Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

Momentum for regulated Internet gambling is continuing to gain speed as eight members of Congress encouraged the Bush administration to consider altering its ban on Internet gambling rather than pay compensation to countries barred from offering Internet gambling services in the U.S. The statements were made in a letter to the United States Trade Representative Schwab.

Here is a link to media coverage on the story: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3886180

Here is a link to the letter: http://www.safeandsecureig.org/media/ustrletter.pdf

Let’s keep up the fight and demand Congress regulate Internet gambling as a way to resolve the WTO conflict and give us the freedom to gamble online.

To learn more about this issue and to contact your elected representative, please visit www.safeandsecureig.org.

Jeffrey Sandman
Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

Mr. Sandman,

You want the Frank bill and that's fine. I know the people who are backing you and I get it. There are a lot of good arguments you can make for the Frank bill. But why does your group continue to put out misleading statements like this one on your home page?

"Frank’s legislation to regulate Internet gambling would resolve the WTO dispute and eliminate the need for the U.S. to pay trade compensation."

The Frank bill in its present state will not resolve the WTO issue. The three main reasons are the state opt outs, the sports league opt outs, and the requirement for Antiguan companies to "Americanize" and set up US offices and pay US taxes.

Please stop putting out false and misleading information.

Jay Cohen

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

[ QUOTE ]
I know the people who are backing you and I get it.

[/ QUOTE ]


Jay,

Why do you keep being coy about hiding the players behind this safe and secure site? There have been too many shills in this forum over the last year who hide their true agenda and interests. So why not just out this organization?

Since they want the Frank bill and not the Weixler one, they aren't representing poker, and also want no regulations, just open access with no strings attached. And they have been repeatedly and intentionally lying about the Frank bill bringing the US into compliance on the WTO issue. Which means they don't give a rat's ass about Antiguan companies, and also are probably competitors.

So I would bet that makes the best possibilities for the backers being a) Costa Rican based sports betting companies, or b) British based sports betting companies. Am I close?

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

Jay, glad we have common ground, as presented the Frank Bill needs a bit of tweeking, only a bit however.

1. Remove the Sports league opt outs.
2. Specify the State opt outs apply only to businesses based in the United States.
3. States cannot prevent residents from doing business with licensed companies NOT based in the United States.

The tax issue is really moot, I do not know if companies pay taxes in Antigua or not, however, businesses can ‘choose’ where to pay taxes when filing a 1040 for income, you can exempt income that you paid tax on in another country and vice versa. A foreign company can exempt income made in the U.S. if taxed in another jurisdiction. This applies to all companies in all countries, not just gaming companies in Antigua.

obg

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

I think the best way to solve 1-3 is to put plain language out that says no US laws affect remote gaming in jurisdictions where it is legal as long as there are age verification and fraud prevention practices in place. The WTO issue isn't about legality or illegality but market access. A poker and/or sports REGULATORY scheme is peripheral to the entire WTO system. Im sure Antigua would listen and reciprocate some as would the UK/EU. Resolving the WTO goes beyond any bill put out so far, so advocating for them as a way to appease the WTO is plain wrong. Safeandsecure has bought some language that will go in the bill they really want, Im sure of that much. If Antigua succeeds for us it wont be by getting "poker" an exemption.

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know the people who are backing you and I get it.

[/ QUOTE ]


Jay,

Why do you keep being coy about hiding the players behind this safe and secure site? There have been too many shills in this forum over the last year who hide their true agenda and interests. So why not just out this organization?

[/ QUOTE ]

Jay IMO has treaded a very fine line politically, as has Mason IMO. As pointed out a number of times, this forum is a fairly open access communications medium.

I have deep personal opinions about how S&S chooses to operate, almost 100% negative, which I have expressed privately to "Jeffery" and his "bosses".

The sayings are; "politics makes strange bedfellows" and "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

But S&S has pushed this philosophy close to the breaking point. To the point that I may out these "people" myself.

I have problems with the PPA, but continue to do anything asked of me personally or to the general membership, but S&S doesn't even deserve to have its name used in the same sentence or conversation!!!



D$D

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

[ QUOTE ]
A foreign company can exempt income made in the U.S. if taxed in another jurisdiction. This applies to all companies in all countries, not just gaming companies in Antigua.

[/ QUOTE ]

A company doing business in the United States, foreign or domestic, must file a corporate tax return. You cannot exempt yourself from the Tax Code. A US C-corporation files Form 1120; a foreign corporation files Form 1120-F.

Various tax treaties do exempt different types of income from different countries. Additionally, most countries allow a credit for taxes paid to other countries. However, there is no tax treaty between the US and Antigua. An Antiguan company doing business in the United States is required to file a form 1120-F with the IRS.

-- Russ Fox

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

But a company operating an online gambling website in a foreign company is not doing business in the United States. When you gamble at their website, you are doing so under the jurisdiction of the country in which the site is located. You agree to this condition. All sites terms and conditions state this condition. So the foreign website is not making any income in the United States.
The United States has applied the Wire Act to foreign websites and is the only country to any of its laws to a foreign website. The United States may attempt to apply its tax laws to a foreign website, but it is alone if it does so. Even the UK does not apply its new 15% tax to a foreign gambling website; only one based in the UK. Some websites left the UK to avoid the tax. This diffference is the crux of the whole WTO dispute with Antiqua.

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

Corrected, used wrong form number, meaning was the same they have to file as I mentioned as well.

obg

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

[ QUOTE ]
But a company operating an online gambling website in a foreign company is not doing business in the United States.

[/ QUOTE ]

While that is true, it also seems true that even if a country like the US doesn't wish for political purposes to criminalize the actions of an American bettor but instead, whether legal or not in international law, to try to subject a foreign corporation to US jurisdiction, that there is an exception when countries have a reciprocal treaty as is the case with tax treaties. So if contrary to the spirit of the WTO countries were to mutually agree to subject their corporations to the jurisdiction of other signatory countries, then the onus could be placed on the company accepting/facilitating a wager by a foreign citizen at its site. Given the current events in various EU countries, this seems to be where all this might be heading de facto, if not de jure.

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

[ QUOTE ]
But a company operating an online gambling website in a foreign company is not doing business in the United States. When you gamble at their website, you are doing so under the jurisdiction of the country in which the site is located. You agree to this condition. All sites terms and conditions state this condition. So the foreign website is not making any income in the United States.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's true for any jurisdictional issues if you (a customer) wish to sue the Internet gambling site. However, a case can be made that these sites are doing business in the US. Chuck Humphrey wrote an article dealing with this issue. A reasonable conclusion based on that article is that the US could consider that the sites are operating in the US.

Obviously, the sites would vigorously argue that they don't operate in the US. However, this is definitely not settled law.

If the US were to successfully get a court to rule that the sites owe US income tax, your conclusion that this would be a further violation of the WTO might be moot. I suspect that many countries would have their tax agencies follow the US' lead in going after the sites (perhaps it's just the cynic in me having dealt with various state tax agencies).

-- Russ Fox

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

My point is that no other country attempts to make this case over jurisdiction of foreign companies with no assets within its borders.

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

[ QUOTE ]
My point is that no other country attempts to make this case over jurisdiction of foreign companies with no assets within its borders.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is correct. Yahoo! has faced government action in France. Various online companies have faced government action in Germany. I imagine that if I researched this issue I would find numerous cases of Internet (web) companies facing actions in countries where all they have is a "virtual" presence.

-- Russ Fox

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

[ QUOTE ]
But S&S has pushed this philosophy close to the breaking point. To the point that I may out these "people" myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it seems clear they are not just an organization looking out for poker players! I assume they have an interest that undermines their credibility. So, since we know that much we might as well know who it is...

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

France and Germany have attempted to prosecute foreign online gambling sites, but the EU have completely shut that down. China has threatened CNN and some other websites and gotten them to cooperate. But I don't want to equate China with US.
I have not researched prosecutions by countries against foreign websites like the US v. WSEX or BetOnSports, but I have read numerous articles about this type of jurisdiction without mention of similar cases. One exception is a website advertising in a foreign country. But when a company advertises on media in another country then it establishes a presence beyond just a website. Maybe Yahoo was investigated etc. for advertising in France?
Anyway the WTO pending action is going to affect this matter in a big way and soon.

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

I'm glad that our post has generated this conversation, but please do not misrepresent this organization and the facts.

The Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative supports the regulation of Internet gambling, including skill games such as poker, sports betting and casino games. If poker becomes regulated before anything else, we would consider that a win. However, we believe that the government should give us a freedom to place wagers on all types of games, not just poker.

In response to the question of whether the Frank bill would resolve the WTO dispute, below is a recent Reuters article where the EU Trade Commissioner says that this would be the case. The reality, whether you believe it or not, is that a legislative solution could resolve the dispute.

EU's Mandelson: U.S. needs to change gambling laws
Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:35pm EST

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European trade chief Peter Mandelson said the United States should let foreign companies into its multibillion-dollar online gaming market instead of trying to compensate European firms for shutting them out.

"The U.S. has so far opted for compensation to make right what is wrong. I don't think compensation does that job," he told members of the European Parliament on Tuesday.

The European Union and other trading partners have been in compensation talks with the United States over Washington's decision to remove gambling services retroactively from commitments it made as part of a 1994 world trade agreement.

Billions of pounds were wiped off the market value of European online gaming companies when the United States closed off its market last year.

"What we really need is for the legislation to be put right and for foreign operators to stop being excluded and discriminated against in the way the present U.S. legislation does," Mandelson said.

Mandelson met U.S. Representative Barney Frank during a visit to Washington this month and he said on Tuesday he was hopeful Frank's attempts to change the law would be successful.

"I will continue to make these arguments on behalf of the European industry," Mandelson said.

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

Sorry, Jeffrey but the article does not state that the IGREA would comply with the WTO decision. It would not, but it could be amended to comply. Simply put the US has to treat all online gambling, and maybe all gambling, the same to comply with the WTO decision.
Sure if the IGREA was amended to apply to all online lotteries, pari-mutual betting, fantasy sports and all other types of gambling and skill games then it would comply with the WTO decision. IMO such amendment will not happen.
Why isn't your organization for free, unregulated and untaxed online gambling before any regulation or taxation?

Re: Congressmen Press for Solution to WTO Internet Gambling Dispute
 

Jeffrey dude, maybe you need a new namecolour, maybe [censored] brown for what comes out of your mouth? You make a statement worded like talking points aimed at sheep. Youre for your own damned profit, not poker. Maybe you should post more at the PPA, unless they are your business rivals? This is a discussion and ideas board, not a gd troll stop.