Newly imposed taxes in Colombia and Peru threaten market stability, discourage investment, and risk pushing LATAM players offshore, according to experts at SBC Summit Americas. The Vixio GamblingCompliance report on the matter, published on 20 May, captures a region at odds with itself: progressive regulatory frameworks now weighed down by fiscal unpredictability.
Colombia’s deposit tax
Colombia’s once-stable regulated gambling market is facing disruption following a presidential decree issued on 14 February. The decree extended the country’s 19% value-added tax (VAT) to all deposits made by players into online gambling accounts — a change that has already led to significant consequences.
Evert Montero Cárdenas, president of the Colombian trade association Fecoljuegos, said the impact has been severe. He noted that “deposits and revenues have since dropped dramatically,” with licensed operators currently offering bonuses to offset the tax — a strategy Montero warned is not financially sustainable.
Iliana Pineda, chief legal and compliance officer at Wplay, added that imposing this tax is like “shooting ourselves in the foot”. She explained that applying VAT to deposits instead of gross gaming revenue (GGR) disrupts the economics of the industry and contributes to an environment of legal insecurity, discouraging new investment and job creation.
Court decision could reverse tax — or cement it
Although the deposit tax is currently a temporary measure due to expire at the end of 2025, the Constitutional Court of Colombia is reviewing whether Emergency Decree 175 — which enabled the tax — is constitutional. A previous court ruling established that the government’s emergency powers must be used specifically to address the crisis in the Catatumbo region. A final decision on the tax’s validity is due by 25 June.
If the decree is found unconstitutional, the tax will be withdrawn. If upheld, the 19% VAT on deposits will remain in place through 31 December 2025.
Colombia urged to strengthen supplier regulation and enforcement
Colombian stakeholders also stressed the need for stronger regulatory enforcement and supplier controls. Montero of Fecoljuegos argued that the tax increases highlight the importance of well-organised lobbying associations across Latin America. He warned that gambling operators should not expect support from advertising or media companies, even if they benefit from the industry financially.
Montero added that the new tax also increases the urgency for Colombian authorities to step up enforcement against offshore operators. Although Coljuegos — the national regulator — has blocked more than 20,000 illegal websites, Montero noted that website blocking alone is ineffective, as operators can easily switch domains.
He criticised what he described as a “lack of political will” to block both payments and advertising for unlicensed operators. He also called for Colombia to follow Peru’s example by requiring licensing or registration of suppliers, to prevent technology and game providers from serving both legal and illegal operators.
Peru’s turnover tax faces industry backlash
In Peru, the Ministry of Economy issued a decree last December that applies a consumption tax of 1% on every online bet made by players. While the rate has temporarily been reduced to 0.3% until 30 June, it is set to return to 1% in July.
This tax is in addition to the existing 12% GGR tax that licensed operators already pay, leading to concerns about unfair treatment of the online sector compared to land-based 바카라s, where taxes are levied on revenue rather than turnover.
Carlos Fonseca Sarmiento, a Lima-based gambling law expert, pointed out the inconsistency, highlighting that land-based 바카라s and slot halls are taxed on GGR — not individual wagers.
Operational challenges and legal pushback in Peru
Andrea Rossi, commercial director for Betsson Latin America, warned that a turnover-based tax poses a major operational challenge, particularly for online 바카라 games, where the tax must be collected for every spin.
Rossi argued that this system would push players to illegal platforms, where they can place full-value bets without tax deductions. She added that “channelisation in the Peruvian market, unfortunately, is going to be very poor and the illegal market is going to be very successful, which is exactly what the regulator does not want.”
Despite lobbying efforts by industry groups, no change has yet been made to the policy. Some operators have filed court injunctions arguing that the consumption tax is unconstitutional. Beatriz Martorello, head of legal and regulatory affairs for Rush Street Interactive, expressed hope that pending legislation in Congress could address the issue: “We have the expectation that this will be positive and will change the situation,” she said.
