Peru bill would lift its online betting consumption tax from 1% to 5%
A bill filed in Peru's Congress would raise the selective consumption tax on online games and sports betting from 1% to 5% of each bet. It is a proposal only, and it was reported by iGaming Business on 12 October 2026.
This does not change anything for South African players directly. It shows how licensed markets tend to tax more over time, and South Africa has no licensed online casino regime, so offshore play here carries no local levy or harm funding. Higher taxes elsewhere can also change the terms operators offer players.
What the bill proposes
A bill filed in Peru's Congress would lift the selective consumption tax (ISC) on remote games and remote sports betting from 1% to 5%. The tax is charged on the value of each bet, not on operator revenue. The bill comes from the Civic Works Party parliamentary group, on the initiative of deputy Luis Aurelio Masco Caceres, and the text is published on the Congress portal. iGaming Business reported on it on 12 October 2026.
The 1% rate has applied since 1 July 2025. The bill says it changes the rate and nothing else: the tax base, the collection rules and the separate 12% tax on remote gaming and betting stay as they are. If it became law, it would take effect the day after publication in the official gazette, El Peruano, and the 5% rate would apply from the first day of the following month.
How the tax works for foreign operators
The bill does not set a different rate for operators based abroad. For a platform run from outside Peru, the player is the taxpayer and the operator collects the tax on their behalf. A bet counts as placed in Peru when the player normally lives there, which the rules test with signals such as IP address or geolocation, SIM card country, Peruvian payment methods and the address registered on the platform. Land-based casinos, slot halls and betting shops are left out.
The reasons given and the numbers
The bill gives two reasons. The first is public health: it cites the Ministry of Health figure of 14,409 gambling addiction treatment cases in 2025. The second is revenue. It estimates that 1% currently raises about S/324 million a year, and that a straight multiplication at 5% would give S/1.62 billion. The authors label that a static, illustrative scenario rather than an official forecast, and they accept that operators might absorb the cost, pass it to players, or split it, and that betting volumes could change.
The text also says the tax is not meant to prohibit online betting, and that it should sit alongside prevention, oversight and treatment rather than replace them. It points to Argentina and Colombia, which levy heavier taxes, though it notes that their tax bases differ.
What it means for South African players
Peru's proposal does not change anything for South African players directly. It does show a pattern that matters here: when a market is licensed, governments tend to come back for more tax and tie it to harm prevention. Operators then decide whether to absorb the cost or alter the terms players get, such as odds, bonuses or limits. South Africa has no licensed online casino regime, so players here use offshore sites and no local levy or player-protection funding is attached to that activity. Gambling is entertainment with real risk, and a higher tax on a bet does nothing to make it a way to earn money.
Always check an operator's own review on this site before you register, and remember that an offshore licence is not a South African one. See our casino reviews for how each brand is rated.
What to watch next
This is a proposal, not a law. It still has to pass through Congress, and the finance ministry and the tax authority SUNAT would be asked to work out how to apply it. Watch for committee opinions, any amendment to the rate, and how operators respond if the bill advances.