SBC News Voice of the Sports Betting Industry
Brazil’s Senate has waded into a minefield of opinions over new gambling advertising laws, with no side yielding any ground. The Bets regime faces yet another fracture, testing political nerves and public sensitivities alike.
The Senate of Brazil has heard opposing views on whether to proceed with further legislation of gambling advertising as part of the ‘Bets’ regulating betting regime.
Last week, key stakeholders hearings in Brazilian advertising and media were summoned by Senators’ Carlos Portinho (PL-RJ) and Jorge Kajuru (PSB-GO). The session featured the participation of media figureheads, lawyers, Bets leaders and civil society organisations.
At present, the Bets regime applies the ‘fixed measures’ on gambling advertising of Law No. 14,790/2023, overseen by the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA).
The Law deems that only licensed operators may advertise. Advertisements must include responsible gambling messages and cannot target minors or use certain public figures.
Further criteria determines that Bets adverts must not present gambling as a personal or social achievement or financial success. All Bets adverts and promotions must contain a +18 symbol for audiences.
Though withstanding, the adequacy of Bets advertising rules, has been questioned by Senators. Legislators have proposed two separate Bills for Gambling advertising to be treated as a unique legislation to be governed separately to the Bets regime.
As such, the Senate’s Sports Committee is currently reviewing Bill No. 2985/2023, which proposes a complete ban on gambling advertising across all channels, and Bill No. 3405/2023, which seeks to prohibit gambling advertisements involving athletes, celebrities, sports teams, and influencers.
Urgency aside, the Senate’s hearings were not intended to choose between the Bills, but rather to gather feedback from key stakeholders on the scope of a framework aimed at protecting society’s most vulnerable populations and young audiences from gambling-related risks and addictive behaviours. The sessions revealed a stark divide between those demanding a total ban and those advocating measured restrictions.
Loud voices for full prohibition
Hermano Tavares, a psychiatrist from the University of São Paulo, issued a dire warning.
“Never in my life have I witnessed anyone handle a calamity with restraint,” he declared, likening gambling’s effect on the brain to that of alcohol and tobacco.
Brazil, he noted, “now leads the world in online betting accessibility — an unenviable achievement.”
Senator Eduardo Girão (Novo-CE), author of Bill No. 3405/2023, pressed for decisive action. “The evil must be cut at the root,” he insisted. With gambling prohibition politically unfeasible, banning its advertising, he argued, was the next best option.
Others echoed the alarm. Senator Magno Malta (PL-ES) lamented that online gambling had become “a disaster with no end”.
Advertising is fractured sector
Industry voices struck a more cautious tone. Eduardo Godoy of the Self-Regulation Forum for the Advertising Market argued that banning advertising would merely drive betting into the shadows. “Prohibiting advertising is the worst available solution,” he said.
The challenge, Godoy suggested, was compounded by the fast-moving media landscape. “Today we talk about influencers; tomorrow, it will be AI-driven avatars,” he said, warning that enshrining rigid advertising formats in law risked rendering legislation obsolete almost overnight.
Concerns about unintended consequences were shared by the betting industry. “If there is no advertising, how can users distinguish between licensed and unlicensed operators?” asked Heloisa Diniz of the Association of Bets and Fantasy Sport (ABFS).
Fernando Vieira of the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming (IBJR) concurred, stressing that most Brazilian gamblers still use unregulated sites. Advertising, he said, functions as “a mechanism for identifying lawful operators.”
Football reliance on Gambling Advertising
Football’s reliance on gambling money also loomed large. Sports lawyer André Carvalho Sica explained that lower-tier clubs, particularly in Serie B, depend heavily on betting sponsorships. “The true value today comes from advertising boards funded by betting companies,” he said.
Senator Portinho reflected the session’s ambivalence. While condemning the “predatory” presence of a dozen betting brands during the Carioca Championship final, he acknowledged that the sport’s financial survival depends on such sponsorships.
Digital platforms were notably absent from the hearings. Portinho criticised Meta, TikTok, and X for failing to engage, warning that uncooperative platforms could soon face stricter regulatory measures.
Despite the divides, there was consensus on the urgent need to better protect minors. Luiz Felipe Guimarães Santoro of the Brazilian Football Confederation (CBF) outlined measures already in place to block underage access on legal platforms, but noted that illegal operators remain a threat.
Brazil now faces a critical choice. Should it impose a draconian ban for the sake of public health? Or should it refine the existing regime to balance commercial interests with societal responsibility?
The Senate’s Sports Committee will have to tread lightly as once more the regulatory development of Bets tests the boundaries of Brazil’s statute in providing a balanced settlement of economic necessity and social protection in Brazil’s digital age – another dual-natured challenge of a nascent gambling market…
