Dominican Regulator Names Seven Online Operators and Flags 81 Without Permits

The new regulator has said which online betting sites may operate, and none of them is new. Nobody else can apply until a council that has not met sets licence terms, and the law's blocking powers are unused.

• The Dirección General de Juegos de Azar (DGJA) said in a communiqué published by El Nuevo Diario on 3 November that only seven online gambling operators appear as authorised on the Ministry of Finance and Economy's portal
• The seven hold existing authorisations, not new licences, and run SuperBets, Betcris, Juancito Sport, Gogo Banca, Orobet, VIP987 and Appuesta
• The regulator says about 81 operators lack authorisation and that it is weighing legal or administrative action, but has not published their names
• New online licences under Law 86-26 wait on a resolution from the Consejo de Juegos de Azar, which has not held its first meeting
• Article 79 of the law lets the DGJA order domain blocking through the telecoms regulator INDOTEL and require payment firms to stop transactions, powers the communiqué did not invoke

The Regulator Confirms the Existing Online Market Rather Than Licensing a New One

The DGJA, the regulator Law 86-26 created under the Ministry of Finance and Economy, set out the status of online betting in the Dominican Republic in a communiqué published by El Nuevo Diario on Tuesday 3 November. It said that since the law was promulgated on 22 September, only seven online operators appear as authorised on the ministry's portal. iGaming Business, reporting the list on 9 November, described them as already recognised businesses rather than new licensees.

The seven, with the domains given in the communiqué, are Game Technology International (superbets.do), Betcris Banca de Apuesta (betcris.do), Juancito Sport (juancitosport.com.do), Gogo Sport (gogobanca.com), Orobet (orobet.do), Breeze Management (vip987.do) and Drbets (appuesta.do). No licence dates or terms were given.

The communiqué also warned of about 81 operators that "no cuentan con la debida autorización estatal", lacking state authorisation. The DGJA said it is in "una fase activa de estudio y coordinación" with other state bodies to establish possible infringements and decide a legal or administrative response, and asked the public and media for evidence. Neither El Nuevo Diario nor FocusGN, which reported the statement on 4 November, published the 81 names.

New Licences Wait on a Council That Has Not Met

Under Article 95 of Law 86-26, virtual gambling may be operated only by companies licensed by the Consejo de Juegos de Azar. Article 96 sets a five-year term and Article 97 leaves fees, requirements and conditions to a council resolution. The council has not held its first formal session, the DGJA said, so that resolution is pending, with no date given.

Existing licensees have their own route: Article 181 gives every holder of an earlier licence, internet gambling included, one year to adapt to a new operating licence, paying taxes and fees and connecting to the regulator's systems.

The tax terms are fixed. Article 78 sets a 10% monthly tax on online operations, tied to the website the DGJA authorises wherever the activity takes place. Until the tax authority's collection system is ready, Article 186 sets a flat RD$5 million (approximately $82,000) a month per company.

Retail came first. The DGJA's first resolutions on 13 October banned new lottery shops and opened a 30-day window to declare irregular ones, which a DGJA notice of 2 November says closes on 15 November without legalising anyone.

The List Is an Inventory, and the Door Is Shut for Now

The seven did not win a tender; they are the operators already on the ministry's books. Until the council sets terms, no one else has a route to apply, which hands the incumbents a clear field just as 81 rivals are told they are unauthorised. Article 191 bars new licences for ten years from publication of the register of licensees for the establishments in Article 21, a list that includes internet gambling and virtual games, although Article 191 speaks of installing establishments. The register is due 12 months plus 90 days after the law took effect. If the freeze is read to cover online licences, whoever is inside by then could hold the market for a decade.

Article 79 Gives the DGJA Tools It Has Not Yet Used

For unlicensed offers, the second paragraph of Article 79 says the DGJA "ordenará", with INDOTEL, internet providers to block the domains, addresses and apps concerned, and "requerirá" payment entities to suspend transactions. It must also publish and update a list of authorised operators and of blocked sites. The communiqué's talk of study, coordination and public tip-offs is the language of preparation, not enforcement. A list of seven is half of what Article 79 requires; the blocked list is the half that would move players. With about 81 unlicensed operators against seven licensed, payment blocking is likely to matter more than domain blocking, which mirror sites sidestep.

The .do Rule Will Test the Incumbents Too

The law defines a licensed gambling domain by the .do country code, and Article 147 makes online gambling not registered under ".do" a serious infringement. One of the seven domains in the communiqué, gogobanca.com, does not use it. With Article 181's year to adapt, that is a test for later rather than a breach now, but it suggests the authorised list reflects the old regime's terms, not the new law's.

The DGJA has told the market who is legal before it has told anyone how to become legal. Until the council meets and the first blocking order reaches INDOTEL, the 81 have a warning and nothing more.