GMB - Because of the pandemic, do you believe that the penetration of online gambling will increase while land-based will maintain their limitations on public entry?
Alexandre Amaral Filho - Yes, that's what tends to happen. But it is worth mentioning that the physical and virtual environments seem complementary to us, as they lead to different consumption experiences of the service. Nothing more natural. It is true that, with the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures of interpersonal distancing, it was realized that several activities do not necessarily require physical presence - work meetings are an example of this.
However, if on the one hand betting entertainment gains greater penetration virtually given its practicality, on the other hand, the social component of physical environments will also have great appeal, especially as the sanitary restrictions are easing over the next few months. There is a pent-up demand for social experiences, which will certainly make physical environments highly relevant in this post-pandemic period.
After the STF's decision at the end of last year, states began to launch their own lotteries. But now, the federal government wants to limit bets. In this case, do you believe that state lotteries will be able to maintain and profit for the benefit of society? How to proceed legally so that everyone wins?
When the Union, under the pretext of wanting to prevent “unfair competition”, signals to advance, by Decree, on these administrative aspects of the state lottery operation, we are undoubtedly facing a problem for the States. For it would be enough for the Union to limit the payout, or even limit the percentages to be safeguarded for social demands, so that the viability of the Lottery institution was compromised.
If this interference by the Union is materialized, it seems to us that there would be a disregard for the precedent set last year by our Supreme Court in ADPF 492 and ADPF 493. Through the invalidation of some rules that date from the time of the military regime, the STF recognized in a way unanimous that States have the prerogative to explore, at the state level, the lottery modalities provided for in federal law. And, among those rules invalidated by the Court is a rule that limited the issue of the number of tickets - therefore, an eminently administrative issue of the lottery operation. There are excellent reasons of a legal nature that would support legal requests in favor of the States if federal normative acts tend to disrespect the decision of the Supreme Federal Court.
Therefore, contrary to what the Union maintains, not only there is no risk of “unfair competition”, but there is space and opportunity for the Union, the Federal District and the States to work in a coordinated way to develop, through the lottery activity, a federalism even more democratic, cooperative and committed to the realization and financing of fundamental rights in all spheres - including at the state level.
According to the current SECAP secretary, Waldir Eustáquio Marques Jr., the regulation of sports betting should come out in July this year. Do you believe that this legislation is a gateway to the legalization of other types of gambling, such as bingo, casino, jogo do bicho, etc.?
These referred games still need to go through the legislative process, being consequently more susceptible to pressure from conservative sectors, historically critical to the gaming sector.
That is why the experience of regularizing sports betting will be so important. It will be a showcase to expose the great advantages of choosing the path of legalization instead of criminalization. It will be the message to give to the world that in Brazil it no longer maintains the aversion in relation to gaming, that, as is known, is against the direction of practically all developed countries. It is also a message to the most resistant sectors of our policy, so that, in the name of a pragmatic appeal based on the possible gains in tax revenue and the promotion of tourism, they understand that it is worth legalizing all gaming in Brazil.
For the regulation of sports betting to be fair for all involved (State, businessmen and players), what do you think SECAP should change, remove or add to the project that they presented to the public last year?
A successful regularization is one that, at the same time that benefits the public interest - especially due to the fact that the fixed-rate bet is a lottery modality - substitutes the illegal market for the legalized market.
The 2020 draft presented by SECAP foresees the use of concessions instead of authorizations. This leaves the bond with the Public Administration less precarious, which is positive for those who want to operate in the country. On the other hand, the number of only 30 concessions is worrying, which seems very low to us. This is because, in more consolidated markets, the number of operators is higher. Even more considering the potential of Brazil. And, if the legalized market is not sufficiently attractive and balanced from a competitive point of view, bettors will continue to seek the service of companies that operate outside of Brazil, firms that do not pay taxes here, do not generate jobs, etc., in short, that they do not contribute to the country's economic and social development.
Recently, the National Association of Mayors and Vice-Mayors of the Federative Republic of Brazil (ANPV) filed a petition to the STF to make an oral statement as amicus curiae in Extraordinary Appeal 966177, which addresses the typical conduct of establishing and exploring games of chance. Does support like this help to pressure the FTS to have a positive result for the release of gambling?
Assuming that the respectable ANPV will provide the STF with elements favorable to games at the municipal level, it will certainly be a great contribution to the sector, yes. Although the amicus curiae figure does not have as many prerogatives as the parties that make up the process, its contribution can influence the quality of the court's judgments, by offering studies, data, and arguments from the perspective of the economic sector, category, or social group represented by the institution that obtains authorization from the judge to act on the claim.
In the specific case, in our view, the recognition of atypical gambling (which we can also call “decriminalization”) has the potential to generate tax revenue at the municipal level, as a possible source of ISS collection for the municipality, for example, and promote tourism. It is known that everywhere, the exploitation of games, with due supervision and control, serves as a factor for social development. There is no shortage of cities here in our South American quadrant: Punta del Este, Buenos Aires, Viña Del Mar, among others.
Do you think that this year, in Brazil, there will be a definite takeoff towards a regulated gambling market? Do the companies of the sector that have arrived and invested in Brazilian sport look for legal support to embark on this fight?
The advances of the last years have been particularly expressive to demonstrate the advantages of the legalization and regularization of gaming in Brazil. The confrontation of the issue has been well conducted by authorities such as Mr. Waldir Eustáquio in the Ministry of Economy, which in fact has contributed to advancing the issue lately - such as fixed-odd bets, which have already been legalized, although still pending regularization.
Only with the demonstration that Brazil has strong institutions, capable of ensuring legal certainty, that foreign companies will seek us to invest in the country. And this is what has happened, especially since 2018, with the legalization of the Fixed-Rate Sports Bet. This means that we, as civil society and the Federative Republic, have managed to get the right message out to the world: that there is an excellent chance that Brazil will break the old prohibitionist paradigm in relation to gaming, and that we are willing to extract from this activity all the economic and social benefits that our country deserves.
Source: Exclusive GMB
