Simone Vicentini: “Rather than simply replicating foreign models, Brazil developed its own regulatory system”

Simone Vicentini, former Deputy Secretary of Brazil's Secretariat of Prizes and Betting (SPA), has outlined how Brazil deliberately charted its own course in building a regulated iGaming framework rather than adopting wholesale the regulatory models of established markets. This distinction carries significant weight, as Brazil represents one of Latin America's largest and most strategically important gaming markets, with unique cultural, economic, and enforcement considerations that differ markedly from European or North American precedents.

Brazil's regulatory journey reflects a pragmatic assessment of what works in mature markets versus what suits an emerging regulated market with entrenched illegal competition. While jurisdictions like the UK and Malta pioneered comprehensive licensing regimes, Brazil faced a different challenge: a deeply rooted illegal gambling ecosystem with established player habits, minimal tax compliance, and sophisticated criminal networks. Rather than importing wholesale a European-style regulatory framework, Brazilian authorities designed rules that account for local market realities, including the prevalence of informal betting operations and the need to transition players from unregulated to regulated channels.

Vicentini's comments suggest that Brazil's regulatory architects studied international best practices but adapted them to local conditions. This approach likely involved balancing consumer protection standards with competitive pricing and product offerings capable of competing with illegal alternatives. The framework also appears designed to address enforcement challenges specific to Brazil, where illegal operators have historically operated with relative impunity and enjoy deep player loyalty.

The fight against illegal gambling remains central to Brazil's regulatory strategy. Despite the launch of regulated sports betting and iGaming operations, illegal operators continue to capture substantial market share, particularly among price-sensitive players and those in underserved regions. Vicentini's emphasis on this ongoing battle underscores a reality facing many emerging regulated markets: legalization alone does not automatically eliminate illegal competition; sustained enforcement, player education, and competitive regulated offerings are essential.

Brazil's experience offers valuable lessons for other Latin American and emerging markets considering regulated iGaming frameworks. The emphasis on developing context-specific regulation rather than copying foreign models suggests that successful market development requires deep understanding of local player behavior, enforcement capacity, and competitive dynamics. As Brazil's regulated market matures, the outcomes of its distinctive regulatory approach will likely influence how other jurisdictions in the region and beyond approach their own gaming regulation.