Brazil's 1st year of regulation: instability, taxes, disunity

Brazil's 1st year of regulation: instability, taxes, disunity

Day 1 – EGR Latam Summit 2026

Panel: “12 months of Brazilian regulation: successes, challenges, and obstacles for the coming year”

Speakers: Udo Seckelmann, Fellipe Fraga, Alessandra Catran, Neil Montgomery, Alessandro Valente

Moderator: José Magnho

One year after the entry into force of the Brazilian regulatory framework for betting and online casino, the main legal and executive sector leaders presented a clear diagnosis: the model is progressing, but under strong tensions that threaten its sustainability and competitiveness against the illegal market.

Main difficulties of the first regulated year:

Strengthened illegal market and challenges in user acquisition

Alessandra Catran opened the debate pointing out that, despite regulatory progress, the legal industry faces serious barriers to growth:

Legal uncertainty and player behavior

Neil Montgomery agreed that the regulatory landscape remains volatile, with changes in already consolidated rules and tax burdens.

He also warned about a growing phenomenon: a volume of lawsuits initiated by players that far exceeds that of other markets, which worries international operators due to the risk profile of Brazilian consumers.

Public image and lack of political dialogue

For Alessandro Valente, the industry is still treated as a “taboo” in Brazil, which limits learning and the participation of political figures in specialized forums.

He pointed out a lack of unity among associations and sector players to educate and engage with political groups that have strong media presence but low technical knowledge.

What the industry needs to improve:

Legal certainty and public reputation

Udo Seckelmann emphasized that the main challenge is to consolidate regulatory stability and work to improve public opinion about the sector.

Focus on the illegal market and openness to dialogue

Fellipe Fraga called on the government to stop pressuring legal operators and direct efforts towards combating illegal gambling, as well as fostering a culture of listening to understand the limits and particularities of the business.

He also referred to the need to work with specialized journalists who investigate margins, risks, and real operational restrictions.

A federal agreement and clarity on domains

Paulo warned that the Union currently positions itself as the regulatory body without considering the role of states and municipalities.

He criticized that official campaigns promote the .bet.br domains as the only trustworthy ones, casting doubt on the legality of licensed state operators using other domains.

He advocated moving towards a clear federal agreement.

The tax burden under debate: 15% or 24%?

The currently projected 15% already discourages investment

Alessandra noted that although a 15% burden is viable, it reduces investment and favors illegal operators, as well as putting pressure on companies that can hardly sustain themselves amid tax increases.

A 24% rate would be “unviable”

Fellipe was emphatic:

Would it be illegal to increase the rate after investments have been made?

Neil stated that there is no legal clarity about the potential illegality of a tax increase after licenses have been granted under different rules. He recalled that the government expected 40 operators and today faces a larger volume, reopening the fiscal discussion.

He also mentioned a new dividend tax announced the day before, which directly affects international operators.

In a passage that sparked debate, he raised whether the lobby attributed to the evangelical caucus actually responds to illegal market interests.

Udo added that several companies are considering canceling their licenses and demanding reimbursement, although since these are precarious authorizations, not concession contracts, this facilitates regulatory adjustments without major legal obstacles.

Licenses: limited approvals and risk of expiration

Udo highlighted that in 2025 only 3 or 4 companies were approved, without clear official reasons.

He also explained that there is a significant risk: after approval, the operator has 30 days to make the payment, but internal procedures of the regulator can consume much of the deadline, causing the automatic loss of an approved license.

Affiliation: a sector marginalized from regulation

Alessandro criticized that affiliates were never included in the regulatory process, which led to a law where the operator is responsible for their activities. This caused a contraction of the affiliate market in Brazil, far from the 40% user acquisition it represents globally.

He also warned that the official narrative in favor of .bet.br raises doubts about state operators with other domains, and that the government must work with Apple to allow mobile apps from legal operators, as has already happened in other countries.

Paulo concluded that state and municipal lotteries must be incorporated into the regulatory discussion.

Challenges for the coming year

Tags: Brasil, Brazil betting, EGR Latam Summit 2026, 12 months of Brazilian regulation, EGR Latam Summit 2025