Key Points
- On 9 November, Chile’s Senate Economy Committee voted 3-1 to substitute the government’s licensing system with two amendments to prohibit private online betting.
- Deputies adopted a budget amendment with a 133-2 vote to cut the tax agency’s budget if passed for funding of betting taxes.
- Neither of those votes is a law yet. The ban amendment should be voted through both the Senate Finance Committee and the Senate as well.
In June, the Chilean tax office started taking VAT registrations from foreign betting sites. However, on 9 November, a Senate committee adopted proposals that could put anyone profiting from running such sites behind bars. Now, the Chilean government faces conflicting approaches to online gambling with two proposed bans, budget restrictions and court decisions of 2023.
Senate Committee Approves Ban without Debate on Government Proposal
On 9 November, the Chilean Senate Economy Committee approved two amendments to prohibit online betting with 3 votes for, 1 against and 1 abstention. The approval happened before the discussion in the Senate of a 114-page proposal for regulation made by the government on 26 October after 3 months’ work.
Vallebona, finance undersecretary of Chile, said about this decision that “We are losing the opportunity to debate regulation.” The committee chairman, Saavedra, noted that the two amendments would be merged into one text at a session scheduled for the next week.
What Two Chilean Amendments Ban Online Betting?
The wider amendment by senators Diego Ibáñez and Gastón Saavedra prohibits the development, maintenance, offer, and promotion of any platform accepting wagers from Chile. People benefiting financially from these actions will be imprisoned for between 541 days and five years as well as paying fines of between 200 and 1,000 UTM.
This amendment allows for gambling activities currently legal based on exceptions in special laws. It includes, for example, Polla Chilena de Beneficencia, Lotería de Concepción, racing tracks, and casinos. However, the activities allowed under the exemption will only include those currently legal under these laws and won’t give them a chance to create any online gambling product.
The second amendment was made by Paulina Núñez, President of the Senate, and Senator María José Gatica. This amendment permits only two gambling entities Polla Chilena and Lotería de Concepción to operate their business through the internet with the restriction of their existing laws.
A briefing of parliament held in October talked about a 12-month period during which the platform in operation during the time of law publication can operate. Media reports suggest that platforms registered under tax may have a transition period of 24 months. Next week’s merged amendment will clear the period of transition in this proposal.
Chilean Senators Differ About Online Betting and Gambling Prohibition
There has been a split among senators about the Chilean policy on gambling. All quotes in this report are English translations of Spanish comments made during the debate.
According to Ibáñez, citing the Supreme Court opinion, “Why do I think we need to open the political debate?” Senator Matías Walker of the Independent Party who advocates for regulation until 2025 called prohibition “the worst path”. He claimed that it would protect companies that did not have licenses nor taxes.
Vallebona contended that denial of the regulation bill would result in less protection of children. Senator Manuel José Ossandón of Renovación Nacional rejected the idea by saying, “I don’t accept that.” Paulina Núñez previously criticized gambling institutions claiming, “Online betting houses are not an innocent business.”
The industry’s trade organization, AGR, considers the decision of this committee unconstitutional, as well as claiming that prohibition will “give a monopoly to the market.”
Tax Registration, Site Blockage and Budget Restriction Are in Conflict
In June this year, Resolution 69 was passed by the tax administration of Chile, which led to the adoption of the VAT registration system. The tax administration has made it clear that although registration creates tax obligations, it does not legalise gambling.
So far, 39 websites have registered in connection with VAT online, whereas 42 websites have been blocked by Subtel (the telecommunications regulator), which are associated with gambling. No one can say for sure whether these two lists are related or not. Members of the committee referred to this combination as “incoherence.”
Sandra Kemp, president of AGR, criticised the measure and declared, “Collecting tax is not regulation.” According to her, collecting taxes does not provide age verification and a self-exclusion register.
Subtel announced on 21 September that it would block 37 websites, subdomains, and mirror websites. The announcement does not mean that there are 37 different gambling websites, which have to be blocked according to the notice. Internet providers have been asked to implement restrictions within 48 hours.
A further restriction was imposed on 10 November, as the Chamber of Deputies approved the budget amendment of 133 to 2 with one abstaining vote. The proposed measure is a part of the 2027 Budget Bill and not the online betting bill.
If the budget restriction passes, it will prohibit the Internal Revenue Service (SII) from using public money for the tax collection systems for unlicensed betting platforms. However, it does not mean that the platforms will lose their tax liabilities. Moreover, the Senate has not considered the measure yet.
Minister of Finance Jorge Quiroz has made a constitutional reservation concerning the budget restriction. The initiators of the budget restriction belong to the Independent Democratic Union (UDI). They argue that the illegal activity cannot be “validated by another entity” because of the necessity to collect taxes.
Chile’s Online Betting Legislation Sees Second Amendment after Four Years
Chile’s attempts to legislate its online betting sector started on 7 March 2022 when Bill 14838-03 came to Congress with a licensing framework being introduced.
In September 2023, the Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in favour of Polla Chilena in its lawsuit against illegal online gambling websites. The Chamber of Deputies adopted the betting bill in December, while the Senate voted in favour of the bill in principle in August 2025 by 27 votes against three.
On 29 September 2025, another Supreme Court decision was made when it ordered Internet service providers to block illegal websites for sports betting in the case filed by the Lotería de Concepción company.
The government of President José Antonio Kast proposed 114 pages of amendments on 26 October, withdrawing all previous amendments. The amendments included introducing operating licenses that will be valid for five years, an annual fee of 1,000 UTM and a 22% effective tax rate.
This includes both 19% VAT and 3% extra tax imposed under the proposed licensing system, which is separate from the VAT registration procedure currently applied to foreign online platforms.
The government also introduced a series of measures, including default limits on deposits, a self-exclusion register, separate player accounts and withdrawals within 24 hours. These changes remain only a proposal and will not enter into law until they pass the legislative procedure.
Based on public opinion, it seems that most Chileans prefer regulating online gambling instead of prohibition. In particular, San Sebastián University conducted a survey among 1,024 respondents online between 9 and 26 October. 63.5% of respondents supported strict regulations for online gambling.
Another 30.8% favoured a complete ban on online betting, while 4.3% were in support of allowing it without any restrictions. The margin of error was 3.4 percentage points. The survey should be considered not as a referendum but a poll conducted among Internet users.
Expert Analysis: Who Will Gain if Chile Bans the Taxed Platforms?
Who will gain and who will become excluded from the market in case the above proposals are implemented in practice? In our opinion, two lottery operators are likely to be the most advantaged parties.
Polla Chilena and Lotería de Concepción have already sued those unauthorised platforms for the use of gambling services. The amendment put forward by Senator Núñez makes digital gambling a monopoly of the same two lottery companies.
We see no reason to suspect the bad faith of the above actors, but a proposal which makes the winners of the above lawsuits the only players with the right to operate their businesses in digital space deserves careful scrutiny. In accordance with the proposed amendment, land-based casinos, which pay 20% of their gross income as tax, do not become the authorised operators for online gambling by default.
At the same time, we do not believe that the ban can be ensured via website blocking since mirrors keep appearing. Moreover, a specific bill was introduced in Congress by two senators on 30 September in order to solve the above problem. In our opinion, the government’s decision to tax, block and ban one and the same business activity creates a problem of credibility.
If the above amendment passes the finance committee without changes, there might be an orderly shutdown of all existing platforms. If senators change the above proposal, a licensing system is possible. The next problem is the potential return of the warnings made by the secretariat of the committee regarding the admissibility of the above amendments.
Share
4 views
