President Donald Trump signed the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act", bringing significant changes to US tax policy, with particular attention to a new fiscal approach to the betting sector. The comparative reflections below are Octus editorial commentary. Exact statutory text and revenue estimates should be verified against primary US legislative and Treasury materials before any planning decision.
The change described in secondary coverage
Previously, American bettors could fully deduct losses against winnings, protecting themselves against taxation when there was no net profit. Under the new rule, from 2026, only deductions of up to 90% of losses have been reported as permitted. This means that even bettors who end the year at a loss may owe tax.
Illustrative example only: a bettor who wins and loses USD 100,000 in a year with zero net profit would still be taxed on USD 10,000 if the 90% limitation applies as described. Confirm the actual statutory computation against the enacted text.
A fiscal boost with collateral risk
Public commentary has cited additional federal revenue projections for the measure. Octus does not independently verify those projections here. Industry representatives have also warned of a collateral effect: migration of bettors to offshore or illegal platforms. That risk argument is reported commentary, not an Octus empirical finding.
Reflections and lessons for Brazil
In Brazil, the Ministry of Finance has at times pursued higher betting-sector taxation, including IOF-related proposals. Chamber of Deputies appetite for such measures has varied. Exact rates and legislative status must be verified against current DOU and congressional records rather than against this commentary.
Brazil's scenario reinforces the need to balance revenue collection with sector viability. The risk that aggressive or unpredictable taxation can weaken the incentive to remain in the legal channel is a comparative planning consideration, not a measured proof that any specific Brazilian rate produces a defined illegal-market outcome.
For operators planning regulatory and fiscal positioning in Brazil, this is a moment to observe international precedents, anticipate risks and structure operations that can withstand regulatory volatility. Verify primary instruments before relying on any rate, deadline or deduction rule.
Editorial basis
This article presents Octus operational analysis rather than a statement of current law. Where a mandate depends on regulatory requirements, the applicable primary instruments must be verified separately.