About this app
About Indian Cash Catcher
In 2025, Brazil collected almost BRL10 billion ($1.97 billion) in tax revenue from the licensed sector. In the first seven months of this year alone, BRL8.7 billion generated by the activity was delivered to public coffers. The Federal Revenue Service itself estimates that the sector should reach BRL16 billion in revenue during 2026.
Besides revenue collection, another concern is legal and economic. Companies have paid over BRL2.5 billion for licences since the sector’s regulation. Certainly, the end of the activity would lead to litigation to recover the amounts paid and compensation for investments made. Furthermore, the revenue from betting is already included in the Annual Budget Law and the Budget Guidelines Law, which define the priorities for federal government spending.
What worries the sector is not just the threat of drastic measures against legalised betting. So far, the government has consistently fallen short in its attempts to curb the illegal market, which still represents almost half of the segment.
What is Indian Cash Catcher?
The approved text includes a series of restrictions on advertising for online betting and gambling:
Advertising prohibited: Direct or indirect marketing communication regarding betting on radio and television, newspapers, magazines, outdoor media, streaming services, podcasts, social networks, video platforms, apps, websites, blogs, forums, search engines and other internet environments is prohibited.
Messaging and targeted advertising: The restriction also extends to instant messaging, SMS, email, notifications, advertising automatically targeted by algorithms, telemarketing – which shows ads again to people who have already been exposed to certain content – and profiling based on user behaviour.
What is Indian Cash Catcher?
IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”
This particular lawsuit involving Fox Financial, one of a growing list IPI is battling, centers on an arrangement the company made with a third party, Forson Holdings. That entity had leased property from Fox in 2016, but fell behind. IPI had signed as a guarantor of that lease agreement and, as such, was responsible for covering Forson in the event payments weren’t made. However, it decided it didn’t need to follow the terms of the contract.
It seems like not a day goes by without IPI coming under fire for something else. The company’s chairwoman, Cui Li Jie, has already found herself in trouble and was previously held in contempt of court, but now has another black mark beside her name. She has been found in contempt again, this time for allegedly perjuring herself in court. A lawyer representing employees suing IPI and Cui produced evidence proving she had lied under oath, and Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has now agreed. She issued her ruling this morning, with Cui only able to respond, through an interpreter, “I don’t know anything, I don’t understand English.”
