Brazil's betting industry has warned that the government's prohibition on fixed-odds betting could cause lasting damage to the regulated market, with operators facing financial difficulties and thousands of jobs at risk. The concerns were raised at SBC Digital Brasil Day on 28 October, which brought together 38 speakers to discuss the implications of Provisional Measure (MP) 1.394/2026.
The measure, introduced in September, prohibits the operation, intermediation and advertising of fixed-odds betting and provides for the termination of existing authorisations. On 3 November the Supreme Federal Court (STF) will hold a public hearing on the matter, scheduled by Justice Luiz Fux following legal challenges to the measure.
Plínio Lemos Jorge, president of the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL), said the industry had been unprepared for the government's decision. Some licensed businesses are already considering judicial recovery proceedings. 'We didn't see the shot coming. The market has gone back to 2022, when there was no prospect at all,' he said. Lemos Jorge questioned how many of Brazil's previously licensed operators would be capable of resuming business if the prohibition were overturned.
Industry participants warned that the restrictions could accelerate migration towards illegal gambling platforms. Leonardo Baptista, a payments industry representative, estimated that more than 40,000 illegal betting websites were operating. ANJL has issued extrajudicial notices to Meta, Google and TikTok concerning advertising for unauthorised platforms. The association has also encouraged operators to report websites impersonating licensed brands to police and the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA).
Former SPA official Waldir Marques defended the safeguards established under Brazil's licensing regime, including financial and technical requirements, beneficial ownership disclosures and daily transaction reporting through the SIGAP regulatory system. Removing licensed operators would undermine these controls while leaving consumers exposed to platforms operating outside regulatory supervision.
Emanuel Macedo de Medeiros, representing SIGA, questioned whether prohibition could achieve the government's consumer protection objectives. 'Regulation may not be a silver bullet, but prohibition is certainly a shot in the foot,' he said.
The loss of betting-related revenues could affect sports federations, football clubs and grassroots competitions. Participants estimated that approximately 15,000 direct jobs across more than 180 betting brands could be affected, alongside employment among suppliers and service providers.
Tax lawyer Ana Helena Pamplona challenged claims that licensed betting companies were not contributing to public finances, pointing to corporate taxation and sector-specific levies. Journalist Eliane Nunes acknowledged that the industry had struggled to communicate the differences between regulated and illegal operators. BNLData editor Magnho José criticised the lack of publicly available regulatory data.
José Francisco Manssur, who previously led the betting regulation process at the Finance Ministry, called for coordinated industry representation ahead of the Supreme Court hearing. Ana Bárbara Teixeira, vice-president of Abrajogo, highlighted proposed amendments to the provisional measure intended to preserve the regulated market. Lawyer Fernanda Meirelles warned that the commercial damage could persist even if the legislation were overturned, as companies had terminated contracts rather than temporarily suspended them.
