Brazils effort to modernize its gaming regulations has encountered an obstacle following an unexpected defeat in the Senate.
Aspirations for gaming law changes were thwarted yesterday when the Senate’s Constitution and Justice Committee (CCJ) rejected a proposal intended to bring Brazil’s gaming regulations into the modern era.
Despite significant attention from both domestic and global gaming entities, Senate Bill PLS 186/2014, which sought to authorize bingo, internet sports wagering, and casino offerings, was overturned in the Senate committee by a tally of 13 to 2.
The proposed measure would have granted the Brazilian national government the final authority to issue licenses for developing any form of chance-based gaming. It would have also empowered the Ministry of Finance to establish a national regulatory entity to supervise licensing and ongoing responsibilities.
The legislation had previously advanced further but was returned to the committee in late 2016 after Senator Magno Malta requested its re-evaluation, citing concerns about its constitutionality.
Senator Ciro Nogueira, one of the bill’s drafters, conveyed his dismay at the outcome, stating: “If we fail to regulate sports wagering, our football will be vulnerable to manipulation. It’s simple to oppose it. However, it’s a reality that gaming exists. Let’s reap its benefits. Currently, Brazil only experiences the adverse consequences of this activity. Money laundering will persist as it does now.”
Senator De Lira reiterated this view, emphasizing the undeniable existence of clandestine gaming and its associated issues. It’s no secret. The objective is to legitimize this employment-generating sector by establishing regulations and bringing it out of the shadows of illicit operations.
Currently, there’s a legislative proposal, PL 442/1991, that has been languishing in legislative purgatory for decades – since 1991, to be exact! Its purpose is to oversee the gaming sector in Brazil, and it awaits a complete vote in the Chamber of Deputies. Despite a request for expedited action in 2016, it remains stalled, awaiting that final legislative green light.
Should it successfully navigate the Chamber, it then faces scrutiny in the Senate. And if the Senate opts for modifications, it must return to the Chamber for a final seal of approval.
