A “epidemia das bets” no Brasil: fundamentos e propostas para uma tributação justa

Abstract

This dissertation is situated within the field of Tax Law, in the research line “Human Rights, Person, and Development: innovation and legal regulation in the context of globalized capitalism,” within the area of concentration “Law and Innovation,” of the Graduate Program in Law and Innovation at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora, and aims to analyze the taxation of the Brazilian bets market in light of fair taxation, in the context of the so-called “bets epidemic” and the consolidation of a regulated market inaugurated, above all, by Laws nº 13.756/2018 and 14.790/2023. The theoretical framework adopted is neoconstitutionalism, which grants centrality to the Constitution and normative effectiveness to fundamental rights, guiding the critical analysis of the taxation of bets from the perspective of fair taxation. The research methodology employed is qualitative, grounded in empiricism, making use of documentary analysis of constitutional and infra-constitutional norms, specialized doctrine in Tax Law, as well as data and studies on the bets market. The research results are: the historical and normative reconstruction of games, betting, and games of chance in Brazil; the identification of the “bets epidemic” as a phenomenon of mass expansion with relevant social costs, especially for health; the systematization of parameters of tax justice and fair taxation capable of guiding the assessment of the tax burden applied to bettors and betting operators; the critical reading of the current tax regime, which shows advances in the taxation of bettors, but also weaknesses arising from infra-legal choices and regressive proposals; the indication of avenues for improvement in the taxation of operators, including through differentiation of the taxation levied across bets modalities; taxation of the bets sector, when designed in a fair manner and guided by the constitutional principles of ability to pay, isonomy, progressivity, and the use of extrafiscality, offers a more adequate alternative than prohibiting the market, making it possible to articulate revenue collection, sectoral ordering, and protection of the right to health in the face of the “bets epidemic.”