leverage, the Netherlands is not a market you should be targeting, and saying so plainly saves more money than any structuring exercise. Trading leveraged products carries a high risk of losing money, which is exactly why these rules exist.
Operationally, host state conduct compliance is a records problem: what was disclosed, when, to whom, in which language, and what the client acknowledged. Firms that treat that as a marketing task fail it. Firms that treat it as a data task, with the disclosures and acknowledgements captured in the client portal itself, pass it. That is the part our broker CRM is built around.
"If your campaign only works when nobody reads the risk warning, you do not have a Dutch market strategy. You have a complaint waiting to be filed."
— Roman Onta, Executive Director, SINGUARD
Key Takeaways
- The Netherlands splits supervision: the AFM covers conduct and selling practices, De Nederlandsche Bank covers prudential soundness.
- Passporting in keeps prudential supervision at home but leaves host state conduct and marketing rules fully applicable.
- Dutch authorities were early and strict on marketing leveraged retail products, so incentive led acquisition is the wrong plan for this market.
- Appearing on a supervisor's warning list damages banking and acquiring across borders, and later obtaining a licence elsewhere does not undo it.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the AFM supervise?
The Autoriteit Financiële Markten is the Dutch conduct of business supervisor for financial markets, covering how financial products are offered and sold, information given to clients, advertising and market conduct. Prudential supervision of banks and many investment firms sits with De Nederlandsche Bank.
Can I serve Dutch clients with a licence from another EU country?
Yes, if your home authorisation covers the services and you complete the passport notification. Host state conduct rules and the EU wide product intervention measures on retail leverage and risk warnings still apply to how you market and sell in the Netherlands.
Does reverse solicitation let a non EU broker take Dutch clients?
The exemption is narrow and depends on the client acting entirely on their own initiative. Advertising, campaigns or outreach directed at that market undermine the claim, and supervisors test it against your actual marketing rather than your terms of business.
About the Author
Roman Onta is an Executive Director at SINGUARD. He builds the Prop Firm CRM, the Broker CRM, Scalegram and CopySignals side by side with his brother Alex Onta, and he helped on the design of eTrader, the division Alex built and leads. His ground is worldwide payment processing, AML compliance and the corporate structures brokers are built on, work the two of them carry together, shaped by executive roles in the UAE and international corporates. He lives and works in Dubai for most of the year. Meet the executive duo leading Singuard's five divisions.