Charmaine Hogan, Global Head of Government Relations at Playtech, analyses the first year of Brazil’s regulated market and looks ahead at what to expect from year two.
It’s now been over a year since Brazil opened its regulated gambling market. The first half of 2025 was relatively slow, but momentum built quickly in the second half as clearer data emerged. Many have shared their perspectives on the first 12 months, but in this piece, I aim to look beyond the headlines to focus on what these developments mean and who they matter for.
Brazil is already positioned to become one of the world’s five largest gambling markets by potential. That scale makes one thing clear: getting regulation right here isn’t simply important – it’s strategic, and it will shape the future of the industry.
Years in the making — yet look where we are now
Brazil’s path to regulation was lengthy, even by industry standards. Although fixed‑odds betting was legally approved in 2018, full regulation only came into effect on 1 January 2025.
Comparable markets have followed similar paths. Colombia established a benchmark open‑licensing model and is now at similar trajectory of mature markets. Peru finally completed its licensing regime only in 2024, offering an instructive example of how market access and public policy evolve together.
Legislation is rarely straightforward, particularly in a federal democracy where social impacts are rightly scrutinised. However, Brazil’s willingness to take that extra time to learn from other jurisdictions to avoid repeating familiar mistakes is vitally important and a testament to the desire to implement things correctly, rather than quickly. Even if timelines between regulations issued and market opening were tight.
Three key stakeholders, one test
A regulated market only works when it works for all three key stakeholders simultaneously: the state, operators, and players. Get the balance wrong for any one of them, and the whole framework begins to fail.
For the state, regulation must deliver on its social contract: tax revenues collected and reinvested into public goods, meaningful enforcement against unlicensed operators (who for now still account for significant online betting activity), and a credible system of oversight that has the public trust.
The SPA has made a strong and deliberate start, and the regulatory direction is positive. Sustaining this progress will require a consistent enforcement strategy and continued political commitment.
For operators, the environment must be commercially predictable and able to withstand uncertainty. Ongoing risks of tax and levy increases on top of an already significant burden makes long-term planning difficult.
Colombia’s experience with a bet-value tax which triggered a sharp revenue drop is an instructive precedent. Operators want clarity on the full product framework: loyalty programmes, bonusing structures and the breadth of fixed-odds games permitted under the law are all central aspects to building a competitive licensed offer.
This year Brazil has a significant advantage: the FIFA World Cup will generate extraordinary betting interest, and for the first time Brazilian players can engage with it through a regulated fixed-odds sports betting market, a direct demonstration of what legalisation delivers.
Equally important is the role of fixed‑odds games as a retention tool during quieter periods in the sporting calendar. They keep players within the licensed ecosystem when the sportsbook alone cannot. Licensed operators must be able to offer high‑quality products and adequate choice without being commercially disadvantaged for doing so.
For players, the question is simple: does regulation make the experience safer, fairer and more enjoyable? Regulation brings mandatory KYC, limit‑setting, self‑exclusion tools, access to support services, and seamless payments through PIX.
At the same time, players expect the full range of products, and yet we still see tension across product verticals, fuelled by a stigma surrounding forms of gambling. That product breadth is a direct driver of channelling rates.
However, when friction is disproportionate at registration or before a player can actually play, players drift to unlicensed alternatives. Getting the consumer experience right is not just an industry interest; it is a public policy imperative. With that in mind, it is encouraging to see a regulator very engaged with the industry and willing to listen, that aligns with the industry-wide desire for evidence-led policy.
Late March saw SPA’s public consultation regarding bringing B2B suppliers under a licensing regime come to a close. The proposal would see any company supplying a licensed operator in Brazil require a license of its own.
It is a significant decision at what is still an early stage of the regulated market’s development and therefore, the fact that SPA has tackled the topic through structured public consultation, inviting industry input before making any notable policy decisions, is another example of a collaborative regulatory culture.
A framework that holds the ecosystem to the same rigorous standards of integrity, player protection and financial probity is a prospect that Playtech supports. It would create accountability across the ecosystem, and reputable third parties will play their part which in turn strengthens the trust with other industry stakeholders. Inevitably this also requires SPA to have enforcement capacity here.
Brazil’s distinctive player protection commitment
Brazil’s Law 14,790/2023 explicitly mandates the identification of problem gambling as a legislative objective, language few jurisdictions had codified so directly in primary legislation at the time. Other markets have strengthened similar provisions, but Brazil placed it at the foundation.
Regulation is not merely a revenue mechanism; it is a commitment to managing a product that carries real risk for a minority of consumers, while enabling the vast majority to enjoy it as what it fundamentally is: entertainment.
What is equally encouraging is that Brazil has, from the outset, resisted the temptation of blanket, one-size-fits-all restrictions, the kind that create friction for the majority without necessarily meaningfully improving protection for the minority who need it most.
The European experience illustrates what happens when the industry fails to raise the responsible gambling bar proactively: media scrutiny intensifies, political pressure follows, and blunt interventions become the default response.
Brazil’s approach, embedding identification of at-risk behaviour at the individual level into its legal framework, reflects a more sophisticated understanding of consumer protection, one that Playtech has long advocated for through tools that focus on individual player behaviour rather than universal limits.
A concrete milestone: One year in SPA rolled out the self-exclusion platform. As of January 2026, more than 217,000 Brazilians had opted to voluntarily register with the self-exclusion system, which was only established one month prior by the Ministry of Finance. This is an important tool, and its wide-spread awareness is an adjacent important part of the responsible gambling architecture.
Protecting minors online is equally embedded in Brazilian law. Marketing restrictions, age verification and prohibitions on advertising likely to reach young people mirror the spirit of Europe’s Digital Services Act.
Social media reach is a particular concern, and Brazil’s authorities have been alert to this. Neighbours across the region are watching closely: public policy priorities differ, political contexts differ, consumer demographics differ.
There is no single global regulatory model. But the objectives are largely the same everywhere. The key is keeping that robust approach rather than defaulting to blunt measures that defeat the ultimate purpose of protecting the individuals that need it most. To date, Brazil’s regulator has not done so.
Bans don’t work, neither does excessive friction
In a modern digital landscape, blanket bans are largely ineffective, as consumers across all age groups can easily access unregulated online environments. In the United States, there was the long‑standing ban on sports betting.
Since PASPA (Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act) was overturned in 2018, the U.S. has emerged as one of the fastest‑growing regulated betting markets globally. The conclusion is unmistakable: regulation that channels demand works better than attempts to suppress it.
Calls to ban gambling in Brazil misread both the evidence and the public, over 86% of Brazilian sports fans already engage with betting platforms. The unregulated market does not disappear when licensed operators are restricted.
Equally, excessive friction in the licensed market risks producing similar outcomes as prohibition. The state bears the social costs either way, but loses the revenue and loses oversight, and the players are afforded zero protections. Strip away the entertainment value of the licensed offer and unlicensed operators are the only beneficiaries.
Over a year in, confident not complacent
Challenges in the first year of Brazil’s regulated market were always to be expected. Launching in any newly regulated market is never straightforward: each jurisdiction legitimately adds its own local flavour to regulation, and Brazil is no different.
What was not inevitable was the quality of the framework underpinning it. The SPA is building the needed institutional capacity. And Brazil embedded player protection as a legislative foundation.
There is real work still to do: sustained enforcement, tax stability and continued refinement of the consumer experience. But the direction is right, the ambition is clear, and the prize, a well-regulated market that genuinely works for the state, for operators, and above all for players, is there for all to see.
The licensed market generated over R$37bn in GGR in 2025, as per SPA data, exceeding initial projections of ~R$31bn, with nearly R$10bn collected in taxes and 25.2 million Brazilians betting on licensed platforms. A standout market in many ways.
Year two will bring both consolidation and further regulatory refinement. Whilst tax policy and costs of compliance are two key components for the market, the upward trajectory is hard to argue with.
