At last! Brazil's Senate Approves Sports Betting Bill with Exclusion of iGaming!

The vote, originally scheduled for December 6 but delayed due to a lack of available senators, took place yesterday. Senator Angelo Coronel presented the bill, which had undergone recent amendments after initial approval by Brazil's Economic Affairs Commission.

Despite facing significant opposition, the voting session highlighted three key points. The most significant decision was the removal of iGaming from the bill, proposed by Senator Carlos Portinho and backed by 37 votes, with 27 against. Additionally, virtual games and sports betting terminals were also excluded, while an amendment to ban sports betting advertising in stadiums was rejected.

The Senate approved all taxation recommendations introduced by the Economic Affairs Commission on November 22. Gross gaming revenue (GGR) will now be limited to 12%, down from the initially proposed 18%. The taxation on winnings has been adjusted, with bettors now taxed once a year at a rate of 15% on net winnings, surpassing the exemption threshold of R$2,112.00 (£339/€394/$425). Licensees must pay an initial fee of up to R$30 million, granting them the right to operate up to five different brands.

With the bill's approval in the Senate, it will now return to the Chamber of Deputies. While the Chamber had previously approved the bill in September, it must vote again to ratify the changes made by the Senate. The challenge lies in having the Chamber of Deputies vote on the amendments before the Christmas recess, lasting from December 23 to early February 2024, providing a 10-day window for the vote.

The exclusion of iGaming raises questions about the anticipated tax revenue, initially targeted at BRL1.6bn. With iGaming now off the table, projections suggest a shortfall, estimated at R$700 million. Neil Montgomery, founder and managing partner of Brazilian law firm Montgomery & Associados, predicted Senate opposition to iGaming in a recent interview with iGB. The fate of iGaming is poised to be a contentious point in the upcoming Chamber of Deputies vote, as they have the authority to reintroduce it into the bill, keeping the story ongoing.