The president of Fecoljuegos, Evert Montero Cardenas, ignited the debate on gambling regulation in Colombia with a column published in the newspaper La República. In it, he warns that the sector faces structural risks derived from a public debate that, in his view, is based more on perceptions than on technical analysis, and that regulatory decisions adopted under this logic can compromise the stability of an industry that directly finances the country’s health system.
Read more Denmark tightens gambling law and limits advertising at sporting events
A debate built on perceptions, not on data
Montero maintains that one of the central problems of the Colombian regulatory environment is the way the sector’s diagnosis is constructed. According to him, legislation is frequently based on incomplete figures, judgments are made without understanding the economic model that sustains the activity, and decisions are taken under a situational logic that is more political than technical.
This dynamic, in his understanding, represents one of the greatest current risks for an industry that operates under a highly regulated scheme: authorized operators must comply with strict standards regarding reporting, auditing, prevention of money laundering, consumer protection, and responsible gaming. However, the public debate tends to ignore this reality.
The economic model of gambling: why the volume wagered does not equal income
One of the most emphatic points of Montero’s column is the distortion generated by equating the total volume wagered with the actual income of the companies. The trade association leader explains that approximately 95% of bets return to players in the form of prizes. The remaining operating margin must cover technological costs, licensing, regulatory compliance, investment in security, personnel, taxes, and mandatory transfers to the health system.
Under this scheme, he states that it is not about extraordinary returns, but about a “delicate mathematical balance” that guarantees both the sustainability of the business and the collection for the State. When regulation ignores this structure, he warns, the impact can be profound and compromise the viability of the entire formal sector.
Legal and tax instability: the risks that hold back investment
Montero also points to legal instability and, in particular, tax instability as structural risks affecting the sector’s competitiveness. Frequent changes in rules, variable interpretations of regulations, and adjustments designed without technical analysis generate uncertainty, hinder financial planning, and inhibit investment.
Read more New Jersey and Vermont regulate prediction markets: fines, bans, and new taxes
In his view, an unpredictable environment not only weakens formal operators but also reduces the competitiveness of the Colombian market compared to other jurisdictions with clear and stable regulatory frameworks.
Over-regulation: the illegal market that advances when the formal one cannot move
Another risk identified by the president of Fecoljuegos is over-regulation and administrative delays in authorizations, procedures, and homologation of new products. When the legal offer cannot evolve with agility, he maintains, the illegal market occupies that space more quickly, offering unauthorized modalities, aggressive promotions, and conditions without any type of state control.
The difference is striking: illegal operators do not pay taxes, do not transfer resources to the health system, do not protect the consumer, and do not apply responsible gaming policies. Under this logic, Montero warns that every unnecessary barrier imposed on the formal sector becomes, in practice, a competitive advantage for illegality.
What the sector asks for: stability, proportionality, and evidence
Montero closes his analysis by making it clear that the sector is not claiming privileges. What it asks for, he says, is regulatory stability, proportionality in decisions, and public policies supported by rigorous data and clear methodologies.
His argument is direct: a formal market, technically regulated and financially viable, provides sustainable resources to the State, generates employment, and protects the consumer better than a market weakened by uncertainty or displaced towards informality.
