TLDR
- Peruvian betting operators are challenging the Selective Consumption Tax (ISC) in the Constitutional Court
- Licensed firms face a combined tax burden that may exceed 50% of Gross Gaming Revenue
- 40 licensed operators have exited Peru’s market between 2025 and 2026
- Excessive taxation is driving players toward unregulated offshore platforms
- A 2001 Constitutional Court ruling on casino taxes could support the new challenge
Peru’s online betting industry is taking legal action against a tax it says is unconstitutional and is destroying the regulated gambling market.
The challenge targets the Selective Consumption Tax, or ISC, introduced under Legislative Decree No. 1644, signed by President Dina Boluarte. Industry groups collected 5,000 signatures, which were certified by the National Jury of Elections, allowing them to bring the case to Peru’s Constitutional Court.
Licensed operators currently pay a 12% Gaming Tax plus a 1% ISC on every bet placed. Depending on operating conditions, experts estimate the total tax load can exceed 50% of Gross Gaming Revenue.
The Damage Already Showing
The numbers paint a clear picture of an industry under pressure.
Between 2025 and 2026, 40 licensed betting firms left the Peruvian market entirely. Around 1,500 retail betting shops also closed during the same period.
Sports sponsorship has dropped sharply too. In 2024, betting companies sponsored 18 professional football clubs. By 2026, that number had fallen to just five.
Constitutional and tax law experts say the ISC may not meet all legal requirements, making it potentially invalid under Peru’s constitution.
Players Moving to Illegal Platforms
Industry representatives say the tax is pushing bettors away from licensed operators and toward illegal offshore platforms.
These unregulated sites do not carry the same tax obligations. That allows them to offer better odds and higher payouts, making them more attractive to consumers.
Lawmakers in the Peruvian Congress are now expected to look at possible changes to the decree. The goal would be to keep some tax revenue flowing while reducing the burden enough to keep legal operators competitive.
The outcome of that review could reshape how betting is taxed across the country.
A Legal Precedent Worth Watching
Legal experts are pointing to a previous Constitutional Court case that could influence the current challenge.
Case No. 009-2001-AI/TC found certain tax rules for casinos and slot machine operators to be unconstitutional. That ruling led to changes in tax obligations and compensation for operators who had paid under the invalid rules.
Specialists believe this precedent could carry weight if the court agrees to hear the new ISC challenge.
The case is now in the hands of both the Constitutional Court and Congress. The decisions made in both arenas will determine whether Peru’s regulated betting market can recover or continues to shrink.
