Brazil’s betting groups want online gaming recertification rules phased in after B2B regulation

The ANJL and the IBJR met Brazil’s Secretariat of Prizes and Betting on Friday, 7/8, to argue that the most disruptive online gaming requirements should not land before the B2B framework is in place. For operators and PSPs serving regulated high-risk markets, the sequencing matters: if the rules change the game mechanics first and the supplier layer later, you get more recertification work, more cost, and a cleaner lane for the illegal market.

1. The meeting took place between the Associação Nacional de Jogos e Loterias (ANJL), the Instituto Brasileiro de Jogo Responsável (IBJR), and the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting of the Ministry of Finance (SPA/MF), which is preparing an Interministerial Ordinance covering platform design, user experience, and online games. The SPA/MF said the document was expected to be published at the start of this week.
2. The main objections focused on structural game changes that would trigger adaptation and recertification. The list includes bans on autoplay and turbo/quick-spin functions, plus a minimum 2.5-second interval between the start and end of each bet or round. In practice, that is not a cosmetic tweak; it changes product logic and forces suppliers and operators back through the certification queue.
3. ANJL’s argument is about market structure, not just compliance cost. The association said that if licensed operators face tighter rules before an equivalent B2B regulatory framework exists, regulated platforms will carry narrower game catalogs and new certification costs while illegal sites keep offering a wider range of games without consumer-protection or oversight requirements. That is the kind of asymmetry that usually shows up in channelization data later, after the damage is already priced in.
4. To support its case, ANJL presented research, channelization data, and comparisons with the United Kingdom, Ontario, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden. The point was not to claim a direct causal link between any single rule and channelization levels, but to show why the order of regulation and proportionality of measures matter.
5. Given the narrow window before publication of the Ordinance and the advanced stage of the discussion, ANJL chose a two-phase implementation proposal instead of challenging the content of the rule itself. Phase one would apply player-protection measures tied to conduct, interface, transparency, and advertising immediately, since they do not require changes to game mechanics or recertification. Phase two would defer the mechanical requirements until after B2B supplier regulation is published and in force, with an additional transition period.

The proposal also calls for a review of the minimum round time; instead of 5 seconds, the text indicates a shorter period is being discussed. For licensed operators and their payment partners, this is the practical issue: the more rules that alter gameplay logic before the supplier framework is settled, the more likely it is that compliance work ends up protecting the regulated channel while giving the unlicensed one a free pass.