Lula’s Victory Leaves Brazil’s Betting Market Future Uncertain

What Does Lula’s Victory Mean for the Betting Market?

The continuation of the policy restricting online betting will depend on legislative and judicial decisions. The election victory may influence political negotiations surrounding the provisional measure (MP), but it does not automatically change its legal effects.

Published on September 25, the provisional measure remains in force as long as it is within its validity period, unless a court decision suspends its effects. Congress may approve the text, modify its scope, or reject it. If the vote is not completed within the constitutional deadline, the MP may also lose its legal effect.

In this context, the sector is monitoring two main developments: the measure’s progress through the legislature and the actions filed before the STF by organizations challenging the ban.

In an analysis presented during a webinar hosted by consultancy Vixio, chief analyst James Kilsby outlined four possible scenarios for the Brazilian market: full approval of the ban; the provisional measure losing its legal effect; maintaining the ban on online casinos while preserving sports betting; or reformulating the rules to allow a more restricted market.

These possibilities represent scenarios under discussion, not predictions that the platforms will reopen.

Lula Maintains His Opposition to Betting Platforms

The president’s statements reinforce the government’s political stance toward online betting. When announcing the restrictive measure, Lula compared the effects of betting platforms to a problem that needed to be stopped.

“Either we remove the tumor or this tumor will kill us,” he stated.

In another statement, the president linked the expansion of digital betting to the growing consumption of crack cocaine:

“It reminded me a little of the beginning of crack. Betting is experiencing exactly the same thing, on a much larger scale, because it is digital.”

On October 22, Lula again spoke out against the continuation of operations in the country and declared that the platforms would not resume operating in Brazil.

“Anyone who wants to make money should go to work,” he said.

The statements demonstrate the government’s position but do not replace decisions by Congress or any potential ruling by the STF. Despite the executive branch’s opposition, the text of the MP may be amended during the parliamentary process, while the legal challenges remain under review.

Can the STF Suspend the Betting Ban?

Justice Luiz Fux is the rapporteur for the Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality (ADIs) filed by industry organizations against MP 1,394/2026. The organizations challenging the measure include the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) and the Brazilian Institute for Responsible Gambling (IBJR).

The organizations have requested an injunction to suspend the ban. Their arguments include potential losses amounting to billions resulting from the interruption of activities, risks to legal certainty, and the possibility that bettors could migrate to illegal platforms.

An injunction can temporarily suspend the effects of a measure before a final ruling is issued. If Fux grants a decision in favor of the industry, its scope and the conditions established will need to be examined to determine which activities may resume.

Until a court decision with such an effect is issued, the proceedings before the STF do not constitute authorization to resume operations.

The federal government, meanwhile, supports maintaining the ban. The Office of the Attorney General of the Union (AGU) argues that the measure seeks to protect household budgets and public health, as well as reduce betting-related indebtedness. The agency has also requested that the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Republic (PGR) issue its opinion before Fux makes a decision.

Although the possibility of a broader injunction has been linked to the period following the presidential election’s second round, no definitive date has been confirmed for the justice’s ruling.

What Is the Validity Period of the Betting MP?

The Brazilian Constitution establishes that a provisional measure has an initial validity period of 60 days, which may be extended once for another 60 days if voting is not completed in both houses of the National Congress. The legislative process may therefore extend to a total of 120 days under the constitutional counting rules.

However, the countdown is suspended during the parliamentary recess. Therefore, simply adding 120 calendar days to the date the MP was published is not enough to determine when it expires.

Taking the legislative calendar and the suspension during the year-end recess into account, the projected date for the MP to lose validity is March 5, 2027, if Congress does not complete the vote before then.

The measure’s validity is a central issue for operators: while it remains in force, the ban produces legal effects regardless of whether it is converted into law.

The legislative process and the proceedings before the STF are separate processes. Even if the MP loses its legal effect, the legal consequences of actions taken while it was in force will need to be considered.

Could Sports Betting Be Allowed Without Online Casinos?

One alternative under discussion in Congress is to distinguish sports betting from online casino games, allowing part of the market to resume under more restrictive rules.

Among the lawmakers who have submitted proposals to exclude sports betting from the scope of the ban are Marcos Braz, Julio Lopes, Pedro Aihara, Felipe Francischini, Julio Arcoverde, Marcos Pontes, and Hiran Gonçalves.

These initiatives still depend on the legislative process to amend the rule currently in force.

A proposal by Marcos Braz seeks to maintain the ban on online casinos and bets on actions, isolated events, or individual plays during matches, while preserving sports betting on final results. If an amendment of this kind is approved, the market could resume operating with a more limited range of betting products than the one available before the MP.

The outcome will depend on the text approved by Congress and, should further challenges arise, the courts’ assessment of its validity.

Congress Received 99 Amendments to the Provisional Measure

The official legislative page consulted records 99 numbered amendments to the MP. The deadline for submitting proposals ended on October 14, following an extension ordered by the president of the Congress’s Joint Committee. The stated reason was to ensure lawmakers could participate after the first round of elections.

In addition to attempts to preserve sports betting, the amendments address sponsorship contracts, licenses already granted, and possible transitional rules.

The end of the amendment submission period does not mean that the proposals have been approved. To change the ban, the initiatives must progress through the legislative process.

Betting Sponsorships in Football Are Also Under Discussion

Sponsorship contracts with football clubs and sports arenas are another area of concern for the industry. An amendment by Marcos Braz proposes allowing the passive display of brands on jerseys and in arenas covered by existing contracts for 24 months, creating a transition period for advertising materials and spaces.

However, this period is a legislative proposal, not a general authorization already established by the MP. According to the schedule announced by the government and the Senate, the deadline for removing advertising materials and sponsorship signage ended on October 5.

Another proposal, submitted by Beto Preto, seeks to preserve authorizations already granted until their respective expiration dates, without renewal or extension. The aim is to establish a transition for companies that have already invested in operating in the sector.

Like the other amendments, these initiatives require approval. The future of betting sponsorships in Brazilian football will depend on the final text approved by Congress and any court decisions that modify the application of the ban.

If the MP Expires, Can Betting Platforms Resume Operations?

The provisional measure losing its legal effect could pave the way for the restoration of the previous legal framework, but it does not guarantee that all websites will reopen immediately, under the same conditions and with the same authorizations.

Article 62 of the Constitution stipulates that Congress must regulate, through a legislative decree, the legal relationships arising from a provisional measure that has been rejected or has lost its legal effect. If such a decree is not issued within 60 days, the relationships established and arising from acts carried out while the measure was in force remain governed by it.

This provision is particularly relevant because the betting MP provides for the revocation of authorizations.

In Vixio’s analysis, the measure losing its legal effect is one of the scenarios that could allow the market to be restored, although the transition may require additional measures. Any reopening will also depend on the measure’s legal consequences and the scope of potential STF decisions.

Therefore, the expiration of the MP and the immediate resumption of operations by all platforms are not necessarily the same event.

What Is the Outlook for Betting Platforms After the Election?

The future of fixed-odds betting in Brazil remains uncertain. If Congress approves the core provisions of the MP, the ban could be consolidated into law. If it amends the text, it could establish different rules for sports betting, online casinos, and sponsorships. Rejection of the measure, the loss of its legal effect, or a court ruling could also change the situation.

Luiz Fux’s role adds a decisive dimension to the debate. While the justice reviews the legal challenges to the ban, the AGU is defending the measure and requesting an opinion from the PGR before a decision is made.

For operators, suppliers, clubs, and bettors, the main conclusion is that there is no confirmed date for betting platforms to return following Lula’s victory, but it is also not possible to claim that the definitive end of the entire market has already been legally established.

The election result may influence political negotiations, but it does not determine the platforms’ fate on its own. The decision on whether to convert the MP into law rests with the National Congress, while the STF may assess its constitutionality and the requests to suspend its effects.