Does HR4411 affect neteller?

[tiltaholic]

sorry for a potentially dumb post but please spell it out.

Does HR4411, in its current wording (as passed) affect neteller

1. in the xfer of $ from us bank account to neteller account?

2. in the xfer of $ from neteller account to us bank account?

assume neteller account holder is a US citizen using a US street address.

thanks.

[checkmate36]

[ QUOTE ]
sorry for a potentially dumb post but please spell it out.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not a dumb question at all. Im sure many of us would like to know how this will effect neteller.

[Bilgefisher]

I for one would like to know.

[mrhat187]

I'm sure not even neteller knows how to respond to this. The only thing I can think of is next year in UK all gambling online is legal and regulated. Neteller is a British company, so I would imagine the USA would have to bring this before the world court?

I dunno, USA couldn't just ban neteller as they do transactions besides just gambling, and I don't think don't quote me you can't block out a business because it can be used for illegal activity. The implicit being "can be" not necessarily will be...........complicate. Who really knows? Poker gods?

[VladKGB]

i hope they cant get to em, if they do get to neteller, i might fold.

[Jooka]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure not even neteller knows how to respond to this. The only thing I can think of is next year in UK all gambling online is legal and regulated. Neteller is a British company, so I would imagine the USA would have to bring this before the world court?

I dunno, USA couldn't just ban neteller as they do transactions besides just gambling, and I don't think don't quote me you can't block out a business because it can be used for illegal activity. The implicit being "can be" not necessarily will be...........complicate. Who really knows? Poker gods?

[/ QUOTE ]


Somneone said on a another forum Maryland told neteller to block the creation/use of an account to the entire state and they complied. Im going with his word on this and just repeating it, so dont come down on me if it isnt true.

[bestcellar]

guys, we have a bicameral system.

[smoove]

[ QUOTE ]
guys, we have a bicameral system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol, let's hope the majority of players providing the profit get this memo as well. Actually, they may not be reading the news anyway.

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
guys, we have a bicameral system.

[/ QUOTE ]

could you explain the text of the bill as it pertains to my questions before it becomes law or would you prefer to wait until after?

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

I think the intent of the bill, certainly, would include blocking gambling-related transactions to and from Neteller.

The text of the bill (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:2:./temp/~c109PoKu6y:e47106:) is a bit harder to parse through. But, essentially it leaves it up to the Treasury Department to come up with guidlines for identifying gambling-realted transactions. Banks would then be responsbile for blocking those transactions.

Whether the Treasury Department would ultimately decide to exclude all, some, or no transactions from Neteller is anybody's guess.

[bestcellar]

the answer is HR4411 will not affect neteller because it is a house bill that was passed and not a law.

If it's unchanged then it can be voted on by the Senate as it stands, although it's MUCH more likely it WILL Be changed, voted on as a Senate bill and then if passed (unlikely) it will go back to the house to get voted on again and then it would have to go to the president to get signed into law. Then there would be a period before the law would go into effect.

My point is that you've got months to figure this out. Relax, already.

If it is passed, you will likely have to figure out a new way of doing transactions online and probably have to set up some sort of offshore account. As for reporting this income to the government, well, those days would probably be over. The trick would be to keep the money out of any US accounts, and then it would probably be untracable. You set up a swiss account, you tie it to neteller, you play online, bang, problem solved. Just hope you don't get audited /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the intent of the bill, certainly, would include blocking gambling-related transactions to and from Neteller.

The text of the bill (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:2:./temp/~c109PoKu6y:e47106:) is a bit harder to parse through. But, essentially it leaves it up to the Treasury Department to come up with guidlines for identifying gambling-realted transactions. Banks would then be responsbile for blocking those transactions.

Whether the Treasury Department would ultimately decide to exclude all, some, or no transactions from Neteller is anybody's guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, i couldn't figure out the text either.

thanks.

i will contact neteller and see if they respond productively.

[Nyago123]

Yeah, I have the bill printed out here and I'm still trying to figure it out. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

Neteller is not a US entity (it's in the UK), so if this bill became law, it wouldn't directly apply in the sense the US Attorney General wouldn't be able to raid Neteller's offices and shut them down- the US has no jurisdiction.

I would think that my transfer of $$$ to Neteller by itself wouldn't be illegal because I'm not necessarily transferring $$$ there to play poker- maybe I'm using Neteller as a payment service to buy something online.

I’m not sure, but I think that now my transfer of $$$ from Neteller to a poker site would become illegal under this act. The Federal Wire Act already prohibits transmission of information for the purpose of betting across state lines in the US, and I believe this bill is supposed to augment that notion by prohibiting my action of using the Internet to move money for the purpose of gaming, even if the money transfer itself is effectively from the UK to some online casino in Canada or Aruba.

As always, I'm not sure how enforcible that is. I suppose they could use international law to get transactional records as evidence if they cared enough about prosecuting me.

[Wynton]

I do not have time at the moment to offer a full explanation. But my opinion is that Neteller WOULD be covered by this bill, or at least, that the bill would permit certain entities to make determinations that would lead to it being covered.

I'll try to remember to come back to this point later.

[Ali shmali]

this is in the "purpose" of the bill section:

prohibit wire transfers to Internet gambling sites or the banks which represent such sites.


I think Wynton is right when the bill gives power to an authority(that will be put in place later) to determine what buisinesses will fall under the banned section.

[PietM]

[ QUOTE ]
prohibit wire transfers to Internet gambling sites or the banks which represent such sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not American, and I'm in not a laywer or anything, but wouldn't it be fun for the Internet gambling sites to open up accounts with al the major banks around the world to stop money being transferred from the US?

As I read your post it would be illegal to transfer money to a bank that also has accounts of Internet gambling sites...

[killa4s]

I can respond to this particular question. Neteller, while not a U.S. company, uses U.S. EFT processing companies to process their (your) electronic transactions. And, for each EFT processing company they they use, those companies must have what is called an "ODFI" (originating depository financial intitution). ODFI's are U.S. based banks with a Fedwire, which allows them to send and recieve electronic transactions through the Federal Reserve system. Quite simply, if the bill does become law, then all U.S. banks will be forbidden to process gaming transactions.

Where there is a grey area, is that Neteller is not a gaming company. Rather, an aggregator that has the ability to process transactions for a variety of merchants. Reality is that most of their transactions probably are gaming related. A processor or ODFI will not take the risk of processing the Neteller transactions should the bill become law. The day the President signs it, is the day that their U.S. electronic transactions stop. Including consumer credit transactions (the way we cash-out). It doesn't matter at all whether you are a U.S. citizen, or have a U.S. address. What matters is whether your bank account you fund the Neteller account with (and also recieve payouts) is a bank sitting in the U.S., thus using the Automted Clearing House (Fedwire system).

Now, that said - we are a long way from this bill becomming law. There are lobbying groups just ramping up for what is the real battle; The Senate debate and vote. Even then, if I had to guess - I doubt it will make the floor before the session ends.

My advice is to join the Poker Players Alliance (http://www.pokerplayersalliance.org/index.html) and contribute to their lobby. Also, please write a rational letter and e-mail it to your Senators, ASAP.

[Edit]: Just read a few more posts and thought I'd clear one point up: Neteller will be able to fund gaming site accounts, as well as recieve credits from gaming sites into your Neteller account, even if the bill becomes law. Neteller is beyond the reach of the Justice Department. The teath of the bill is in that Neteller will not be able to send and recieve electronic transactions via the U.S. banking system (your bank to Neteller, and vice versa). So, yes - if you wanted to go to the trouble, and assuming you have the ability, you could open a foriegn account with a bank that Neteller has the ability to do electronic transactions with.

[killa4s]

[ QUOTE ]

Whether the Treasury Department would ultimately decide to exclude all, some, or no transactions from Neteller is anybody's guess.

[/ QUOTE ]It won't matter what the Treasury Deparment thinks. The processors or banks will not take the risk of processing ANY of Neteller's electronic transactions. Period.

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
this is in the "purpose" of the bill section:

prohibit wire transfers to Internet gambling sites or the banks which represent such sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that is the key word there. I don't that neteller "represents" any site. I'm not a lawyer either though.

[Wynton]

Killa,

That's very informative. Mind if I ask you how you happen to know that much about the banking industry?

[killa4s]

[ QUOTE ]
Killa,

Mind if I ask you how you happen to know that much about the banking industry?

[/ QUOTE ]I'm in the business.

One more bit of info: Because my expertise is on the electronic side of things, I haven't been keeping up to speed with how the bill might curtail paper checks from Neteller to the account holders. But, I'm almost positive that paper checks from Neteller to the account holders (players) would be allowed if the bill passes. So, no huge worries about withdrawing your funds anytime soon.

[TruePoker CEO]

Grest post.

Thanks.

The only thing I would add is that opening a foreign bank account is WAY tougher since 9/11.

I suspect an offshore cottage industry of go-betweens may appear, like some sportsbooks reportedly use for Western Union transactions. It would be tough for a US Bank to brand an occasional transfer to/from overseas to/from a reasonable source as a gaming transaction.

I suspect also that US players would drop to a small fraction of their current numbers, and forget about attracting new US players .... so the Neteller/funding issue may be a minor effect.

[livinitup0]

What if we never have to send money from the bank? I havent used an EFT transaction since my inital $50.00 I deposited 2 years ago.

What about the neteller debit card? Is HR4411 going to have any effect on cashing out at the ATM?

[Greg Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Whether the Treasury Department would ultimately decide to exclude all, some, or no transactions from Neteller is anybody's guess.

[/ QUOTE ]It won't matter what the Treasury Deparment thinks. The processors or banks will not take the risk of processing ANY of Neteller's electronic transactions. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if the Treasury Dept. guidelines called for by HR4411 don't include Neteller in the category of organizations to block? I'm sure you'd be right if there weren't going to be any government guidelines, but that's not the case as I understand it.

[killa4s]

[ QUOTE ]

What about the neteller debit card? Is HR4411 going to have any effect on cashing out at the ATM?

[/ QUOTE ]I'm not an expert in ATM transactions, so I'm hesitant to give a firm analysis. That said, the two networks are somewhat related, and since I know a bit about the ATM network, I'll give you a somewhat educated guess: ATM networks run through switches that most all of you have heard of - Star, Cirrus, etc. Those are U.S. based companies that banks align with to process their financial data. Bottom line is that if the money comes from a U.S Bank, through one of the ATM switches and on to Neteller, then yes - it would be prohibited. In terms of paying out to the consumer, I'm very unclear, so I'm not going to even guess. I'd have to do some research.

[livinitup0]

I didnt even know I could fund my account with my neteller card. Also the Neteller checks that get sent have some place strange buisness name from CA on them....at least when I used to get them. I dont know why neteller couldnt just consistantly change the names on the checks.

That being said Im sure Neteller isnt just going to idlely sit by losing millions of dollars in buisness. I sense a battle of powers is near with the yeahers and the super powers of online gambling PG,PS,numerous gaming lobbyists... It simply wouldnt make sense to lose all this money and the chance at a hugely liquid future as well (by eventually making online gaming legal and promotable in the US) without fighting some sort of battle. If ther eis one thing we can count on in the US...it's that our federal government will find ANY way to tax us more....and wont pass up a chance like this.

[AJFenix]

I am pretty sure that they would not be able to prevent you from using Neteller, as neteller is a legitimate company traded on the UK market, providing service tied with 1700+ legitimate merchants. The US doesn't have jurisdiction upon Neteller, and our constitution protects our right to do business with them. Neteller isn't in breach of any violations, nor does it "represent" those gambling sites.

[Losing all]

[ QUOTE ]
The US doesn't have jurisdiction upon Neteller

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the difference between the US and Maryland regarding this issue?

[AJFenix]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The US doesn't have jurisdiction upon Neteller

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the difference between the US and Maryland regarding this issue?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? I'm just saying that Neteller is an offshore company, so the US govt cannot stop it from dealing with online gambling sites, and at the same time the US govt cannot stop US citizens from dealing with neteller given that neteller does not represent any of those "illegal" gambling sites, it is a legal and publicly traded company, and it provides access to many legitimate merchants. Neteller is not breaching any laws, and our constitution protects our right to do business with them. I'm not sure I understand your question.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing I would add is that opening a foreign bank account is WAY tougher since 9/11.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've never set up an offshore account.

What would happen if I walked into a Canadian bank and tried to open an account using my real U.S. resident-citizen ID and a check drawn on a U.S. bank?

Then I would use EFTs between the Canadian bank and my U.S. local bank to move money, with other business with the Canadian bank being handled online or by snail mail.

Realistic?

[Losing all]

NT has been blocked in Maryland for some time. Maryland said "you can't use NT", now you can't. I'm curious how it will be different when the US says "you can't use NT"

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]
I am pretty sure that they would not be able to prevent you from using Neteller, as neteller is a legitimate company traded on the UK market

[/ QUOTE ]

PartyGaming is also a legitimate company traded on the UK market, as is 888.com, but that status isn't going to matter at all if this bill becomes law.

[AJFenix]

[ QUOTE ]
NT has been blocked in Maryland for some time. Maryland said "you can't use NT", now you can't. I'm curious how it will be different when the US says "you can't use NT"

[/ QUOTE ]

When I said the US has no jurisdiction on Neteller, what I was saying was that the U.S. cannot tell Neteller who to do business with outside of U.S. borders, as it is an offshore company dealing with other offshore companies.

I know Maryland has strict state laws and banks don't do transactions with NeTeller, but FirePay works there just fine and can be used to accomplish the same thing, so I'm really not sure what the deal is there.

[AJFenix]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am pretty sure that they would not be able to prevent you from using Neteller, as neteller is a legitimate company traded on the UK market

[/ QUOTE ]

PartyGaming is also a legitimate company traded on the UK market, as is 888.com, but that status isn't going to matter at all if this bill becomes law.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you will still be able to legally use these programs, provided you are playing for play chips /images/graemlins/smile.gif If they make online gambling a felony in all states as it currently is in Washington (which isn't what this bill itself is intent on doing, as far as I know), then making a monetary bet online will be a felony. PartyPoker itself isn't going to be illegal, nor will playing poker on it be illegal, as long as no money is involved.

[skaboomizzy]

Inter-state horse betting is still allowed online with this bill (assuming it becomes law, which is fairly unlikely).

I'm fairly sure there are sites that allow wagering on God-blessed All-American thoroughbred racing that ALSO have poker rooms online.

Just saying, is all.

[Tachyon]

[ QUOTE ]
sorry for a potentially dumb post but please spell it out.

Does HR4411, in its current wording (as passed) affect neteller

1. in the xfer of $ from us bank account to neteller account?

2. in the xfer of $ from neteller account to us bank account?

assume neteller account holder is a US citizen using a US street address.

thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a very good article on the Bill at CardPlayer here. (http://www.cardplayer.com/magazine/article/15416)

[ QUOTE ]


2. Financial Institutions
The bill prohibits a gambling business from accepting certain forms of non-cash payments, including credit cards and electronic transfers, for the transmission of bets and wagers in violation of the Act.

The way I see it, this is the least of the threats, because as I explained above, (1) the gambling businesses are offshore and beyond U.S. jurisdiction, and (2) most banks and credit card companies already refuse to send money to offshore sites. Therefore, there are already offshore third-party companies in place that are more than happy to handle our financial transactions.

Government cannot stop its citizens from sending money out of the country for legitimate purposes. For example, if I want to buy a widget offshore, the Constitution protects my right to do so. As long as there is a third party, not involved in gaming, I am permitted to place my money in that receptacle from a U.S. financial institution and then spend it. Once my money goes to NETeller, I can buy a watch, pay for a trip, or even place that money in a gaming site. Because there are legally allowable things that can be done after sending the money to NETeller, the government cannot tell my bank not to send my money there. Our Constitution protects one's personal right to send money from a U.S. bank or financial institution to a business outside of the United States.

The company I mentioned is the popular NETeller. Others will soon appear on the horizon. NETeller happens to be a publicly traded company on the London AIM Exchange with a user base of more than 2.3 million customers. More than 1,700 online merchants accept payments through the NETeller system, and most of those companies are not gaming sites. With corporate headquarters in the Isle of Man, the company processes billions of dollars yearly. Companies like NETeller are not going to pack up and disappear. This legislation merely encourages more of the same.



[/ QUOTE ]

[Benjamin]

[ QUOTE ]
If ther eis one thing we can count on in the US...it's that our federal government will find ANY way to tax us more....and wont pass up a chance like this.

[/ QUOTE ]
You can not count on this when enough of Congress thinks they can gain votes by posturing to their 'family values' constituency. And if this bill is passed into law and a Federal beauracracy is put into place to enforce it, then that beauracracy will join the forces of those who are posturing for votes to make sure it is very difficult to undo the job.

You don't have to look any further than the marijuana laws to see a huge potential source of tax revenue that is illegal despite broad acceptance and use.

B.

[livinitup0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If ther eis one thing we can count on in the US...it's that our federal government will find ANY way to tax us more....and wont pass up a chance like this.

[/ QUOTE ]
You can not count on this when enough of Congress thinks they can gain votes by posturing to their 'family values' constituency. And if this bill is passed into law and a Federal beauracracy is put into place to enforce it, then that beauracracy will join the forces of those who are posturing for votes to make sure it is very difficult to undo the job.

You don't have to look any further than the marijuana laws to see a huge potential source of tax revenue that is illegal despite broad acceptance and use.

B.

[/ QUOTE ]

A bit of a stretch...

Poker doesnt equal pot to the masses....when was the last time you saw 10 old guys get together to do gravity bongs? Or pipes being advertised on TV?