270 Days Pretty Solid -- no run on the banks necessary

[BillJames]

[ QUOTE ]
the whole point is that there is no reason to believe the bolded section will take place.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not entirely accurate. While the statute itself says nothing specifically about banks' relationships to Neteller, it is concievable that the regulation will be very strictly worded -- perhaps specifying that banks could face liability under the statute for processing transactions not only directly to gambling sites, but to EFTs that deal almost exclusively in gambling transactions (i.e. potentially Neteller, though I don't know what % of Neteller's business is gambling-related).

The whole point is that we don't know until the regs are promulgated. If they are indeed very strict, then practically every US bank may simply refuse transfers to all but a select few EFT-type business that they know don't do gambling transactions (like PayPal). Otherwise, it will be very difficult for them to determine which sites mainly do gambling transactions and which don't. This type of policing problem is the whole reason the banks hated this internet gaming statute in the first place.