Chile’s SII expects more than US$100 million from VAT on online betting

Chile’s tax authority has told the Senate that charging VAT on online betting platforms does not amount to legalising them. For PSPs and operators, the point is simpler: the SII is treating these flows as taxable activity now, with registration for tax purposes explicitly separated from any operating licence.

1. The Servicio de Impuestos Internos (SII) defended its decision before Chile’s Senate Economic Commission to apply VAT to online betting platforms operating in the country. Director Jorge Trujillo said the SII’s job is to enforce existing tax rules, not to decide whether a business is legal or illegal.
2. According to the SII, Resolution No. 69 of 2026 created a mechanism for foreign betting platforms, casinos, gambling services, and related businesses to declare and pay taxes on their operations in Chile. The authority stressed that tax registration does not authorise a platform to operate.
3. The regime also requires the platforms to pay the VAT corresponding to the last 36 tax periods. Carolina Saravia, the SII’s subdirector of enforcement, said 39 online betting platforms are currently registered under the special regime, which uses quarterly payments. The first payment is due in October 2026.
4. Another 10 platforms did not register voluntarily and were added to a taxpayer-substitution mechanism under Exempt Resolution No. 94, published on 15 July. In those cases, the tax obligation moves to the corresponding withholding agent to secure payment.
5. The SII estimates that the first payment could exceed US$100 million. Saravia said the projection was based on available information and public data provided by the companies themselves. The authority is classifying these operations as digital entertainment services under letter n of article 8 of Decree Law No. 825.

For high-risk payment providers, the practical takeaway is that Chile is building a tax collection framework around online betting even while senior senators question the legal status of the activity. That usually means one thing in practice: the flow can be taxed before the regulatory debate is fully settled.