The regulation of Brazil’s fixed-odds betting market was a necessary governmental response to the growing economic and social relevance of the sector.
However, when observing the institutional framework — particularly some recent developments — one notices a dangerous inversion of purpose, as the focus on revenue collection has increasingly taken center stage in the regulatory process.
This perspective strays from the classic understanding of the role of market regulation, which should primarily be to impose discipline, enforce oversight, and maintain control. Revenue generation should be a means to achieve those goals — never the goal itself.
Unfortunately, this is not what we are seeing.
Regulation is a public policy tool. Its core function should be to correct market failures, promote social justice, protect consumers, ensure fair competition, and uphold public values.
This logic, however, is overlooked when the government adopts a revenue-driven stance, treating the regulated activity merely as a source of income.
In the case of betting markets, the focus should be:
- To discipline the sector by setting boundaries for private operators;
- To monitor operations for legal compliance and ethical standards;
- To control systemic risks associated with the activity, especially those related to money laundering, gambling addiction, and match-fixing.
And that’s it.
Let’s be clear: it is legitimate for the State to collect revenue through regulation. But the limit lies where public duty is compromised.
The key point is that a combination of high taxation and regulatory bureaucracy tends to push away serious operators and fuels informality.
That must be avoided at all costs.
Excessive taxation does not protect society — it suffocates the regulated market, making the legal environment less competitive and more prone to evasion.
As a result, the illegal market grows stronger — operating without fees, oversight, or any commitment to integrity, consumers, or the State.
The truth is that when revenue becomes an end in itself, the logic of public interest is reversed: formalization becomes harder, compliance is discouraged, and paradoxically, the very thing regulation is meant to fight — the illegal market — is encouraged.
In short, society gains nothing from that.
Let’s be clear:
Brazil has the opportunity to build a modern and effective regulatory model for the betting sector. And this model must serve society.
But for that to happen, regulation must be grounded in the right purpose.
Yes, tax the industry — but within parameters that keep the market viable. The State must remember: to regulate is, above all, to protect — not to collect.
Tiago Horta Barbosa
Head of Integrity – Genius Sports Latin America
Horta Barbosa is a member of the Integrity Committee of the International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF). He holds degrees in International Relations and Law, a post-graduate degree in Sports Law and Management (FIFA/CIES/UCA), and a Master’s in Sports Law (ISDE Madrid). From 2012 to 2014, he served as a Police Training Officer with INTERPOL. Since 2015, he has been notably active in the sports legal sector, specializing in sports integrity, particularly in the prevention and fight against match-fixing and the impact of betting markets on sports.
