Klarna violates Dutch law by collecting debts without proper registration

Dutch experts and the responsible minister now say Klarna’s current Dutch debt‑collection activities are likely in breach of the Netherlands’ Debt Collection Services Quality Act (Wet kwaliteit incassodienstverlening, Wki) because Klarna is not registered in the mandatory debt‑collection register while engaging in extrajudicial collection.

What Dutch law requires

• Since 1 April 2024, any party providing out‑of‑court debt‑collection services to consumers or small businesses in the Netherlands must register in the national debt‑collection register managed by Justis.

• The Wki applies to both domestic and foreign companies that perform extrajudicial collection activities “in the Netherlands,” including factoring companies and BNPL providers that pursue overdue claims.​

• Operating as a debt‑collection service provider without this registration can constitute an economic offense and may lead to administrative or criminal sanctions.

Klarna’s position and current status

• Parliamentary responses in early 2026 state that Klarna falls under the Wki and therefore must be in the national debt‑collection register, but it is not currently registered.

• Despite this, Klarna sends payment reminders and collection notices to Dutch consumers for overdue BNPL installments—activities experts consider “extrajudicial collection” within the scope of the Wki.

• Klarna has acknowledged the issue, saying it supports the Wki, that it “doesn’t work directly with debt collection” in some contexts, but that its application for registration is now prepared and will be finalized.​

Why experts say this violates Dutch law

• Legal and academic experts quoted in Dutch media argue the law is “crystal clear”: if Klarna is performing out‑of‑court debt collection without being registered, it is committing an economic offense under the Wki.

• The minister’s confirmation that Klarna is not in the register, combined with its ongoing reminder and collection activity, is the basis for the view that Klarna is currently acting unlawfully in the Netherlands.

• Foreign status or EU passporting does not exempt Klarna: the Wki explicitly captures foreign providers operating in the Netherlands and requires them to register before engaging in collection activities.​

Practical implications and open points

• At this stage, the language used by the minister and commentators is that Klarna “may be in breach” and “possibly” violates the Wki, pending any formal enforcement action or court ruling.

• If Dutch authorities find a violation, Klarna could face fines or other sanctions, and it may need to adjust its Dutch collection practices and governance to comply with Wki standards.

• For other BNPL and fintech creditors collecting their own receivables, the Klarna case signals that first‑party status does not automatically sit outside Dutch debt‑collection regulation where local law defines and regulates “collection services” functionally.