The text pending in the Senate (Bill 2234/22) estimates around R$ 20.4 billion (US$ 3.95b) in revenue for the public coffers. Of these, R$ 2.4 billion (US$ 461m) would go to the Brazilian Agency for International Tourism Promotion.
The rapporteur for the matter in the Chamber was deputy Felipe Carreras (PSB-PE), who today chairs the Tourism Front and is close to the president of the House, deputy Arthur Lira (PP-AL).
Since the beginning of the week, Carreras has sought to articulate the text with the government, especially in conversations with members of the government’s economic team. Today (Monday 6), he will participate in a meeting at the Ministry of Finance with Haddad.
Last Wednesday (1), the Minister of Finance, Fernando Haddad, defended taxing the electronic betting market on sports games as a way to compensate for the losses of the new IR table.
“The minister’s statements seem to be a positive sign, which heralds good winds for the long-awaited regulation of sports betting in the country — which will allow us to be aligned with other large countries where this activity is explored, generating economic and social benefits for the country and benefiting the gamblers themselves, who will be able to have a regulatory framework that gives them security and protection,” says lawyer and expert in Gaming Law Fabiano Jantalia, founding partner of Jantalia Advogados.
Jantalia observes that Haddad’s statement “shows a very important pragmatism so that sensitive and technically complex issues such as sports betting are treated in an adequate and more technical manner as possible — and a non-prejudiced and pragmatic view of the government on the subject. And this is how the issue is treated in other countries,” he adds.
For the expert, Haddad gave an important demonstration of the government’s sensitivity “about those that have been pointed out by the industry as the main benefits of this regulation in the last four years.”
“The issue of taxation is important because it will allow the government to have more resources to finance social programs and other government actions, but this opening is also important for allowing the generation of jobs and income in the country, providing a virtuous circle of growth in this sector,” he adds.
In the minister’s interview with Portal UOL, however, Haddad highlighted that “electronic games” are not taxed. Does this proceed? Lawyer and specialist in gaming and eSports Marcelo Mattoso — partner at Barcellos Tucunduva Advogados explains: “There are two different situations: taxation of ‘online games’ and composition of the loss of income tax due to the new table,” he clarifies.
“On the first point, it is important to clarify that, by all indications, the minister was referring with the term ‘electronic games’ to online sports betting — those approved by Law 13.756/18, but not regulated within the foreseen period of four years, expired in December 2022 — and not to all types of online gaming activity, such as video games and the like,” says Mattoso.
“As well highlighted by the minister, the online betting market has already become entrenched in society and today, without regulation, the Brazilian State loses hundreds of millions – or even billions – in tax collection, as all money from this activity ends up going to abroad,” adds the specialist.
On the question of the composition of the IR, in turn, the specialist reiterates that there will be, yes, “a reduction in collection due to the new table – and, with the taxation of bets, the government intends to balance this loss.”
Mattoso agrees that gaming regulation would bring benefits that go beyond revenue. “The main thing would be legal certainty: a well-regulated activity generates stability for the market and attracts investment. As a result, the collection grows and this amount can be converted to benefit the country, such as public policies for security, education, transportation, leisure, culture, etc. A well-designed regulation only brings benefits.”
For him, the proposal should move quickly. “In fact, we are already late, because the deadline for the regulation to be approved based on Law 13,756/18 expired in December. The market spent four years waiting for a regulation that did not come — there were four years of lost revenue. It is in the public interest that this regulation come out as soon as possible.”
Source: GMB
