Key Points
- Only 7 operators received official recognition from the regulator, but none of them received any license; instead, they were merely confirmed as authorised.
- There are at least 81 unlicensed websites or operators, but the regulator does not provide more information regarding them.
- Online gambling regulation remains postponed due to the lack of the Gambling Council’s first meeting.
The regulator of the Dominican Republic has released information regarding the 7 authorised operators, but 81 possibly unlicensed websites and operators remain unknown, along with other issues related to one particular website and licensing regulation.
In November, the Directorate General of Gambling (DGJA) gave an interview to El Nuevo Diario. Later, this news was released by iGaming Business on 9 November. The fact is that none of the operators received an additional license as a result of the public announcement. Instead, 7 operators have already been confirmed as being authorised, and the regulator merely decided to give them public recognition.
7 Names Out In The Open… And 1 Disputed Web Address
The 7 companies that are now officially cool with the regulator are Game Technology International, Betcris Banca de Apuesta, Juancito Sport, Gogo Sport, Orobet, Breeze Management and Drbets. Their platforms are Superbets, Betcris, Juancito Sport, Gogo Banca, Orobet, vip987.do and Appuesta.
And then there’s the small issue of a website address that’s been disputed, Yogonet and El Nuevo Diario are listing it as juancitosport.com.do while the official register says it’s juancitosport.do. The regulator hasn’t said whether the .do or .com is the right one to use, just that players should choose the one in the official register.
As can be seen from a SoftSwiss licensing guide from 2024, the former directorate had 7 operators registered in its registry, so this new official statement may be considered the confirmation of existing licences rather than the issuance of new ones.
An interesting exception among these seven addresses is represented by Gogo Sport gogobanca.com, which stands out from the pack by being the only operator without .do domain, while the directive issued in 2024 stated that all operators should operate the .do domain, redirecting users to a .do website, but the fact that an operator operates on the basis of a .com domain does not mean anything, as the regulator did not state how this company manages to comply with its directive.
81 Names That Won’t Be Mentioned
Along with 7 companies whose licences were confirmed by the DGJA, this organisation was checking the activity of approximately 81 online resources and operators, called “operators, websites, platforms” by the reports and still unclear in terms of what they mean and whether the regulator is taking all of them into account.
DGJA stated that it conducts its investigation together with other government institutions but has found no evidence of any violations yet. As to the list of these 81 resources’ addresses, it has not been published anywhere.
Comparing the number of operators whose existence is not officially confirmed with the number of those which are confirmed, we obtain quite a curious ratio of 12 to 1. However, it should be noted that these two numbers might not even be comparable in the first place.
A Regulator Still Defining Its Role
On 22 September 2026, the DGJA was formed to replace the Directorate of Casinos and Gambling through the signing of Law 86-26 by the Dominican Republic government. The Official Gazette enacted the law on 2 October. The same date saw Decree 684-26 appoint Teófilo “Quico” Tabar as the interim director.
The next few days saw the finance minister Magín Díaz swearing him in, as Tabar still acted as the head of the National Lottery.
Prior to the formation of the DGJA, regulation of gambling included the finance ministry, the former directorate, the National Lottery, and the tax office. The DGJA now regulates all these together with the mass of documents, betting outlets, and unfinished registrations.
Two resolutions were passed on 13 October. Resolution 02-2026 banned the establishment of new lottery banks, agencies, and sales outlets.
On 19 October, the list of businesses that had joined the program was transferred to the tax authority DGII. A notice of 2 November defined 15 November as the deadline for declarations. The filing of declarations does not make an establishment legal.
There is also a matter of the deadline calculation. The 30-day period which ends on 15 November should have started on 16 October, only three days after the resolution was adopted. Nobody offered an explanation for this period.
None of the measures concern online gambling licences. The deadline for declarations is related to betting shops which are not included in the program.
Two Licence Approaches and One Council That Hasn’t Met Yet
As it is said, Law 86-26 introduces two licence schemes for internet gambling. According to the law firm, licences for online gambling are going to be valid for ten years under Article 77, while those for virtual games will be valid for five years under Article 97.
It is important to determine and verify the age of players using the data collected by the Central Electoral Board.
And virtual gambling sites also have one more condition – they will depend on the decision of the Gambling Council regarding fees and operation. It is noted that the council did not hold any meeting; till 11 November there was no news about this.
The Spanish version of the description contains information on the possibility of blocking the site and placing restrictions on the transfer of funds to unauthorised providers via the telecommunications agency.
The tax at 10% for internet gaming is not a novelty. It was mentioned by the tax authority in relation to Law 139-11 in 2024. It is stated that the new law provides for retention of the tax according to Art. 78, including the monthly payment of RD $5,000,000 by each company until the appropriate technology is created.
The above information is based on the interpretation of the firm. The text in the Official Gazette is the ultimate reference to the legislation.
From the 2024 List of Fees to an Old Corruption Story
The price of an internet casino licence according to Resolution 136-2024 signed on 26 March 2024 was RD$20,473,481 for five years. These are outdated fees and they aren’t necessarily going to be the price of a licence application in the future.
At that moment iGaming Business said that Amaya, licensed in 2011, is the owner of the only online gambling licence in the country.
Also, the former directorate published on 22 March 2024 the list of 41 banned brands. This public blacklist showed that the regulator used to publish the names of banned operators earlier.
There is also the problem of corruption in the country’s gambling regulation. Late in October 2025, a former director of casinos and gambling admitted to accepting money from illegal betting shops, as mentioned by the Associated Press.
Tabar who at that time was the director of the National Lottery, had referred to “circumstances beyond our control” to explain several years of delay in regulation of betting shops.
Next Test: The Council Grinds Through its First Meeting and a Published List
It will become one of those weeks when three significant events may completely revise the operation of the new system as it concerns the businesses interested in entering the world of virtual gambling games.
The first event is connected with the convening of the meeting of the Council of Gambling and the adoption of the resolution regarding virtual game licensing. Don’t know when the meeting of the DGJA is scheduled at all.
The second issue is connected with the expiry of the period for declaring business enterprises conducting irregular betting shops by November 15th. We’ll understand what scale the programme will take when we find out the number of such enterprises which will step forth.
And the third one is the publication of the list of the blocked websites in case the DGJA decides to publish it. But will this list serve as the determining factor in regard to the processing of 81 reported entries?
Until then though, operators and existing players, are still completely in the dark as to which websites DGJA considers unauthorised until the regulator finally spits out the names.
Expert Analysis: A Ledger With About One Column Filled In
As evident from the headlines, one would get an idea that the regulatory body is out there to launch some kind of offensive against the rogues, but in truth, the official statement from the DGJA does not make any concrete promise. What we understand from it is that they have reserved a page in their book.
The stand we take here is quite simple; if the DGJA wants the public to have faith in them, then they should publish the list of 81 names who are engaged in their illegal activities. The 2024 blacklist of 41 prohibited brands shows that publishing the names is not some impossible task.
But it can be argued that publishing websites before finishing the investigation may result in errors, and such criticism would be justified.
The Associated Press reported that Tabar said something cryptic about the circumstances that were beyond the authorities’ control, we’d just love to know what stopped the earlier regulation of betting shops and whether all that has been fixed with the new law.
Any new operators wanting to get into the virtual game can’t get licenses until that council meeting happens. But unfortunately there is no word yet as to whether the processing of applications for the newly issued gambling licences will be expedited.
Meanwhile, the seven licensed operators continue to reign unchallenged in the online gaming space with no newly licensed operator making an impact there yet. We’re not implying that the seven companies did anything wrong, but it’s a delay that leaves them pretty isolated.
You can only get regulatory status by being listed on that official register of course, but that does not guarantee some of the things that really matter to players like having their deposits safe, fair odds, or getting their winnings in a timely fashion. Players would be much safer checking the register and using a website address published there rather than just relying on some flashy ad.
One thing remains, will the DGJA ever actually publish the names behind those 81 reported entries or will they just stay a complete mystery?
This report covers regulatory developments and editorial opinion, not betting or legal advice. Remember, betting is a game of chance and carries financial risk, players should check if they are old enough to play in their jurisdiction before using any platform.
Share
7 views
