Brazils Gaming Future Uncertain as Senate Delays Vote on Regulation

Brazils ambition for a regulated gaming sector may be on hold until 2019.

This week saw another hurdle as the Senate’s Constitution and Justice Committee (CCJ) postponed the vote on PLS 186/2014, the legislation that could usher in industry oversight. As elections approach in the coming year, experts suggest 2019 is a more feasible timeframe. This postponement is particularly disappointing considering the potential economic boost for Brazil. Research commissioned by the Remote Gambling Association in November estimated a substantial $2.1 billion in yearly income, assuming effective market regulation.

The KPMG analysis emphasized the importance of an intelligent licensing framework, a tax structure based on gross gaming revenue (not turnover as seen in some recent cases), and strong responsible gaming protocols. Nevertheless, these suggestions are currently irrelevant. The ongoing postponements have shifted attention to a more pressing matter: the privatization of Rio de Janeiro’s state lottery, LOTEX. Further complicating matters, mere days before the CCJ vote, certain senators introduced contentious amendments, including one requiring gambling entities to collaborate with domestic firms possessing a minimum 30% ownership.

A comprehensive regulatory proposal in Brazil suggests a substantial 30% levy on all gaming income, encompassing both digital and physical venues. Although this attention-grabbing tariff is still being deliberated, legislators did concur to prohibit slot machines and video bingo outside of established casinos. The destiny of the complete legislation, nevertheless, hangs in the balance as a crucial parliamentary body evaluates the possible consequences of gaming on government coffers. This postponement arises amid findings from the Brazilian Legal Gaming Institute revealing that illicit gaming activities within the nation amass a shocking $6.2 billion each year. Undoubtedly, the matter of authorizing gaming in Brazil is a divisive one that has circulated within the chambers of Congress for numerous years, with resolute viewpoints from both factions hindering any significant advancement.

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *