(H1): Comparison with Peru and Chile (for country: Bolivia)

Introduction and Method

Below is an applied comparison of the three neighboring jurisdictions of AND/Konisur. Focus on regulatory model, online, taxes, payments, RG/AML and tourism. Specific rates and procedures can be updated - check the current regulations before launching.

1) Who regulates and what exactly

Parameter	Bolivia	Peru	Chile
Central regulator	AJ (Autoridad de Fiscalización del Juego)	MINCETUR (nat. tourism/gambling sector regulator)	SCJ (Superintendencia de Casinos de Juego) for offline; online - transition to regulation
Offline casinos/lounges	Licensed by AJ (venues, games, equipment)	Licensed; developed network of halls and casinos	Licensed by SCJ; high standard of control
Online Casino/Betting	Only allowed with AJ resolution and e-KYC/AML compliance	National online licensing model, detailed technical requirements	Reforming the online segment: moving towards a licensed model; advertising requirements are tightened
Promo draws	Overseen by AJ	Supervised by MINCETUR	Supervised by SCJ/relevant authorities

2) Licensing and technical control

Bolivia (AJ)

Area licenses for offline + individual digital channel permissions.

Hard inventory of slots, RNG/RTP certification, log uploads.

Online: e-KYC, geofilters, RG tools are required.

Peru (MINCETUR)

Structured national license for online games/betting; unified technical standards for platforms, providers and reporting.

Historically strong slot-salons culture, streamlined inspections.

Chile (SCJ/Go Online)

For offline - one of the most "adult" models in the region (casino contests, strict KPIs, monitoring).

The online format is in the implementation/configuration phase: it is important for operators to prepare the architecture for future SCJ (or new authorized body) requirements, including regulator data access and advertising standards.

3) Taxation (vector, no rates)

Bolivia: AJ regulatory fees + common law taxes; for games, the guideline is the GGR approach (details are specified by regulations). Important registers of bonuses/jackpots and synchronization of AJ/tax reporting.

Peru: stably used national model for offline; online - specialized payments/charges based on GGR/gross revenue combined with income tax.

Chile: offline casinos pay under a mature scheme (licensing fees/taxes, municipal shares); online block - as implemented, provides for a separate fiscal contour and advertising/responsibility rules.

💡 In all three countries, the key is the correct definition of the GGR base, documentation of bonuses and jackpots, transparency of payments.

4) Advertising, RG and AML/KYC

Block	Bolivia	Peru	Chile
Advertizing	18 +, RG-marking, prohibition of "easy money," digital control	Strict rules for offline and online, strong focus on the reliability of offers	Consistently tightened (sports sponsorship, digital targeting, warnings)
RG	Self-exclusion, deposit/time/loss limits, timeouts	Similar mechanics; operators report complaints/limits	Strong offline RG standards; online - RG integration into digital loop
AML/KYC	e-KYC, re-verification before payment, KYT-monitoring	e-KYC, suspicious transaction reports, compliance officer	Strict AML procedures; for online - expected unification with offline

5) Payment rails and fintech

Bolivia: conservative payment ecosystem; bank cards/transfers, local wallets. Crypto payments - only with strict AML/KYT and allowed configuration.

Peru: high penetration of card and mobile tools; local fintech wallets are popular, convenient for online (strong onboarding, high apruv).

Chile: developed card/acquiring networks, online banking and instant transfers; integration with fiscal accounting and anti-fraud providers.

Practical conclusion: operator's focus is multi-PSP, high deposit uproar (≥90%), minimization of fees and instant returns, especially in Peru/Chile, where UX expectations are higher.

6) Fighting illegal supply

Bolivia: AJ inspections, sealing/confiscation, blocking and payment firewall for online.

Peru: system supervision, regular raids and public cases; pressure on gray dots reduces the "cannibalization" of the licensed market.

Chile: strict offline circuit; for online - movement towards clear rules + sanctions for advertising unlicensed sites.

7) Tourism and offline ecosystem

Bolivia: niche tourism role, priority is local demand; casino and bingo complement the hotel segment.

Peru: dense network of halls/casinos, strong urbanism (Lima and major cities), a steady flow of resident players + tourists.

Chile: casino resorts with a high standard of service, MICE/events, a strong multiplier for the restaurant and hotel industry.

8) SWOT cut (for investor looking from Bolivia)

Bolivia's strengths

Centralized regulator (AJ), understandable vertical supervision.

Accurate inventory/certification of equipment.

The possibility of "catch-up" regulation online, taking into account the experience of neighbors.

Weaknesses

A narrower payment ecosystem and slower growing online demand than in Peru/Chile.

Risk of fragmentation when rules are updated if bylaws are delayed.

Opportunities

Import of best practices of Peru/Chile by e-KYC, digital reporting, affiliate compliance.

Travel/event formats (poker series, sports weekends) as an offline stream driver.

Risks

Gray online and advertising arbitrage.

Cross-border payment competition/UX (especially against Peru).

9) What makes each market attractive to the operator

Bolivia - offline predictability and the chance to "enter early" into licensed online if AJ requirements are met; low competition in niche verticals (live games in Spanish, localized slots).

Peru - scale, mature payments, well-functioning online framework, understandable reporting expectations; high conversion of mobile bets.

Chile - "premium" offline model, high check, compliance discipline; with the finalization of online rules - the powerful potential of legal digital.

10) Recommendations for localization and launch

For Bolivia (including comparison)

1. Make a double compliance loop: AJ reporting ↔ tax ↔ internal GL.

2. Payments: 2-3 independent PSPs, fallback routes, P95 payout ≤ 15 minutes.

3. Content: slots with local themes, live tables in Spanish, sports live (football).

4. Advertising: "white lists" of affiliates, RG layouts; zero-tolerance to "easy money."

5. Prepare the architecture for real-time monitoring (as in Peru/Chile) in order to painlessly complete the AJ upgrades.

For Peru

Emphasis on mobile-first UX, instant deposits/payments, aggregation of local wallets; showcase rates with live micro markets.

For Chile

Design the platform for future requirements of online supervision: telemetry, logging, privacy-by-design; comply with the tightening standards of sports advertising/sponsorship.

11) Quick investor checklist

Understand online licensing status and timing (AJ ↔ MINCETUR ↔ SCJ).

Reconcile fiscal requirements and base (GGR/jackpot/bonus deductions).

Validate RNG/RTP and e-KYC/AML/KYT for each country.

Generate PSP matrix (main/standby/local).

Set up reporting consistent with the expectations of all three regulators.

Test RG mechanics (self-exclusion, limits, timeouts).

Prepare an advertising white paper and contracts with affiliates.

12) Summary

Bolivia already has an AJ working vertical and allows neatly online through licenses and strict compliance.

Peru is the most operationally "ready" for a large-scale online market of three, with strong payments and clear rules.

Chile - the "gold standard" of offline and the rapid formation of an online framework; demands the highest level of discipline and RG.

For the operator, this means: we build a universal compliance stack (RNG/RTP/e-KYC/AML/RG/reporting), localize payments and UX for each country and follow the updates of the rules - this way you will maintain the speed of entering the market and avoid regulatory surprises by 2030.