TLDR
- Brazil’s Supreme Court held a public hearing on the fixed-odds betting ban on November 3.
- The CBF expects R$420 million in lost revenue in 2027 because of the ban.
- 27 of 40 Series A and B clubs have a betting company as their main sponsor.
- The ANJL said the ban is pushing bettors toward illegal sites.
- An economist said betting was less than 0.5% of household spending in 2025.
Brazil’s ban on fixed-odds betting is putting about R$1 billion in football sponsorship at risk, according to testimony at a public hearing before the Federal Supreme Court (STF). The hearing took place on November 3 and was presided over by Justice Luiz Fux.
Industry groups, sports bodies and economists used the session to argue against the ban. The National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) said the ban will not stop betting but will push people toward illegal operators.
Football and Olympic Sports Rely on Betting Money
Attorney Igor Mauler Santiago, representing the Brazilian Football Confederation (CBF), said the confederation expects revenue losses of R$420 million in 2027. He said the sudden exit of betting companies is “causing a real collapse in the system.”
Santiago said 27 of the 40 clubs in the men’s Series A and B have a betting company as their main sponsor. Together, those sponsorships total around R$1 billion, he said.
Olympic sports also face funding gaps. Attorney Pedro Henrique Rebello de Mendonça, acting for the Brazilian Olympic Committee (COB), said athlete development depends on long-term planning and investment.
He said money invested today affects the Los Angeles Olympic Games, now less than two years away. It also shapes future Olympic cycles and events used to find and promote Brazilian athletes.
Brazilian Paralympic Committee (CPB) president Mizael Conrado warned about a lack of funding for Paralympians. He asked what had changed since the industry was regulated and companies received authorizations, and he questioned the legality of the provisional measure.
Attorney João Paulo Bachur cited figures from the National Revenue-Sharing Office (ENDR), a non-profit that sends funds to sports groups and civil society organizations. About half of the licensed betting operators took part in the program.
From June to September 2026, before the provisional measure was issued, ENDR allocated R$580 million to beneficiaries. These included the COB, the CPB and the Brazilian Committee of Clubs.
Industry Says Regulation Was Working
ANJL legal consultant Pietro Cardia said claims that gambling has stopped in Brazil are “far removed” from reality. He argued that regulation protects consumers better and helps address problems such as compulsive gambling. “The data and Brazil’s own institutional history show that the prohibition attempts, which lasted more than 20 years, did not have the necessary effects to address the issue,” he said.
Cardia said betting volume fell 32% in the last three months of Ministry of Finance data compared with the same period a year earlier. He said more than 60% of betting was in the regulated market and about 40% in the illegal one.
Economist Eric Universo Rodrigues Brasil, of the Brazilian Association for Economic Freedom (Able), disputed claims linking betting to rising household debt. He said household spending on betting reached R$37 billion in 2025, compared with about R$8 trillion in total household consumption.
That puts betting at less than 0.5% of household consumption, he said. By comparison, households spent R$696.8 billion on interest, R$152.1 billion on mobile phones and accessories, and R$69.7 billion on streaming services.
Brasil also said the ban had not changed supermarket sales. He noted that earlier surveys showed food sales were already rising before the ban took effect.
ANJL law consultant Bernardo Freire said the ban took demand away from licensed platforms and ignored authorizations already granted. “The hasty ban, carried out the way it was, without respecting the authorizations already granted, has already proven to be a failure,” he said. “In 30 days, we can already identify this very simply, showing how easy it is to access an illegal site.”
