Brazil pushes back compliance date for gambling ban on social welfare recipients

Brazil’s Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA) has postponed the deadline for licensed betting operators to block players who receive social welfare benefits, extending their compliance window by another month. The move comes just weeks after the country’s formal prohibition on gambling by welfare recipients took effect at the end of September.

The ban, introduced through Normative Ordinance No. 2,217/2025 and Normative Instruction No. 22, bars beneficiaries of programs such as Bolsa Família and the Continuous Benefit Payment from participating in fixed-odds betting. It marked the government’s first concrete step toward enforcing a Supreme Federal Court decision from late 2024 that supported restrictions on the use of public assistance for gambling.

Operators were initially required to identify and close the accounts of affected players within 30 days of the announcement. With that period about to expire, the SPA has granted an additional 30 days for compliance, but did not explain why the extension was necessary.

Regis Dudena, who heads the SPA, said the measure is intended to shield vulnerable citizens from excessive gambling losses. He expressed confidence that the ban would limit risky betting behavior among those relying on state aid.

However, operators and industry associations warn that the restriction could backfire. The National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) has been one of the most vocal critics, arguing that the full ban goes beyond what the Supreme Court initially endorsed. The Court’s earlier decision had only prohibited the use of welfare money for betting, not the act of gambling itself.

Many believe the policy risks fueling illegal betting activity even as it seeks to uphold social protection principles. A recent study commissioned by ANJL and shared with BNL Data suggested that 45% of welfare recipients plan to shift their gambling activity to unregulated operators once the restriction is enforced.

The association said this would effectively drive players toward the black market, undermining the goal of protecting consumers.