Regulatory News Mexico Proposes Gambling Tax Increase from 30% to 50% of GGR Bartosz HrydziuszkoPublished: September 12, 2025 Updated: October 2, 2025039 views Mexico proposes raising gambling tax from 30% to 50% of gross gaming revenue as part of "healthy taxes" package to reduce budget deficit. Table of Contents Tax Structure ChangesBudget Impact and TimelineIndustry BurdenRegulatory Context Tax Structure Changes The IEPS (Special Tax on Production and Services) is an additional levy applied to products like cigarettes, soft drinks, and gasoline. The gambling tax increase affects all operators, including foreign companies without Mexican tax residence. The proposal is part of broader “healthy taxes” designed to discourage consumption of products linked to health and social risks. Mexico also introduces an 8% IEPS levy on violent or adult video games unsuitable for children under 18. Budget Impact and Timeline The additional taxes aim to reduce Mexico’s budget deficit. The Ministry of Finance projects total revenue of MX$8.7 trillion in 2026, with tax collections contributing MX$5.8 trillion. The fiscal deficit is forecast at 4.1% of GDP, while public debt is expected to reach 52.3% of GDP. The Chamber of Deputies must approve the budget by October 20, with Senate review by October 31. Industry Burden Operators already face complex fiscal obligations including corporate income tax, local levies, and regulatory fees to SEGOB. All gambling companies pay 30% corporate income tax on net annual income. States and municipalities impose additional 6% sales tax, with some jurisdictions adding 10% consumption tax. Operators can deduct up to 20% of IEPS liability for local taxes paid, but the overall burden remains among the region’s heaviest. Regulatory Context The proposal comes as online revenue is projected to surpass land-based operations by end-2025. However, regulation remains anchored in a 1947 law, with modernization efforts progressing slowly. President Claudia Sheinbaum’s administration has signaled willingness to pursue gambling reform, but economic pressures may prioritize taxation over regulatory modernization.