Brazil Finance Ministry Defends Betting Ban Despite Admitting Reforms Worked
Government lawyers told the Supreme Federal Court that regulation had cut illegal gambling and improved player protection, but argued the sector still caused wider social harm, as football clubs warned of lost sponsorship revenue.
Brazil's Finance Ministry has told the country's Supreme Federal Court that last month's betting ban should stand, even though it accepts that licensing and taxation had strengthened enforcement against illegal operators and improved player protection.
The ministry made its case during a hearing on Tuesday 3 November examining whether the ban is constitutional, according to Casino.org News. It argued that regulatory safeguards had not gone far enough to offset the broader social cost of gambling.
Government lawyers told the court that Brazilians were roughly R$62 billion ($11.3 billion) poorer from losses to betting companies, and estimated that gambling had reduced the country's GDP by between R$120 billion ($21.9 billion) and R$140 billion ($25.6 billion).
The Brazilian Football Confederation (CBF) used the same hearing to warn that the ban threatens the finances of the domestic game. It said 27 of the 40 clubs across Brazil's top two divisions rely on betting companies as their main sponsors, with those deals worth about R$1 billion ($183 million) and accounting for 35% of the clubs' combined sponsorship income.
Flávio de Araújo Willeman, vice president of Flamengo, said the club had built its finances around sponsorships that were approved by the government at the time they were signed. "It was on this basis that Flamengo planned its financial structure for the years following the signing of the contracts," he told the court.
Willeman said Flamengo stood to lose R$430 million ($79 million) a year in combined sponsorship and broadcasting revenue because of the ban. The Brazilian Olympic Committee separately warned that betting partnerships were expected to make up around 20% of its 2027 budget.
The Brazilian Institute for Responsible Gaming (IBJR), a trade body representing licensed operators, questioned whether prohibition would achieve its stated aim. Its representative told the hearing: "I did not hear anyone here, all afternoon, say they will end illegal gambling. What I heard is that they want to end regulated gambling."
Justice Luiz Fux, who is overseeing the constitutional challenges to the ban, did not issue a ruling at the hearing.
Separately, operator Casa de Apostas has resumed online casino operations in Brazil after winning a temporary exemption from the ban. Federal appeals judge Adriana Pileggi ruled on 3 November that CDA Gaming, which runs the brand, could have its authorisation restored.
Pileggi criticised the government's decision to revoke licences without compensation, calling it "a genuine confiscation" and saying the measure disregarded "the constitutional principles of legal certainty, reasonableness and proportionality." Casa de Apostas has since reopened its online casino product.
The ruling echoes a reprieve granted to Stake last month, though that injunction was overturned within days and the operator was forced offline again. Whether Casa de Apostas retains its exemption for longer than Stake did will depend on how the wider constitutional challenge, still pending before Justice Fux, is ultimately decided.