Brazil: state agencies produced no studies backing the betting ban

In Brazil, BNLData says the Ministry of Finance admitted, on the eve of Provisional Measure 1.394/2026, that it had no study on the betting ban. The Ministry of Sports said it was not consulted, and three later information requests to other agencies turned up no impact note, no technical memo, and no estimate of the fiscal effect.

1. The requests went to the Ministry of Planning and Budget, the Tax and Customs Studies Center (CETAD) of Receita Federal, and the Casa Civil. None of them delivered a study, a technical note, or an impact estimate on the prohibition.
2. According to Estadão, Lula decided on the ban on 23 September at the Alvorada Palace, with representatives from the Ministry of Finance, Planning, and the Casa Civil present. The official replies, however, did not include any assessment of the decision’s consequences.
3. The Ministry of Planning replied on 13 October, the last day of the deadline, with the response “information does not exist.” It said the Council for Monitoring and Evaluation of Public Policies (CMAP) did not carry out any assessment of policy changes or of betting in general. The request covered the period from 1 January 2025, and no analysis of the sector was recorded during that time.
4. CETAD replied on 29 September, four days after the measure was published. It said there were only two technical notes on the topic, both from 2026 and written before the reply, and added that it did not know of any other body holding additional documents. In other words, when the ban was already in force, the agency responsible for analysing federal revenue had not produced fresh estimates of possible tax losses.
5. The Casa Civil, which coordinates the drafting of provisional measures, extended the deadline on 29 September and replied on 23 October with partial access. Its agenda showed that no meeting before the measure dealt with the ban; monitoring and advertising were discussed on 28 September and 2 October, after publication. Earlier meetings were about the STF decision of 4 February 2025 and the Desenrola and Desenrola Familias programmes.

The Casa Civil also cited a decree and an ordinance that created a committee to oversee illegal gaming and advertising, both issued after the measure. It also mentioned a guide on children and screens, which was unrelated to the request. The only document it acknowledged was the legal opinion from its Legal Affairs Secretariat (SAJ), which it withheld under attorney-client privilege, as provided by Law 8.906/1994.