The I of ‘Bets’, established in the Senate in November 2024, aims to investigate the growing influence of online betting on the family budget of Brazilians, as well as possible links with criminal organizations and the use of digital influencers to promote these activities. This is an absolutely legitimate issue, since the construction of a regulated and safe market requires effective monitoring, control and combating the harmful effects of gambling and betting.
However, when following the most recent I sessions—particularly those involving digital influencers like Virginia Fonseca and Rico Melquiades—one cannot ignore the superficial way the topic has been addressed. Basic questions have been asked without any study or reference to existing legislation, such as Law 14.790/2023 or the regulations issued by the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting of the Ministry of Finance (SPA/MF).
This lack of legal knowledge reinforces anti-legalization narratives and undermines regulatory progress in Brazil. When only one side of the story—ideologically opposed to the legalization of the industry—is presented to the public, a misinformed environment is created, where public opinion is manipulated based on faulty premises.
It’s important to that fixed-odds betting was legalized in Brazil in 2018 through Law 13.756/2018. This law mandated that the Executive Branch regulate the activity within two years, extendable by another two. Nevertheless, practical regulatory effects only started in 2025, with the full implementation of the SPA/MF’s normative orders.
During the six-year regulatory gap, betting activity grew in an unregulated manner, exploited by both legitimate operators and opportunists or criminals. Now, less than six months into regulation, some lawmakers are already questioning its effectiveness—an unrealistic and unfair demand.
It’s impossible to erase six years of government inaction—during which the illegal market expanded, the harmful effects of gambling intensified, and Brazilian consumers were misled—within just a few months of regulation.
More concerning, however, is the shift in the nature of the debate: legality gives way to morality. When hearing from influencers who promoted licensed betting operators, many lawmakers chose to make moral judgments, attempting to shame these professionals based on personal beliefs or so-called “family values.”
It’s crucial to clarify that these influencers promoted companies that:
* Operate a legalized activity;
* Are authorized by the Ministry of Finance;
* Paid licensing fees to the government (R$30 million);
* Pay taxes and fees;
* Generate jobs in Brazil;
* Comply with numerous SPA/MF regulations;
* Are subject to oversight and penalties within Brazil.
Even so, they were portrayed as “enemies of society.” The issue here is not legality—but morality. The I seems to be driven by a moralist agenda, where personal convictions override the current law and influence public policy.
Concerns about gambling addiction and debt are understandable, but the solution is not prohibition or repressing digital influence. Instead, it lies in education, awareness, and oversight. In fact, these problems only began to be seriously addressed in Brazil after legalization and regulation. For decades under prohibition, gambling addiction was ignored by the government.
As I previously wrote in the article “The Enemy Is Not the Bet,” prohibition is the easiest and most populist solution. It pleases much of the electorate, creates the illusion of control, but merely sweeps the issues under the rug. If we prohibit influencers from promoting licensed companies, it becomes far more difficult to:
Help consumers distinguish legal from illegal operators;
* Raise awareness that betting is entertainment, not investment;
* Prevent addiction;
* Educate about self-exclusion tools, procedures in case of loss of control, and access to treatment for gambling disorder.
Advertising is a powerful tool to inform and educate consumers. The goal should be to establish clear rules for its use, especially online—where influencers can indeed help deliver more effective communication about the risks of gambling and responsible play.
Imagine a scenario where all influencers commit to responsible advertising, complying with current laws and regulations. They become allies in spreading best practices, promoting betting as entertainment (not a financial strategy), educating about risks, and only endorsing operators licensed in Brazil.
Influencers have the power to influence for good or bad. If they choose to disregard responsible advertising guidelines, they should be penalized in accordance with applicable law.
The choice is ours. Legality and regulation are now in effect. It is up to the government to implement regulation responsibly, without moralistic setbacks that harm consumers in the name of supposed protection.
The I of 'Bets' must make it clear to the public:
* Betting is legal and regulated in Brazil;
* There are licensed operators that comply with the law and may their services within the rules;
* There are illegal operators that must be confronted.
But criminalizing the legal market will not solve the issues related to gambling. This battle can only be won if we stop treating the sector as the enemy and start seeing it as part of a regulated and safe solution. If we want to protect consumers, we must do so based on evidence, dialogue, and effective regulation.
Juscelino Kubitschek’s slogan “50 years in 5” is inspiring. But in our case, we won’t undo six years of unregulated legality in just six months of regulation. Progress requires time, responsibility, and a serious approach if we are to consistently reduce addiction and debt in the population.
Udo Seckelmann
Lawyer and Head of Betting and Crypto at Bichara e Motta Advogados, professor at CBF Academy, and Master in International Sports Law from the Instituto Superior de Derecho y Economía in Madrid. He writes for Poder360 monthly on Wednesdays.
