Lula was re-elected on Sunday (25) with 51.79% of valid votes, on the same day the betting ban in Brazil completed one month and the licenses of 85 operators lost their validity.
The result alone does not define the market’s future, which now depends on the Supreme Court (STF) and Congress. And, while it waits, part of the sector itself is beginning to admit that it lost the responsible gambling narrative.
In prediction markets, the shift was abrupt. Polymarket, where the election moved more than US$200 million, gave Flávio Bolsonaro as much as an 80% chance on Saturday (24) and flipped to Lula on Sunday night.
What the victory means for bets
Lula signed the Provisional Measure (MP) on September 25, nine days before the first round, in a move seen as an electoral gamble, and it ended up turning the game against Flávio Bolsonaro in the runoff.
For lawyer Luiz Felipe Maia, of MYLaw Advogados, a short-term reversal is unlikely, but the debate could shift. “Supporting the ban and supporting any consequence of the ban are different things,” he told staging-latam.next.io/. Once it becomes clear that demand has migrated to unauthorized sites, the issue for the government “will stop being about ‘backing down’ and will become about how to protect the consumer in a market that hasn’t disappeared.”
Within the sector, the reaction was harsher. Thomas Carvalhaes, CEO of TC Advisors, said: “As a Brazilian and as an executive in the gaming and betting sector for Latin America for almost 20 years, it is impossible to deny that we have been suffering a series of harsh, unfair, incorrect, utterly unethical blows from our own government, the same government that legalized and regulated the sector.
How can a five-year promise or contract simply be torn up like this, as an arbitrary, unilateral, authoritarian measure. The attitude of a dictator. What’s most concerning is that it’s a series of attacks against a regulated sector in the Brazilian market.”
For him, Lula’s victory “leaves us perplexed,” but the formation of the new Congress brings “a certain positivity.” Carvalhaes argues that the sector should move closer to the government. “We have to roll up our sleeves even more. There’s no point crying over spilled milk now.”
In a statement, the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) congratulated Lula on his re-election and said it hopes “that dialogue will be restored and the democratic rule of law will prevail.”
The association offered itself to Congress and the Executive branch to help improve the regulated market and combat illegal bets that, according to the statement, “unfortunately dominated the country during the ban on legalized companies.”
The sector lost the narrative
The ban carried little weight in the vote, but it also met no resistance from society. For part of the market itself, this says less about the government and more about how the sector behaved during the 21 months of the regulated market.
Even IBIA, which advocates for the regulated market, acknowledges that advertising, consumer protection, and operator oversight “require ongoing attention.”
For Fellipe Fraga, CBO of Stellar Gaming, the sector needs to face this problem before attributing its fate solely to politics. “We got the tone of advertising wrong and the way we competed wrong. We talked too much about the advantages of each operation and showed too little about how we would protect people exposed to the risks of the activity,” he wrote in an opinion piece for staging-latam.next.io/. “We left the ball bouncing for anyone who wanted to kick it.”
For Fraga, this gave the government arguments. “The message that ‘the bets are over’ is simple and politically powerful.” Regaining credibility will require accepting limits on acquisition, advertising, and customer retention. “In certain situations, protecting the player will require giving up revenue.”
Consulted by staging-latam.next.io/, Marcos Sabiá, former CEO of Galera Bet, considers the ban “illegal and tremendously mistaken,” but acknowledges that it “only had the conditions to happen because the political world saw some dividend in banning them, among the nearly 80% who disapprove of the bets.”
For him, winning back society will be “a matter of survival,” requiring “a disciplined, sincere communication effort that will be costly in several respects.” “Bets need to consider a market with restrictions, especially in terms of advertising, with special attention to responsible gambling beyond the bureaucratic ‘play responsibly,’” he stated.
Ana Clara Barros, a lawyer and vice-president of AIGAMING, sees the episode as a warning for the industry itself. “Gambling is facing growing scrutiny around the world, not just in Brazil.
Antonio Forjaz, LatAm head at Sportingbet, points to concrete actions: at the company, customers are required to set up control tools, and accounts are monitored daily by a “Markers of Harm” model, with human review in higher-risk cases, which can lead to deposit limits, blocks, or exclusion.
For him, responsible gambling “is a systemic agenda and requires the participation of other sectors, such as financial institutions and credit companies.” “None of these protections exist in the illegal market, and the public needs to be informed about that.
Maybe it’s time for the industry to ask what future it wants to build,” he said. “Are we positioning ourselves as a legitimate sector, one that creates jobs, pays taxes, attracts investment, and contributes to society, or are we still selling little more than ‘irresponsible fun’?”
According to her, the issue goes beyond compliance with rules and relates to how the industry presents itself. “We can’t demand to be treated as a mature, responsible industry while, for example, we objectify women at trade shows, glorify excess, and turn professional events into endless parties. This is a warning.”
Sindibets-SP acknowledges the problem. “The industry is undoubtedly facing significant wear on its public perception, and we recognize that there is significant work to be done to rebuild society’s trust,” said Laura Morganti, lawyer and financial director of Sindibets-SP, the employers’ union for online betting companies in São Paulo.
She points to a paradox: the MP’s advertising restrictions could even reach responsible gambling campaigns, precisely when the industry needs them most. “The industry needs to be prepared to demonstrate, when legal conditions allow, that responsible gambling is not just talk, but an effective commitment,” she said.
One month’s balance sheet
In one month, the sites went offline and the 85 federal licenses lost their validity. According to ANJL, more than 3,500 workers were laid off by the beginning of October, as staging-latam.next.io/ showed.
While the legal market waits, the illegal one advances. The International Betting Integrity Association (IBIA), an entity funded by operators and dedicated to monitoring betting integrity, estimates that the cost of the ban goes beyond the market itself.
Based on estimates from H2 Gambling Capital, the association projects that, without a legal alternative, around 60% of the regulated market’s activity, equivalent to R$ 25 billion, could migrate to unlicensed operators, raising the illegal market from R$ 17 billion to around R$ 42 billion.
Who decides now
The election determined the president, but the future of betting depends on two other bodies.
At the STF, Justice Luiz Fux, the rapporteur for the lawsuits against the MP, scheduled a public hearing for November 3 before ruling on the suspension requests. 26 institutions were summoned, including the Attorney General’s Office, the Ministry of Finance, the CBF, football clubs, and industry associations. A ruling with retroactive effect could reinstate the licenses that expired on Sunday.
For Ana Barros, the election results do not allow for definitive conclusions. “Nothing has been conclusively decided. The legislative process remains open, and there is still room for political negotiations, institutional responses, and legal challenges,” she told staging-latam.next.io/.
By the lawyer’s count, the industry still has about 130 days, until early March 2027, before the MP loses validity. “That’s a significant window for political organizing, legislative negotiations, and legal challenges.”
Maia sees three simultaneous fronts: the STF examining the measure’s constitutional limits, Congress deciding its legislative fate, and the government potentially proposing a regulatory solution. “
The immediate response may come from the STF, but Justice Fux alone does not replace Congress, nor will he necessarily have the final say on all the economic effects of the MP,” he said. He notes that the current Congress, before the new lawmakers take office, can already amend, approve, or reject the measure. “Waiting for the new Congress as if nothing could happen before then is a mistake.”
At the Planalto, the stance is not expected to change. “With Lula re-elected, the ban remains the government’s position, barring an explicit change of course,” he said.
Witoldo Hendrich, president of ABRAJOGO, has a different take. For him, the government is already negotiating the overturning of the MP, whether with the STF, the TCU, or Congress, because it “desperately needs the revenue from gambling” given its campaign promises and spending.
“Taxing betting is essential for the current government,” he said to staging-latam.next.io/. If the market returns, he expects “slightly more restrictive” rules, to “give society some satisfaction,” with limits on marketing and, eventually, the elimination of controversial games, such as Tigrinho.
Hiago Piau, president of the National Association of Municipal and State Lotteries (ANALOME), sees a middle ground. In his view, Lula won’t take the initiative to reopen the market, but he also shouldn’t make an effort to prevent it from happening through Congress, because he won’t easily give up a revenue source of this size.
“If the provisional measure expires, he can simply say he did his part and that the decision was up to the lawmakers. In the end, the sector comes back, revenue comes back, and life goes on,” he said to staging-latam.next.io/. His bet is that Congress will let the MP expire, because lawmakers “won’t want to discuss this topic and directly take part in a possible solution.”
For Fellipe Fraga, none of these decisions alone solves the sector’s problem. “A legal victory may allow operations to resume. It doesn’t guarantee that society will recognize value in that resumption,” he wrote.
Sindibets-SP also doesn’t expect the market to simply go back to what it was. “It’s natural for the sector to undergo remodeling and regulatory improvements. We don’t necessarily expect a return to the previous scenario without adjustments,” said Laura Morganti.
Regarding the new government, she considers it “premature to make predictions,” but argues that the debate should consider “not only public opinion perception, but also the practical consequences of the ban,” such as bettors moving to illegal platforms.
A warning for LatAm
For international operators and suppliers, the Brazilian experience leaves a lesson that goes beyond the country’s borders: a paid federal license offered no protection against a sudden political decision.
In less than two years, Brazil authorized more than 80 operators and created rules for customer identification, monitoring of suspicious bets, and self-exclusion. According to IBIA‘s assessment, the Brazilian framework scored 77 out of 100, ahead of Portugal (68) and not far behind Great Britain (86). It took just one provisional measure to suspend all of that.
For Witoldo Hendrich, president of Abrajogo, what investors need in order to return is basic. “Guarantee that agreements will be honored, guarantee of stability, guarantee of legal certainty. That’s the bare minimum. No one puts business money where there’s uncertainty. Where there’s uncertainty, we put money in when it’s gambling, with the expectation that the uncertainty will turn in our favor. In business terms, no one can do that.”
Thaise Jupiter, head of business development at BETBY in Brazil, says the issue goes beyond the candidates. “What’s really at stake is whether the authorities want betting activity to take place within a regulated framework, with clear rules, player protection, and oversight, or outside of it,” she told staging-latam.next.io/.
She recalls that operators paid R$ 30 million for five-year licenses, invested in certification, technology, and local teams. “When the framework changes so abruptly, the concern is whether operators, suppliers, and investors can have enough confidence in the rules to take on that kind of commitment again.”
For Maia, even a reopening would not automatically restore what was lost. A judicial suspension of the MP, its rejection, or its loss of effect could reinstate the rules of the previous regime, but “that, on its own, does not resolve the situation of each extinguished authorization nor guarantee companies an immediate resumption of operations.”
A politically negotiated reopening, on the other hand, “would hardly reproduce Law 14.790 as it was.” The lawyer expects stricter requirements on advertising, prevention of problem gambling, and operator oversight, but does not consider a license cap or higher taxes a certainty.
There is also a question that, in his view, is independent of the market’s fate: “Can the State extinguish authorizations for which it charged a licensing fee and rule out, through a single sentence in the MP, any possibility of restitution or compensation? The fate of the market and the responsibility of public authorities don’t need to have the same answer.”
For Sabiá, the sector doesn’t have much time. “Either it earns its social license or, in four years, it could become an electoral bargaining chip again. Do we want that?”