Belo Horizonte’s proposed betting advertising ban has been delayed after the City Council withdrew the bill from a scheduled vote. The measure had been due for a second-round vote, but councilor Pedro Rousseff removed it from the agenda because it did not have enough support to pass.
The bill needed 21 votes in the 41-member chamber. Council president Juliano Lopes does not vote, meaning 40 councilors take part in deliberations.
Vote lacked enough support
The proposal did not have the votes needed for approval and is expected to return next month. The delay means Belo Horizonte will not immediately join the list of Brazilian cities and states moving to restrict betting promotions.
The proposal is one of two measures dealing with betting advertising in the city. A second bill from councilor Wagner Ferreira was also affected because the two texts were being processed together due to similar subject matter.
Under the council’s internal rules, attached proposals follow the same route when one is withdrawn. That removed both betting advertising bills from the current vote.
Bills target betting promotions
PL 297/2025, presented by Rousseff, would restrict advertising by online betting platforms in Belo Horizonte. The bill also covers betting products linked to election predictions.
The proposal would block betting companies from sponsoring sporting, cultural, civic and educational events in the city. It would also restrict indirect advertising on social media and prohibit pre-installed betting apps on electronic devices.
The second measure, PL 362/2025, takes a wider approach. It would prohibit betting advertising and promotional actions, including gifts, coupons, draws, events and championships tied to betting platforms.
Commercial access would face limits
The broader bill would also ban betting access equipment in commercial establishments. That includes totems, terminals or other devices that let users access betting websites. The proposal also blocks betting brands from being linked to municipal public equipment and city-backed events. That would affect naming rights and other forms of local brand visibility.
Supporters of the bills argue that tighter rules are needed because betting advertising has spread quickly across sport, media and digital channels. They also link the proposals to concern about debt, addiction and exposure among younger users.
Two different approaches under review
The two proposals take different paths toward the same goal. Rousseff’s bill focuses on restricting advertising and sponsorship activity, while Ferreira’s proposal seeks a much broader prohibition on betting promotion and related commercial activities.
Both measures would still need approval from the City Council before reaching the mayor’s office. The delay gives supporters additional time to build support before the proposals return to the agenda.
