Key Moments:
- The Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA) in Brazil granted betting operators 30 more days to apply new rules targeting social welfare recipients.
- Critics and the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) warned the policy could drive up to 45% of affected bettors to black market options.
- Compliance challenges and doubts about the ban’s enforceability are growing among industry experts and analysts.
Regulatory Extension Signals Enforcement Challenges
The Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA) in Brazil has provided licensed betting operators with an additional 30 days to implement a new restriction targeting social welfare recipients. Under Normative Ordinance No. 2,217/2025, operators must close accounts belonging to Bolsa Família or BPC beneficiaries. The regulation is designed to prevent the use of welfare benefits for gambling purposes.
The rule followed a 2024 Supreme Federal Court decision supporting limits on using welfare funds for gambling. The SPA expanded it further, banning all gambling for welfare recipients. Despite the initial 30-day window for compliance, operators have struggled with technical and procedural obstacles, leading to the SPA quietly announcing a one-month extension to the deadline. While no official explanation was given, sources within the sector indicated ongoing difficulty in identifying and verifying linked accounts.
Critics Warn of Black Market Migration
The SPA’s policy is intended to shield financially vulnerable Brazilians from gambling risks, according to SPA chief Regis Dudena. However, the move has sparked criticism, especially from the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL). The group contends that the rule goes further than the Supreme Court intended, suggesting that by excluding all welfare recipients from legal betting, the regulation oversteps its original mandate of preventing only the direct use of welfare funds for gambling.
Concerns are mounting that the restriction could have the opposite of its intended effect. In a study commissioned by ANJL and shared with BNL Data, about 45% of social welfare recipients stated they would turn to black market betting options if denied access to regulated operators.
| Original Rule | SPA Implementation | Industry Reaction |
|---|---|---|
| Ban on using welfare funds for gambling | Ban on all betting for welfare recipients; operators must close affected accounts | Concerns over feasibility, black market risk, and business impacts |
Analysts Express Skepticism About Effectiveness
Industry observers are questioning whether the ban can achieve its objectives. Ed Birkin, managing director of H2 Gambling Capital, argued that it is unlikely the policy will prevent welfare recipients from gambling. Birkin told iGB:
“There may be some who say, frankly, you should spend money on what you want. But if you’ve been given benefits for a certain reason, then that’s it. But this idea that they can stop them betting; unless they’re able to really go down to restricting almost what they can spend it on [and say] you cannot spend it with a legal betting operator, they’re just spending with the illegal ones.”
This perspective highlights the loopholes in the enforcement strategy, emphasizing that bans without robust mechanisms may merely shift activity into unlicensed and potentially riskier environments.
Regulatory Landscape and Market Implications
Ever since the legalization of sports betting in 2023, Brazil’s government has worked to strengthen oversight, enhance taxation, and implement robust controls throughout the gambling industry. The current ban represents another attempt to bolster accountability and safeguard susceptible populations.
However, the SPA’s extension and the operational disruptions it has entailed are raising questions throughout the industry. As operators monitor developments and seek clarity on compliance measures, doubts remain regarding whether the policy will fulfill its intended purpose or simply drive customers towards the illicit market.
The ongoing developments underscore a core debate in gambling regulation: whether restricting access genuinely alters betting behavior, or merely changes the channels through which it occurs.
- Author
Daniel Williams
