The government will prohibit Bolsa Família and Continuous Cash Benefit (BPC) recipients from placing bets on the so-called “Bets’ to comply with a ruling by the Supreme Federal Court (STF). The measure was announced in advance by the Secretary of Prizes and Betting of the Ministry of Finance, Regis Dudena, in an exclusive interview with Estadão.
The secretary stated that this will be implemented through CPF (Individual Taxpayer Registry) control to prevent beneficiaries from using their funds for sports betting and online gambling.
The prohibition is expected to affect approximately 20 million people registered as Bolsa Família beneficiaries and will undergo a legal review before being enacted through an official ordinance.
The STF ruled that the government must take measures to prohibit the use of funds from social assistance programs in online betting. Initially, the Ministry considered complying with the decision by banning Bolsa Família funds and payment methods directly linked to the benefit, such as the program’s card, from being used on betting sites.
However, technical experts concluded that this was unfeasible. The decision now is to prohibit beneficiaries individually, based on their CPF, from placing bets—regardless of the source of the funds.
Since last year, the government has taken down 11,007 illegal betting websites, according to data from the Ministry. Additionally, 177 investigations have been launched to examine the conduct of digital influencers suspected of illegally promoting ‘Bets’ on social media, advertising illegal companies, or engaging in unauthorized promotions, such as those targeting children and adolescents. Currently, 71 companies are authorized to operate in Brazil, totaling 153 legalized betting sites.
The secretary expressed opposition to a bill that seeks to ban ‘Bets’ advertisements on TV and the internet—a proposal put forward by the government leader in Congress, Randolfe Rodrigues, and endorsed by the rapporteur, Damares Alves.
In October, President Lula stated that he would shut down online betting if regulation failed to address the problems associated with ‘Bets’. The government's concerns centered on the use of these platforms by children and adolescents, social program beneficiaries, health risks, money laundering, and other crimes. According to the secretary, the government has been addressing these issues, and the worst-case scenario would be a return to illegality. Below are key excerpts from the interview:
Estadão - What measure will be taken regarding the use of Bolsa Família for sports betting?
Regis Dudena - The ruling leaves us with some uncertainty about exactly what the Supreme Court wants us to do. One issue is whether it refers to funds rather than individuals. Another challenge is that the decision mentions Bolsa Família, BPC (which is paid to low-income elderly people and people with disabilities), and similar programs without specifying exactly what is meant by that. We are preparing a measure to comply with the ruling in the way we believe is feasible, which is to prohibit beneficiaries specifically from Bolsa Família and BPC. However, this is still in the final stages of alignment, particularly in legal terms, to ensure compliance with the STF ruling.
Will the measure prohibit beneficiaries by CPF, regardless of whether they are using program funds? Is this more effective?
Yes. Blocking the card would not be effective. It is very rare for a beneficiary to receive payments exclusively on the Bolsa Família card nowadays. The standard practice is for payments to be deposited into an account, and that account to have an associated card. The standalone Bolsa Família card, which is not linked to a payment or deposit account, is already prohibited under our regulations. The Supreme Court has ordered us to implement this restriction, and we will seek the best way to comply with the ruling.
With the regulated market in operation since January, is there now an official overview of how many people place bets daily and how much money is involved?
We are compiling this data. Our system, Sigap (Betting Management System), is expected to receive daily reports from all companies via API (Application Programming Interface). The betting operators’ systems will communicate with Sigap daily, providing data on the number of registered bettors, the total amount wagered, winnings, and losses. We encountered some technical difficulties in the first months, but we are finalizing the resolution of these issues. Our expectation is that by the end of the first quarter, we will be able to consolidate the data. The plan is to publish a report presenting these numbers to the public.
Are the current regulations sufficient to protect the market and address issues such as addiction, exposure of children and adolescents, and crimes like money laundering?
Regulation is inherently a cyclical process; it must always be monitored, outcomes must be evaluated, and improvements should always be welcomed. The regulatory choices we have made provide a much higher level of security. Saying the market is completely safeguarded might be an overstatement. However, within the regulated market, our ability to prevent children and adolescents from accessing betting platforms is close to 100%.
President Lula stated in October: "If regulation does not work, I will shut it down." Has regulation worked, or should online betting be banned?
The absence of regulation is the worst possible scenario. If you want to protect people and the broader economy, you need a highly controlled and well-regulated sector to direct players toward authorized platforms.
If I believed the regulation was failing, I would go up to the fifth floor (where Finance Minister Fernando Haddad’s office is) and say, "Boss, this isn’t working." In September, news reports surfaced about Bolsa Família, but the key ordinances had already been issued between February and July. I am fully convinced that regulation is an ongoing process that will always require assessment and improvements, but we have taken significant steps. The sector is much safer now than before and certainly safer than it would be under an unregulated system.
You mentioned that most gambling-related health issues are tied to illegal sites. How can this be demonstrated?
I am not defending the authorized companies, but as a rule, the problematic sites are illegal and fraudulent; they masquerade as betting houses. Users believe they are placing bets, but in reality, they are simply losing their money. Our regulated market has only been operating for two months and 20 days. Before that, the industry was entirely unregulated.
What does the number of currently authorized companies indicate about the national betting market?
We now have 71 companies, which seems like a reasonable number. We anticipate a trend toward market consolidation. Considering the brands that can be explored, I believe there is a likelihood of mergers and acquisitions. If two companies are operating separate brands without significant results, they may eventually merge into a single company.
Government leader Randolfe Rodrigues introduced a bill to ban ‘Bets’ advertisements, and the rapporteur, Damares Alves, issued a favorable opinion. What is the Ministry’s stance?
Advertising currently plays a social role by directing bettors to authorized sites. Children and adolescents cannot participate and must not be targeted by advertisements. Betting is a form of entertainment where you lose money, so ads cannot suggest that players will get rich. If, in the future, we identify problems related to advertising—such as excessive gambling—then we may consider restrictions.
When a company strongly suspected of links to the illegal jogo do bicho (a type of underground lottery) is authorized to operate, how should society interpret this? Was there truly a rigorous vetting process?
Our responsibility is to examine the company, its owners, and the origin of their funds. We must handle this legalization process in a legally sound manner. If there is clear evidence that the funds come from illegal activities, we reject the application. In some cases, with support from agencies like the Federal Police, we have denied applications. Unfortunately, in certain instances, the courts have ordered us to grant licenses to these companies.
Has any company been investigated or penalized for failing to meet regulatory requirements?
We conduct targeted monitoring based on specific topics. Currently, we are reviewing compliance with the legal ban on welcome bonuses (when a betting platform offers money or gifts to new users). We are investigating whether any companies are violating this rule.
Is this the first monitoring effort?
No, we previously conducted a review of influencers. We have already notified some who were engaging in unauthorized advertisements, either promoting illegal companies or violating advertising rules. Some influencers have been investigated, and we are reviewing their responses before issuing sanctions and fines.
Source: Estadão
