The debate is legitimate. The rules aim not only to ensure the sustainability of an economic activity that generates important resources for the State and Brazilian sports, but also to protect the most vulnerable links. Measures aimed at combating compulsive behavior and debt are essential and require the joint efforts of all agents.
Some narratives, however, generate concern. Initially, figures released by the Central Bank were used as an argument that the legalization of gambling compromises purchasing power and the health of the economy. This narrative was reinforced by still superficial data involving Bolsa Família.
A recent technical note issued by the Ministry of Development, Industry, Commerce and Services points to an inconsistency in this statement, especially in light of positive figures on economic activity in the country. In the same vein, a study this year by LCA Consultoria Econômica demonstrated the lack of evidence of a significant change in household debt due to participation in gambling and betting.
According to the study, spending on online betting represents a fraction between 0.2% and 0.5% of total household consumption. Annual net spending on ‘Bets’ (as the operators are called in Brazil) varies from 0.1% to 0.3% of the Gross Domestic Product. It cannot be said that spending on sports betting has generated a systemic crisis in families and in the Brazilian economy, as some sectors of the economy have maintained.
There is a consensus on the need for measures to mitigate the risk of using social benefits and other risky behaviors in betting. In this regard, the IBJR has taken the lead and its members have stopped receiving payment via credit cards, mitigating the risk of bettors getting into debt. The institute has also positioned itself favorably on proposals under discussion and presented by the federal government. Among them are measures to prevent the use of Bolsa Família cards and other social benefits in transactions, as well as prohibiting bets by highly indebted individuals.
And we have another front of discussion, equally fundamental: the restriction of harmful advertising that induces risk groups to play irresponsible and even illegal games. We support the initiative and participate in the debates that inevitably involve prohibiting the operations of illegal companies that are not committed to the current legislation. These companies contaminate the business environment and the healthy relationship between ‘Bets’ and bettors.
We need to separate the wheat from the chaff. Just as in countries with more advanced regulations — such as England — the betting market can and should be a source of entertainment and revenue for the economy and sports and social projects. In this responsible game, everyone benefits from information, transparency and clear rules.
André Gelfi
President of the Brazilian Responsible Gaming Institute
