Chile’s ACOT security agenda leaves online betting out, and that is now part of the fight

Chile’s government wants to fast-track the main ACOT security measures before Christmas, but the debate has widened beyond street crime and into the money flows behind online betting. For high-risk PSPs, the relevant detail is simple: regulators and lawmakers are now arguing over physical slot venues, digital wagering platforms, and who gets to tax or police either one.

1. The government is pushing to approve the main ACOT measures before Christmas. The package includes extending flagrancia (flagrante delicto) from 12 to 24 hours, creating the crime of belonging to a criminal organization, and a constitutional reform to establish that security is a duty of the State.
2. Senator Karim Bianchi, who chairs the Senate Security Commission, said the crackdown is focusing on physical venues with slot machines while online betting platforms continue moving large amounts of money. That is the real dispute here: the security agenda is being judged not only by what it targets, but by what it leaves outside the frame.
3. Chile also has a separate legislative process to create a regulatory framework for online betting platforms. The stated goals are to create a regulated market, protect users, and make the origin and destination of funds generated by these operations transparent.
4. In Peñalolén, mayor Miguel Concha said the municipality will continue operations aimed at shutting down the so-called “casinos de barrio,” removing machines, and restricting licenses tied to electronic games that local authorities say can be used to mask this type of activity. Physical venues are being inspected and sanctioned locally; digital platforms remain in a legal and legislative dispute.
5. The taxation angle is where the payments issue becomes hard to ignore. In June, the Senate Economy Commission reviewed Resolución Exenta N.º 69 from the Servicio de Impuestos Internos (SII), which set up a system for taxpayers without domicile or residence in Chile that provide betting, games of chance, and related services through digital platforms to comply with certain tax obligations.

The tax decision drew criticism in Congress because the Supreme Court ruling that has been cited in the debate is being used to argue that online betting without specific authorization is illegal. For PSPs, acquirers, and banks, the practical takeaway is that Chile is not debating online betting in the abstract: it is debating whether the flows can be taxed, traced, and treated as legitimate before the underlying legal status is settled.