How influencer partnerships are shaping Argentina – for better or worse

The regulatory framework in Argentina is straightforward for those who take the time to understand it. As lawyer Tomás García Botta, Partner at MF Estudio – Abogados, tells Gambling Insider: “Today in Argentina, you can’t really talk about a grey market, a white market, or a black market. Gambling is either authorised or prohibited. And this is very clear.” 

The distinction is even simpler than many realise: legal gambling sites in Argentina must have domains ending in .bet.ar, while anything else operates illegally. Yet, despite this clarity, a significant disconnect persists between regulatory reality and public understanding. So what went wrong, and why has this become such a contentious issue? 

The complexity begins with Argentina’s federal structure. Unlike countries with centralised gambling regulation, Argentina distributes authority across provinces, each with its own licensing requirements and advertising rules – not unlike the US’ state-by-state regulatory system for different forms of gambling. This creates a fragmented landscape where a platform legal in Buenos Aires City cannot operate in Buenos Aires Province, and vice versa. 

García Botta states: “You can’t talk about advertising regulation at a national level. Regulatory competence in gambling matters belongs to the provinces. It’s what we call ‘non-delegated’ competence.” This patchwork system has practical consequences that highlight the confusion. He adds: “Watch any major football match, and you’ll see betting company advertisements displaying multiple provincial logos, sometimes three or four different regulators on a single ad. Even more telling, these ads often feature multiple responsible gambling messages, each tailored to different provincial requirements.” 

While regulatory attention traditionally focused on traditional advertising channels, research by the ALEA (Argentina’s State Lottery Association) revealed where the real problem allegedly lies. Its study on how minors access gambling found that the majority were reaching these platforms through influencer promotion instead of football sponsorships or TV ads. García Botta says: “According to the ALEA, when it comes to gambling exposure, minors aren’t influenced by traditional football advertising or what logos appear on team jerseys; they’re influenced by what influencers and streamers do on social media platforms. That’s what the younger public consumes and pays attention to most.” 

This concept is particularly concerning because minors can only access illegal gambling sites, since legal platforms have mandatory age verification systems. The influencers driving this traffic were, knowingly or unknowingly, promoting unregulated platforms that represent over 90% of Argentina’s gambling market. 

Layers of accountability 

The influencer problem, like ogres and onions, reveals multiple layers of accountability. Legal gambling companies now conduct background checks on influencers, with some refusing to work with creators who have previously promoted illegal sites. But the responsibility extends beyond corporate due diligence. García Botta argues: “There’s a responsibility for influencers themselves regarding the content they promote and the impact that promoting illegal activity can have on the rest of the activities they promote. There are no influencers who only advertise gambling: they advertise a variety of brands, products, or services and, ultimately, those other clients they have can be affected if they’re advertising something illegal.” 

This creates a domino effect for content creators. An influencer’s decision to promote illegal gambling platforms doesn’t just risk legal consequences; it can damage relationships with legitimate brands who may reconsider partnerships with creators associated with illegal activities. The lawyer points to a broader issue affecting the influencer space: many content creators operate from what they perceive as a moral high ground, declaring they don’t accept gambling money. But this blanket rejection often originates from a fundamental misunderstanding. 

“You see many digital media outlets that raise a flag saying ‘I don’t receive money from gambling’ as if it were a moral standard,” García Botta observes. However, failing to distinguish between legal and illegal operations opens a different discussion about business sustainability. Rejecting all gambling partnerships might seem ethical, but it puts legitimate, regulated companies in the same category as illegal operations. 

But proper gambling promotion could be achievable if influencers followed what regulations actually demand. Many influencers seem unaware of these comprehensive requirements, but Law 6330 in Buenos Aires City establishes specific guidelines for gambling advertising, including requirements for interactive advertising featuring public personalities. García Botta breaks down what proper gambling promotion should include: “When you promote a gambling product, you have to emphasise that it is an entertainment offer, that you have to participate in that entertainment offer responsibly, and that if that entertainment offer somehow affects your mental health, your relationships with others, or your personal finances, you need to seek help. The provider needs to offer channels for assistance, for example, the responsible gambling programs that different provinces have, and tools to limit your consumption and participation in games.” 

The requirements also include clear prohibitions: “You cannot diminish or undervalue the importance of work concerning gambling. You cannot say that you’re going to become a millionaire through gambling, or that you should gamble to pay off debt.” Real examples of problematic content have emerged in the Argentinian market. García Botta recalls seeing influencers advertising that they were paying for dates based on blackjack results, or worse, promoting gambling as debt solutions. “We saw examples of some more well-known influencers who advertised gambling by talking about playing to pay debt, playing as a way to have an additional source of income,” he says. “The reaction from society was very strong in that regard – and that message was corrected quickly.” 

Fallout: Legal action in Benos Aires and more 

The issue moved beyond social media criticism when authorities began taking action. Several high-profile cases have emerged of Argentinian influencers facing legal scrutiny for promoting illegal betting sites, highlighting the gap between the perceived normalcy of gambling partnerships and their actual legal status. These cases underscore a critical point: many content creators allegedly entered gambling partnerships without understanding the legal landscape they were navigating. The investigations revealed that influencers were often promoting platforms that not only lacked proper licensing but also targeted jurisdictions where they had no authorisation to operate. 

The most significant legal action came from Buenos Aires City, which launched a major criminal case against influencers promoting illegal gambling sites. García Botta notes that this prosecution had immediate industry effects. Agustín Díaz Fúnes, Chief Compliance Officer at Guavapay and a lawyer specialising in crypto and gambling, spoke to Gambling Insider and emphasised the broader significance of this enforcement action: “Today the tools are already there; the legislation is already in place in each of the jurisdictions. Perhaps it was a bit confusing – at the end of 2024, there was a bill that was being discussed and, listening to the speeches in Congress, it seemed like there was no regulation at all. But the reality is that today there are many tools; there has been a lot of work by regulators on this issue.” 

The case substantially reduced illegal gambling advertising on social media and forced a public conversation about the distinction between legal and illegal operations. However, when sanctions were eventually imposed on the influencers involved, the Argentinian public was unhappy, to say the least. Indeed, the Buenos Aires City case involved several prominent Argentinian influencers who had been promoting illegal betting platforms to their substantial social media followings. The investigation revealed these content creators had been directing their audiences to unregulated sites that lacked proper licensing, age verification systems and consumer protections. 

The legal action sent a clear message about enforcement and the resulting penalties, which involved posting a video on the influencers’ social media platforms speaking about the risks of gambling and taking a gambling course. But they were viewed by many observers as disproportionately light compared to the income these influencers had generated from their gambling partnerships, and the potential societal impact of their promotions. 

García Botta acknowledges this enforcement gap: “In terms of influencers or advertising media, here in Argentina, there’s a regulatory restriction regarding the tools you have to advance against or apply sanctions to influencers. There are some contravention codes like Buenos Aires City’s that criminalise advertising, but the penalty is a fine, so ultimately the deterrent element of the sanction has limited value.” 

The economic calculation is straightforward for content creators: if the fine for promoting illegal gambling is less than the income generated from these partnerships, it becomes a business expense rather than a deterrent. “The person who’s going to engage in borderline activity thinks about how much it costs versus what profit they have, and they keep doing it,” García Botta explains. 

A more complex solution? 

As enforcement actions against influencers multiply and public debate intensifies, a fundamental question emerges: is additional regulation the solution to the influencer gambling advertising problem? Díaz Fúnes suggests the issue may be more complex than simply adding new rules targeting content creators. “Maybe it’s not about more regulation, but better regulation. The reality is that the norms exist: each province has quite robust frameworks. It’s not that there’s nothing there,” he explains. 

Instead, he points to the need for deeper understanding of how influencers and their audiences interact with digital platforms: “Maybe we should review how people interact with this technology, do more refined work to understand why these situations occur. Maybe we should think about how people relate to technology: this idea of opening an app to consume content and spending 12 hours looking at your phone. 

“This perspective reframes the influencer gambling issue as part of broader digital consumption patterns. Young audiences don’t just trust influencers with gambling recommendations. They follow their lifestyle advice, product suggestions and entertainment choices across all categories.” 

“The evolution of technology that’s been happening in recent times is enormous,” Díaz Fúnes notes. “By its very nature, regulation always comes after people’s actions.” This creates a particular challenge for influencer oversight, where content creation moves faster than regulatory frameworks can adapt. 

The Argentinian experience suggests that effective solutions require coordination that includes influencers as stakeholders rather than just targets of enforcement. Instead of simply restricting gambling advertising further, the focus may need to shift toward educating content creators about legal distinctions, creating clearer guidelines for responsible promotion and helping influencers understand their role in consumer protection. 

The question isn’t whether to regulate influencer gambling advertising more strictly, but how to create a framework that gives content creators clear, enforceable guidelines while protecting their audiences; especially younger followers who trust their recommendations across all categories.  

As Argentina’s provinces continue developing their approach to digital gambling, the influencer advertising challenge highlights the need for regulatory frameworks that acknowledge the unique relationship between content creators and their audiences in the digital age. 

The solution likely lies not in restricting influencers, but in empowering them with the knowledge and tools to promote responsibly. García Botta is unequivocal in his conclusion: “Society benefits when you have a regulated entertainment offer, and prohibiting an activity that has always existed is favouring the illegal offer.”