What is your definition of Regulation?

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
We already pay taxes.The real crush of regulation would be on the sites.Those are the ones who are not paying taxes,not the players.Although,this taxing of poker sites could effect us as well,by companies who try to pass their new burden to players through higher rake.Free market would hopefully control this to an extent.At least this would seem logical.How exactly does it work in other countries where it is regulated and sites are taxed???If someone who lives somewhere like this could chime in and explain the actual effects that would be great.It is a very interesting question,and id like to hear from someone who is living it,what the reality of playing online poker under government regulation is.

[/ QUOTE ]

The situation in the UK is like this. The betting shops (William Hill, Ladbrokes etc) pay a 15% levy of their take to the taxman, this is on top of their normal corporation tax etc. This replaced a 9% tax on all bets (you could pay it placing a bet or lose it from your winnings, this was the only UK tax on gambling winnings). The bookies agreed to this deal a few years back and have since concentrated on upping their revenues via electronic terminals in shops etc so that both the bookies and the taxman get more - as a result of an increase in gambling. The punters are happy as they feel 9% better off and given the competition of betting exchanges the bookies have not been able to fix the book by anything like 9%.

In Gibraltar/Antigua etc it is a bit less clear as they don't talk about it but the scuttle but is that taxes are about 1% of revenues. The UK gov is yet to outline what tax regime they would have for dedicated online operations, they would like 15% as this way it matches the B&M operations but it's unlikely anyone would come onshore at this rate. The problem for the UK is if they set a lower rate the local firms will go "Oi, what about us" and the treasury wants the money. It's likely they will need an online/B&M difference but this would make all the bookies try and push all the punters online.

Anyway the conference was not just about regulation it was also about taxation. They will not admit it but the 32 governments were trying to get a cartel where they all agreed a minimum tax take. Gib/Antigua may not be keen to lose their competitive advantage but today's press with gov ministers putting pressure on the Treasury by talking about nobody coming onshore suggests they made progress but not near 15%.

My guess 5% and an agreement to work on joint regulation so that a licence in 1 country can be ported to another for a fee and a cut of the 5% on revenues from that market. This is just a guess though, the negotiations will be long.

In short though the tax on the companies should not really hit the rake or the punter much, it is likely to hit the house margin in a competitive market. We all know they are making superprofits today, the market will push the rake down and because only authorised sites will be allowed to advertise the real market will be of regulated sites.

[5thStreetHog]

Thanks for the reply.

[AAAA]

representative kasper from ND indicated he thought the state could get the IRS to accept a Net win/loss for the year instead of each session. IMO it would be better for the government to run the room rather than try to tax it. there is an extra level of expense if the companies try to run the rooms.

perhaps in its infancy, this would have been a bad idea, but now that things have pretty much settled down with changes in software and such...i think it is a reasonable thing for a government to do.

years ago i read a book where there were no taxes at all except for a voluntary gambling game that people enjoyed playing! perhaps the time has come!

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
if regulation of our industry takes place allowing online poker to exist legally.


[/ QUOTE ]


As your honest Washington lobbyist, I would tell you to talk to the State people.

Gambling is legalized and regulated at the state level. Congress is only enforcing the State's unlawful gambling laws with the UIGEA, not changing them.

Yes, if States allow something as retarded as Powerball to exist, there is great hope for regulated online poker. But like Powerball, it has to be at a State level IMHO.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if regulation of our industry takes place allowing online poker to exist legally.


[/ QUOTE ]


As your honest Washington lobbyist, I would tell you to talk to the State people.

Gambling is legalized and regulated at the state level. Congress is only enforcing the State's unlawful gambling laws with the UIGEA, not changing them.

Yes, if States allow something as retarded as Powerball to exist, there is great hope for regulated online poker. But like Powerball, it has to be at a State level IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

You just advised us to what we currently have. Online Gambling is legal at the state level, not at the national level (technically).

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if regulation of our industry takes place allowing online poker to exist legally.


[/ QUOTE ]


As your honest Washington lobbyist, I would tell you to talk to the State people.

Gambling is legalized and regulated at the state level. Congress is only enforcing the State's unlawful gambling laws with the UIGEA, not changing them.

Yes, if States allow something as retarded as Powerball to exist, there is great hope for regulated online poker. But like Powerball, it has to be at a State level IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

You just advised us to what we currently have. Online Gambling is legal at the state level, not at the national level (technically).

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


If online gambling (poker) is legal at the State level, when did that happen, who is licensed and what are the regulations?

What do you think is making it illegal at the national level given the State's legality?

[j2zooted]

You know how states have a hunting or fishing liscense you must buy? Could you have something like that where you had to annually or monthly buy a permit from some federal agency to play online poker, or do whatever form of gambling you prefer? That could be the consumer end of the tax.

[jlkrusty]

Regulations should try to mirror how actual B&M casinoes are regulated. Here are two main points that would make online casinoes more like B&M casinoes:

1. The sites themselves would be taxed for every dollar of american money made. Thus, for each $1 of American money earned by a site, the site would have to pay say 25 cents of that to the government. The sites could then decide how to pass that onto the customer. Since there would be free market competition, hopefully the effect on the player would not be great.

2. Have a commission that oversees all the sites to ensure that the games are fair and secure--just like there is a gaming commission that oversees B&M casinoes.

[ericicecream]

[ QUOTE ]
You know how states have a hunting or fishing liscense you must buy? Could you have something like that where you had to annually or monthly buy a permit from some federal agency to play online poker, or do whatever form of gambling you prefer? That could be the consumer end of the tax.

[/ QUOTE ]

Follow this up with smoking licenses, coffee drinking licenses, steak-eaters license...

[burningyen]

[ QUOTE ]
Gambling is legalized and regulated at the state level.

[/ QUOTE ]
Congress has the authority to regulate interstate commerce. They could easily pass a law with respect to internet gambling that preempts state laws.