Brazil's regulated market responds to government campaign as fears of prohibition rise
The regulation of betting in Brazil has once again moved to the centre of political debate following the Federal Government’s new campaign on online betting. The posts published on the Government of Brazil’s social media channels, featuring slogans such as “Rules for bets, protection for you” and “Without rules, you’re out”, show an important shift in how the state has started positioning itself regarding the betting market.
The main point of the campaign is not the prohibition of betting. There is also no explicit attempt to condemn the act of gambling. The message constructed by the government is different: betting exists, but it must operate within rules defined by the state.
The new narrative around betting regulation in Brazil
The images released by the government reinforce this idea continuously. In one of the campaign pieces, the message states that “if it is in Brazil, it must follow our laws”. In another, the government says it has “tightened oversight on the prediction market in Brazil”. There were also posts about the new self-exclusion programme, free treatment through the SUS public healthcare system for people with compulsive behaviour, and restrictions for beneficiaries of social welfare programmes.
All of this accompanies the new regulation implemented at the beginning of 2025. Since then, the Ministry of Finance, through the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting (SPA), has been implementing rules for operator authorisation, sector oversight, consumer protection mechanisms, and combating the illegal market.
In recent months, the government has also intensified the blocking of unauthorised platforms. In April, the Secretariat of Communication announced actions against prediction platforms considered irregular, arguing that these services were operating without complying with the rules of the Brazilian regulatory model. Institutional messaging began emphasising that the issue was not necessarily the existence of betting itself, but rather the lack of control over it.
At the same time, the campaign reveals an interesting contradiction. Although the government tries to associate regulation with social protection, the campaign materials use aesthetics extremely similar to those employed by betting platforms themselves and criticised by lawmakers from the government’s own coalition. 3D characters, flying coins, vibrant colours, flashy typography, and social media style language make the images resemble campaigns for digital entertainment apps.
The contradiction becomes even more evident when compared with the discussions held during the Bets CPI, Brazil’s Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry. During Senate debates, lawmakers specifically criticised the use of highly gamified campaigns, digital influencers, and visual reward mechanisms associated with games such as Fortune Tiger, known in Brazil as the “little tiger game”. The political debate itself began questioning the psychological impact of elements such as vibrant colours, cartoon mascots, and rapid stimuli used to increase user engagement and retention.
The return of prohibitionist rhetoric around betting in Brazil
Although the new institutional campaign supports regulation, state control, and combating the illegal market, the debate over a possible prohibition of betting has once again emerged within President Lula’s government in recent months. The topic returned to the agenda following statements by Guilherme Boulos, minister of the General Secretariat of the Presidency, who said that the regulation approved by Congress “did not solve” the sector’s problems and associated betting platforms with money laundering, debt, and negative social impacts.
During an interview on the programme Bom Dia, Ministro, broadcast by CanalGov, Boulos stated that “these bets have become an epidemic” and claimed that the platforms were “corroding the Brazilian family” and “ruining families with debt”. The statement showed that, despite the consolidation of the regulated market, part of the government still adopts a much tougher stance towards online betting.
Some industry experts linked the government’s new position to the approach of the 2026 elections. Behind the scenes in Brasília, proposals have begun circulating to further tighten sector rules, including severe advertising restrictions, limitations on online casino games, and even projects advocating the criminalisation of betting in the country.
At the same time, industry specialists continue arguing that prohibiting betting would not eliminate the market, but would instead push millions of users back towards illegal platforms without state supervision. This is the opinion of specialist Magnho José, president of the Brazilian Legal Gaming Institute, who believes that “the real issue is not whether it should exist, but who governs it, the State, or illegality”.
This contradiction helps explain why the government’s communication appears so ambiguous. While part of the federal administration works to consolidate regulation, another part still flirts with rhetoric closer to prohibition. The main example is President Lula himself, who recently spoke against the gaming and betting market in Brazil. What is most notable is that the regulated market itself has already become a multi-billion real source of federal revenue.
In 2025, betting companies recorded around BRL 37 billion ($7.33 billion) in gross gaming revenue (GGR) in Brazil and, according to data released by the Federal Revenue Service, the federal government collected around BRL 9.95 billion ($1.97 billion) from the betting market in 2025, including taxes on operators’ gross revenue, in addition to taxes such as IRPJ, CSLL, PIS, and Cofins.
Regulated market responds
Comments from industry specialists showed that part of the regulated market interpreted the campaign and the advance of anti-betting rhetoric within the government with concern, mainly because of the risk of strengthening the underground market.
Executive Amilton Noble, executive director at Hebara Lottery Products Distributor, stated in comments on the LinkedIn post that “only regulated gaming generates benefits for society”. According to him, considering prohibition would mean “throwing millions of bettors into the arms of the illegal market”. Noble also argued that while there are around 190 legal websites in Brazil, thousands of illegal platforms continue to emerge every month.
The same line of thinking was followed by Thiago Iusim, founder and CEO of Betshield Responsible Gaming, who stated that “the problem is not the existence of gambling”, but the difference between those operating “within the rules” and those operating outside them. According to him, attacking the regulated market while the illegal market continues to grow “does not protect citizens” and instead “protects organised crime”.
Specialist Fellipe Eduardo Fraga, chief business officer at Stellar Gaming, also followed this line, stating that tools such as self-exclusion had already been developed by regulated operators themselves. According to him, combating illegal platforms would be essential to create “a safe entertainment environment for Brazilians”.
The reactions show that part of the industry views the return of rhetoric closer to prohibitionism within Brazilian political debate with concern. For these specialists, the hardening of the narrative against betting could create regulatory uncertainty precisely at a time when the country is trying to consolidate an official model of licensing, oversight, and responsible gaming.
The debate, however, gained a more political dimension following the repercussions of another comment published on social media. Magnho José stated that the government was attempting to “demonise betting” by associating platforms with rising household debt. According to him, there is a contradiction between political rhetoric and the State’s own practical actions. While bodies such as the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting work to regulate and oversee the sector, part of the public communication continues associating betting with broader social problems.
This article was originally published in Portuguese on 19 May.
