The recent ban on betting in Brazil has sparked significant debate over its potential impacts, particularly regarding the growth of illegal gambling operations. Industry experts are sounding alarms that the prohibition could push gambling activities into the hands of unregulated operators, undermining consumer protections.
This issue was central to a public hearing held at the Supreme Federal Court (STF) on Tuesday, where representatives from 34 organizations gathered to discuss Provisional Measure 1.394, which implements the betting ban.
According to the Ministry of Justice, between September 25 and October 29, authorities requested the removal of 36,905 websites linked to illegal betting. While this figure highlights the government’s commitment to tackling unlicensed gambling, industry voices expressed concern that pushing licensed operators out of the market could complicate enforcement efforts.
Pietro Cardia, spokesperson for the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL), reported a 32% drop in betting volumes over the last three months compared to the same timeframe last year. Prior to the ban, he noted that over 60% of the betting market was operating legally.
Udo Seckelmann, who represents the football club Botafogo, referenced data showing that 188 websites had received approval from the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA), Brazil's gambling regulatory body, while more than 66,000 illegal sites had been blocked in under two years of regulation.
Proponents of licensed operators argue that they have played a crucial role in establishing frameworks to monitor suspicious betting activity and combat issues such as match-fixing and money laundering. Representatives from São Paulo FC emphasized that regulated operators have taken proactive measures to monitor, report, and eliminate irregular betting, in addition to educating athletes and staff on match-fixing and creating reporting mechanisms.
There is growing concern that shifting gambling activities to unlicensed platforms could undermine these safeguards. Industry representatives emphasize that illegal operators generally do not adhere to standards for consumer protection, reporting, or collaboration with sporting organizations.
In defense of the ban, the government has pointed to social and health concerns associated with betting. Justice Minister Wellington César Lima e Silva characterized betting platforms as fostering “architecture of dependency.” Health Minister Alexandre Padilha presented statistics related to problem gambling and suicide, while Attorney General Jorge Messias contended that prior regulatory frameworks did not sufficiently protect families.
Consumer spending was another contentious topic. Ana Clara Marques de Barros Santos, representing Aigaming, cited SPA data indicating that 70% of bettors spend up to BRL50 each month, with average betting sessions lasting about 12 minutes. The industry utilized these statistics to refute claims that gambling leads to excessive household spending.
Conversely, representatives from the Brazilian Association of Supermarkets (Abras), the National Confederation of Commerce (CNC), and the National Confederation of Industry (CNI) expressed opposition to betting, raising concerns regarding consumer debt, spending habits, and health impacts.
This discourse is part of the Supreme Court's review of Provisional Measure 1.394, which is currently being challenged by the ANJL. The association has petitioned Minister Luiz Fux to suspend the measure while the court deliberates.
Minister Fux will determine the next steps in this ongoing debate. At the heart of the hearing remains the pivotal question for policymakers: Are the risks associated with gambling better addressed through prohibition, or is a regulated market with robust consumer safeguards the preferred approach?
