Regulatory Radar | Fixed-Odds Betting – Ed. 14

Week of August 24 to 28, 2026

The week closed with enforcement hitting the sector hard: the Federal Revenue Service and the Federal Prosecution Office launched, on Friday, the month’s second major operation against a betting group. In parallel, pressure on advertising advanced on three fronts — in the states, in Congress and among football clubs — while the Supreme Court has yet to decide whether a single state may restrict the sector’s advertising on its own. Below are the points that deserve your attention.

Federal Revenue and prosecutors launch operation against major betting group over suspected tax evasion and money laundering

On Friday (Aug 28), the Federal Revenue Service (Receita Federal) and the Federal Prosecution Office (MPF) launched Operation “Jogo de Sombras” (Shadow Game), investigating a major player in the betting market for suspected tax evasion, currency evasion and money laundering. Six search-and-seizure warrants were served in Recife, João Pessoa and São Paulo, with no arrests. According to investigators, the group is said to have moved more than R$ 5 billion in 2025 alone, used a shell company abroad to make it appear it operated outside Brazil before the sector was regulated, and relied on pooled “omnibus” accounts at fintechs to hinder the tracing of funds. The Revenue Service opened 11 tax proceedings, with potential recovery of around R$ 300 million. The authorities did not disclose the platform’s name; the press has linked the case to a large operator. This is the second operation of its kind this month.

What this means: Tax enforcement and anti-money-laundering efforts have arrived in force in the regulated sector, and the focus is telling: the authorities are looking at the pre-regulation period, offshore structures and the flow of money through fintechs. For operators — and for the payment institutions that serve them — the message is that the origin of funds, corporate structure and tax records must withstand heavy scrutiny. As always, the usual caution applies: those under investigation are presumed innocent until a final decision.

Rio Grande do Sul’s advertising law is already in force, but the Supreme Court has yet to rule on suspending it

The Rio Grande do Sul law restricting betting advertising has been in force since Aug 25. The sensitive point, however, is not that it took effect — it is the Supreme Court’s silence. The law has been challenged for months before the Court, in a case assigned to Justice Cármen Lúcia, and both the Prosecutor-General’s Office (PGR) and the Solicitor-General’s Office (AGU) have already come out in favor of suspending it. Even so, the Court has not ruled on the request for an injunction. In practice, the law began to produce effects without the Court having ruled, even on an urgent basis, on the central argument that regulating betting advertising is a matter for the Union, not the states.

What this means: The problem for the sector is not just the law itself, but the insecurity of operating under a rule that could be struck down at any moment and that, while the Supreme Court does not decide, is already producing concrete effects. Since the PGR and AGU have asked for suspension, there is a basis to expect an injunction favorable to the sector — the risk is how long the decision takes. And if the merits ultimately confirm that states may legislate on the matter, the door opens to as many as 27 different advertising regimes across the country. Worth watching the Justice’s docket closely.

Lower House advances bills to ban betting and its advertising

Two moves in Congress drew attention. A bill before the Lower House (Câmara), proposing to ban fixed-odds betting entirely and repeal the law that regulated the sector, was assigned a rapporteur in committee and had its amendment window opened. And a new bill was introduced banning all advertising, sponsorship and commercial promotion of betting — including by digital influencers, athletes and artists. Both are internally classified as high-criticality.

What this means: These are bills still at an early stage, and an outright ban is an extreme scenario, unlikely to advance as drafted. But the volume and direction of the proposals show which way the wind is blowing in Congress: more restrictions on advertising. Those who rely on marketing and sponsorship to grow should start drawing up contingency plans.

São Paulo clubs push back against bill banning betting sponsorship

Corinthians, Palmeiras, São Paulo and the São Paulo Football Federation joined forces against a bill advancing in the Lower House that bans betting advertising. The estimate circulating in the press is that the clubs could lose up to R$ 1 billion in sponsorships if the restriction goes through. The topic also entered the electoral campaign, with candidates taking up anti-betting banners.

What this means: Brazilian football’s dependence on betting money is today among the highest in the world — which makes any sponsorship restriction a sensitive matter for operators, clubs and the entire sports-media chain. New sponsorship contracts and renewals should account for the risk of regulatory change.

England removes betting from shirt fronts — a reference feeding the debate in Brazil

From August, the English top flight began banning betting brands on the front of shirts (sleeves and pitch-side boards remain permitted). Columnists are already projecting that other leagues, including Brazil’s, will tend to follow the path of limiting — rather than banning — advertising, in line with what is already done with tobacco and alcohol.

What this means: International references like this tend to become ammunition in the Brazilian legislative debate. The practical reading is that the most likely course in Brazil is not an outright ban, but limits on advertising. Getting ahead of that scenario — rather than reacting to it — tends to be the safer strategy.

Looking ahead to next week

• The decision on the request to urgently suspend the Rio Grande do Sul advertising law could come at any moment at the Supreme Court.
• The Public Security Constitutional Amendment (PEC), which provides for using betting revenues to fight crime, is expected to be analyzed by the Senate’s Constitution and Justice Committee next Wednesday (Sep 3).
• The SPA/MF (Secretariat of Prizes and Betting) may issue new restrictions on the design of betting platforms; as of closing, no rule has been published — only press signals.
• The regulator has, for early September, a full schedule of hearings with the sector (associations, operators and consumer-protection bodies), which usually precedes new regulatory moves.

Our team is available to discuss the impact of any of these topics on your business.

This material is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The analyses reflect the team’s understanding as of the date of publication and may be revised as regulations or case law evolve. For specific guidance on concrete situations, please consult a member of our team. © Souto, Correa Advogados — Gaming & Betting Practice.