Through Decree 197-26, the regularization process has been set in motion again for lottery shops, points of sale, agencies, betting shops, and other gambling operators. The official reason is that a high volume of regularization requests remained unresolved after the 2022 deadlines expired. So, the government has decided to restart the process rather than leave the backlog hanging.
The decree also assigns DGII, the tax authority, additional operational functions. These include tax-compliance checks, support for inspections, and provisional tax registration for regularized establishments.
Regularization Is Back on the Policy Agenda
It is not just an administrative restart. The measure also involves restructuring of the institutional framework around the plan. The advisory council combines state bodies with industry representatives and other designated members, while the National Lottery administrator serves as coordinator. This is important since the proposed reform does not seem to be treated as a mere issuance of licenses. Rather, it is being presented as a broader attempt to clean up a fragmented market.
Compliance Demands Are Expanding
Meanwhile, operators are facing a broader compliance burden. Resolution 217-2025 imposed a more stringent anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing framework for obligated entities supervised by the gambling regulator.
This was followed by Resolution 161-2026 that set out suitability assessments for shareholders, board members, senior managers, key employees, and general staff. An April attachment in the ministry’s legal archive reveals that the rule is being implemented already using sworn declarations and reporting requirements. While the approach makes sense from a compliance standpoint, critics argue that without sufficiently specific criteria, the rule could widen administrative discretion over who remains fit to operate.
The Problem Lies in the Form of the Rulebook
The criticism that legal commentators give in the local press does not call into question the need for stricter regulation as such. The more serious point is that the regulated operators are being saddled with additional responsibilities. At the same time, the informal sector remains partly outside the regulator’s effective reach.
The broader framework also remains patchy. The Ministry of Finance and Economy’s legal archive shows gambling regulation is spread across multiple resolutions covering regularization, sanctions, AML controls, internet gambling, and licensing requirements. That fragmented structure helps explain why calls for a single modern law are getting louder. Reopening regularization may move files forward. However, it does not solve disputes over distance rules, proof of operating history, or how to deal with unlicensed actors already entrenched in the market.
Market Implications
The government is attempting to move the industry from fragmented oversight toward tighter formal supervision. The real challenge will be whether the Dominican Republic can turn a patchwork of decrees and resolutions into a process that is both clear enough to follow and credible enough to enforce. Without that, current efforts could help formalize the process but would not fix the imbalance between compliant operators and those still working in the shadows.
