“In addition to other issues, sports betting is an innovative topic that attracts everyone's attention,” opened the panel Judge Ricardo Miguel, who then gave the floor to Udo Seckelmann, a lawyer at Bichara e Motta and a member of ANDD.
Seckelmann highlighted that sports betting, if considered the Criminal Misdemeanors Law, could be understood as a prohibited activity, “but Law 13.756/2018 legalized the sector, after the sports betting boom began to be explored around the world, where the activity was legalized around 2005 and they also started to exist in Brazil,” he says, remembering that the offer to Brazilians started to happen through the internet without the companies settling in the country.
With the 2018 law, betting began to be contemplated in the Brazilian market, although it has not yet been regulated. “We are in a period of transition and we see many football clubs being sponsored by bookmakers, even though they are not installed in Brazil.”
Udo informed those present of the presentation so far of three regulatory drafts. “The most recent was presented earlier this month and we believe it will be the last – or penultimate – until we have the regulation of the activity. Therefore, I ask my colleague Luciano Andrade Pinheiro if ‘do we really need regulation of this market?’”
It is evident that Brazil needs such regulation, according to the lawyer, since Law 13,756 itself determines this. “The government loses with the lack of revenue, and the market with the gray area and the doubt about what can and cannot be exploited,” he said.
For him, “the government does not want to regulate and is playing games and saying that it is meeting the deadlines to shut the market up. The first one was dark, the second was worse and the one today, I can't believe that anyone stopped to do it. The market was consulted, hearings took place and experts gave their opinion. We need regulation now.”
Udo commented that they are basing the panel on the draft presented in early May. “I expected something worse, especially regarding the licensing model. Today we have a 100% unlicensed market because we don't have the regulation. The big question is how many market operators will come to Brazil to explore the activity,” he commented.
Seckelmann recalled that some countries, such as Portugal and France, were not successful in the activity due to the way the sector was regulated, but with the observation and analysis of good international practices where the operation is a success, Brazil will be able to create a strong segment and with a high capacity to generate jobs and taxes. “Brazil has to prepare fertile ground for operators to want to come to the country. It is no use stipulating an extremely high licensing fee and high monthly or quarterly inspection fees and absurd taxation for both the operator and the gambler and thinking that these foreign operators will want to come to Brazil,” he said.
Judge Ricardo Miguel questioned the speakers if the regulation can help to open the Brazilian market for the gaming sector.
Andrade Pinheiro said that sports betting is a type of game and the regulation can be a test balloon for the whole gaming sector in Brazil. Seckelmann agreed, and thinks it will be a test for a future legalization of other types of verticals in the country, but that at the moment the permission to exploit only sports betting is not so attractive for operators who offer on their websites other verticals, such as online casino.
Luciano also commented that the land-based is migrating, worldwide, to online. “Today we see many casinos that used to operate on land now operating on the internet.”
Finally, Udo recalled that the draft regulation of sports betting provides for a license for five years at a cost of R$ 22.2 million (US$ 4.5m) and asked Luciano what he thinks about this fee. “The government, depending on the size of the taxation, makes the activity unfeasible. It may fend off adventurers, but the big international operators will come. The issue that worries about is the tribute to the operator and the gambler. This is the biggest bottleneck I see, especially for the bettor. The recreational gambler will not care much about income tax, but those who do it regularly and in a professional way, will not have much interest in placing their bets in houses operating in Brazil,” analyzed Luciano.
In this sense and taking the best international practices as an example, Udo defends taxation only for the operator and not on the gamblers' earnings.
In addition to these topics related to the regulation itself and taxes, the panelists discussed sports integrity, sports sponsorship and education of society and sports entities regarding the activity.
Source: GMB
