Chile-reinicia-trabalho-para-reformar-legislacao-de-jogos-online

After the failure to approve a bill to legalize online gaming last year, Chile’s Congress has resumed efforts to update gaming legislation in the country.

The house is now committed to reviewing the pending articles to finalize Law N°035/2022. Introduced in early March 2022, the law includes measures to regulate online gaming.

Previously, lawmakers had already reached a consensus on a licensing system. Thus, the interpretation of online games and a proposed 20% tax on gross income.

However, the Senate Economy Committee interrupted the project, awaiting opinions from other bodies on technical requirements, penalties and legal definitions.

Online gaming legislation in Chile

Approved with a vote of 97 in favor and 28 against in the Chamber, the project underwent technical revisions in the Senate. Taxes have been proposed on income from online gaming, as well as for land-based gambling sectors.

In addition, provisions for obtaining online gaming licenses and penalties related to unauthorized activities were outlined.

Chile’s Supreme Court also ruled on the case, ordering the government to block access to online gaming sites. These were considered illegal until proper regulation was established.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court upheld a legal challenge from existing operators, who demanded that authorities consider online gambling to be illegal until new legislation is passed.

Thus, resulting in blocking access to gaming websites. The new legislation would aim to end the monopolies of Loteria Concepción and Polla Chilena, responsible for football betting, and Teletrak Chile, involved in horse racing, although these companies are seeking safeguards to protect their businesses.

As determined by the Supreme Court, the new legislation must include a 12-month transition period for operators operating in the informal market.

Foreign operators such as Betano and Betsson claim that Chilean legislation does not explicitly prohibit online betting. However, the regulator SCJ considers the offer to be illegal in the absence of explicit regulation.