---
title: "Costa Rica — a Company Without a Formal Licence: the Real Regime and Risks"
url: "https://legal.ge/en/service/media-entertainment-and-sports-law-en/costa-rica-a-company-without-a-formal-licence-the-real-regime-and-risks-en"
field: "Media, Entertainment & Sports Law"
description: "Costa Rica honestly: the 1922 statute, premises-based casino rules, and the verified absence of any online operator licence — with the risks. Legal.ge."
updated: "2026-11-02"
publisher: "legal.ge"
---

# Costa Rica — a Company Without a Formal Licence: the Real Regime and Risks

> Source: legal.ge, https://legal.ge/en/service/media-entertainment-and-sports-law-en/costa-rica-a-company-without-a-formal-licence-the-real-regime-and-risks-en

In the vocabulary of gambling intermediaries, Costa Rica figures as "the country" where you can supposedly incorporate a company and run online operations without a gambling licence. That formulation is partly true and partly a dangerous simplification, and this page's task is to take it apart into three realities: what is established officially by statute; what is established by absence; and what is market practice that could not be verified from official sources. Each tier is shown separately, labelled by where the fact comes from — and the page closes with a direct list of the risks, because the main content of the "no licence" model is precisely risk. At the end comes the Georgian cross-border layer, which works here with particular clarity.

## The first reality: what the statute establishes

Costa Rica's gambling legal base is more than a century old: the games of chance law (Ley de Juegos) was adopted on 3 August 1922 as law No. 3, and the frame of its first article is this: games whose outcome depends on luck rather than skill are prohibited, except as permitted by law. That is a prohibition-with-exceptions model — and the whole modern picture grows out of it. The law was followed by an implementing decree of 1974, partially annulled by the constitutional chamber; the modern regulation is built on land-based casinos: the 2008 casino regulations were adopted by decree and published in the official gazette, and by their definition a casino is a physical premises — a "local" — where permitted games are conducted. The casino tax law and its regulations repeat the same logic: a casino is premises authorised for games permitted by law.

Lotteries remain a state monopoly in this picture: they are administered by the social protection board (JPS), and it is that body which adopted, in 2021, the regulations granting concessions for the web-based sale of its own lotteries and games of chance — those concessions concern the web format but are not an operator-licensing regime for third parties. And one more official quotation worth memorising: a rule published in an issue of the state gazette states that no person may exploit the activity of betting, casinos or games of chance without authorisation. In sum: the reality established by law is one of land-based premises and a state lottery monopoly.

## The second reality: no online operator licence exists

Now the conclusion established by systematic searching of the state legislative databases: in Costa Rica's official sources there is no statute creating an online gambling operator licence. The only web-specific instrument is the concession for selling the state board's own lotteries — not an operator regime for third parties. This "verification by absence" is exactly the fact on which the "no licence" model is built: there is nothing in the regime to apply for — so nobody applies. But here a decisive verbal precision is needed: the absence of a licence means not "freedom" but the absence of regulatory protection. Such activity is not authorised under Costa Rican law — and the gazette quotation quoted above raises the question whether exploitation without authorisation is permissible at all.

## The third reality: market practice — a flagged tier

Market sources describe the operational recipe used by groups working in Costa Rica: local corporate forms (joint-stock or limited-liability), a municipal business permit — per market sources, often in the form of "data processing" — a sanitary permit and tax registration. This recipe must be read correctly: it is corroborated only by trade publications and does not exist as an official instruction — which is why this page presents it as "practice described by the market", not as a fact of law. The legality and consequences of the concrete steps must be clarified with each municipality and with local counsel.

The same tier includes the reform question: trade and media sources speak of a government bill that would tax casino and internet-betting revenue, and of an online-gambling regulation bill presented by the state board. The status of these bills is not officially verified — it must be checked in the legislature's system before any decision. Reform risk is fundamental here: a business plan built on the "no licence" model can be invalidated by the adoption of a single law.

## The risks — the true price of the model

Now what the marketing decks do not write. First: the absence of regulatory protection — an unlicensed operator has no regulator to confirm its status, and remains "unverifiable" for every counterparty. Second: the demands of banks, payment systems and platforms — financial institutions ask operators for a gambling licence, and its absence must be explained afresh in every new relationship. Third: reform risk — the bills described above. Fourth, decisive for the Georgian contour: under articles 951 and 952 of the Civil Code a claim from a game arises only where the game is state-permitted — and for an unlicensed foreign platform this risk is maximal: a Georgian player's dispute with such an operator carries the no-claim risk.

## The Georgian cross-border layer

In Costa Rica's case the Georgian layer is written with the same articles, but works more clearly than with other jurisdictions — because here "the licence does not exist at all", and Georgian law remains the only legal frame of the structure. Article 5, part 1 of the Georgian law on gambling ties organising and supplying into Georgia to a Georgian permit, and article 11, part 2 grants that permit only to an entrepreneur registered in Georgia. A Costa Rican company cannot satisfy this requirement in any way.

The remaining articles of the layer: article 80, part 7 of the Tax Code — margin taxation of an individual organiser; article 81 — the rates, including the 5% line on supply-permit excess income; article 8 — player winnings and loss offsetting; article 171(b) — VAT exemption of gambling services under the carve-out of article 172(4). Reporting: articles 3, 11 and 12 of the AML law where a Georgian entity is in the chain; article 29(b) of the gambling law — winnings registration with reporting to the Financial Monitoring Service; article 36-1 — the selected-person regime for system-electronic supply into Georgia.

## Frequently asked questions

Four questions repeat themselves in connection with Costa Rica.

### Is operating online gambling lawful in Costa Rica?

Costa Rican law creates no online operator licence — that is a fact. But the absence of a licence is not proof of lawfulness: a gazette rule prohibits unauthorised exploitation, and the legal assessment of the regime must be established with local specialists. This page's position is precise: the absence of an official licence is verified; using it as a business model is a question of calculating risk.

### Why is Costa Rica sold as a "licence-free jurisdiction"?

Because market practice describes it that way: a company and a municipal permit, without a gambling licence. That description rests on trade sources and no official instruction exists — which is why it is presented here with that caveat, and not as a recommendation.

### Could this model change soon?

Possibly: trade sources carry traces of both a taxation bill for casinos and internet betting and an online-regulation bill. Their status is not officially verified — it must be checked in the legislature's system. For a project built on a "no licence" plan this is the principal long-term risk.

### What does this mean for a Georgian player?

The maximal no-claim risk: under articles 951 and 952 of the Civil Code a claim arises only from a permitted game, and a dispute with an unlicensed platform is the weakest position in that respect. The details are on our page about disputes with foreign operators.

## How We Help on Legal.ge

Legal.ge treats the Costa Rica question in the form in which it actually stands: we separate the three realities — the official statute, the verified absence of a licence, and market practice; we assess the risks of your model's use of these three tiers — regulatory protection, banking and payments relationships, reform timelines; and in parallel we construct the Georgian layer — the tax and reporting plan of the person behind the structure, under the relevant articles. If you already have a Costa Rican structure, we audit it against the same three tiers. Our position is open: Costa Rica is not a licensing jurisdiction and must not be counted as one — the decision is taken after calculating the risks. Contact us to start that calculation.

### Does an online casino licence exist in Costa Rica?

No. The official legislative databases contain no statute creating an online operator licence; the only web instrument is the concession for selling the state lotteries.

### Which law regulates gambling in Costa Rica?

The 1922 games of chance law, on a prohibition-with-exceptions model; above it stand the 2008 land-based casino regulations and the casino tax law; lotteries are a state monopoly.

### What risk does the "no licence" model carry?

No regulatory protection (nobody confirms the status), banks' and payment systems' demands, reform risk from pending bills — and, for a Georgian player, the maximal no-claim risk under articles 951-952.

### Does a Costa Rican company replace a Georgian permit?

No. Articles 5 and 11 of the Georgian gambling law tie organising and supplying into Georgia to a Georgian permit, issued only to an entrepreneur registered in Georgia.