Peru Betting Tax Dispute Heads Into Legal Phase
The online gambling and sports betting sector in Peru has cleared a procedural hurdle toward filing a constitutional challenge against the Selective Consumption Tax, referred to as ISC. The JNE certified 5,058 valid signatures, exceeding the threshold required to advance the constitutional action.
The dispute concerns the tax framework introduced through Legislative Decree No. 1644 under President Dina Boluarte’s administration. The operators find that the current scheme imposes an unreasonable burden on licensed companies.
Operators Challenge the Tax Base
The dispute centers on how Peru taxes online gambling and sports betting. Licensed operators are subject to a 12% Gaming Tax. On top of that, the ISC adds a 1% charge on the total amount placed in bets.
According to the representatives of the sector, the headline rate fails to capture the actual tax load. As the ISC is pegged on stakes rather than GGR, it may amount to as much as 50% of GGR for certain models of bets.
This is one of the core arguments behind the legal challenge. Apart from opposing the new tax, operators are questioning whether the design of the tax fits Peru’s constitutional and tax principles.
Market Pressure Builds in Peru
The tax dispute has come at a tough time for Peru’s regulated betting market. According to industry figures mentioned by operators, 40 companies operating in the betting business have left the country in 2025 and 2026. 1,500 retail betting venues have shut down as well in the same period.
Sector figures also point to a decline in sponsorships. Betting companies reportedly sponsored 18 football teams in 2024. However, by 2026, only five teams were receiving such support.
For betting operators, the situation is pretty clear. An expensive regulated market offers offshore betting sites the opportunity to compete. Offshore sites don’t pay taxes; they can give bigger bonuses and maintain better margins.
Congress Faces a Wider Policy Question
Legal action is just a component of the whole matter. The country’s National Congress may also assess the taxation system in place for online gaming and remote sports betting. Lawmakers may have to determine whether the current ISC regulation should be maintained or modified in order to alleviate the burden of licensed companies.
Industry supporters argue that Peru needs a regulatory model that will secure tax revenues while at the same time avoiding gambling outside the regulated sector. Moreover, it can give gambling companies more certainty when investing in the market.
It is important to note that the Peruvian Constitutional Court had to address issues associated with gaming taxes in the past. For instance, Case No. 009-2001-AI/TC declared certain sections of tax legislation unconstitutional.
What to Watch Next
If the current challenge reaches a similar outcome, the consequences could be significant. Peru is still building its regulated online betting market. A tax model that looks strong on paper but pushes operators out would leave the state with less control, not more. The next stage will show whether Peru wants a high-pressure tax system or a framework that keeps licensed betting commercially viable.