How are pro players "safe"?

[Ryno]

I saw a thread locked that asked such a question, but no one that I've seen has made a good counter-argument to the following:

Line A of Schedule C, 1040 form, asks for "Principal Business or Profession"

Suppose you write "Gambling" in that box. You are now in the business of betting or wagering.

Unlawful Internet Gambling is defined as follows:

"to place, receive, or otherwise knowingly transmit a bet or wager by any means which involves the use, at least in part, of the internet where such a bet or wager is unlawful under any applicable Federal or State law in the State or Tribal Lands in which the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made." (p. 221-222)

It does not say "placing the bet" has to be unlawful, just that the bet or wager itself is unlawful. In other words, if placing a bet is legal but booking a bet is illegal, then the bet is illegal. Therefore if playing poker is not legal where you live, and you play poker online, you fit under the definition of Unlawful Internet Gambling.

Add the two together, throw in a cashout from Pokerstars, and you are a person in the business of betting or wagering accepting a payment in connection with Unlawful Internet Gambling, no?

I would love to have someone prove this wrong.

[vinyard]

You can enter "drug dealer" or "child pronographer" on a IRS form and, in theory, they can't use that against you as long as you file lawfully. And this bill did very little to criminilize playing poker

[Ryno]

I'm not really interested in what can be used against me. Playing online poker as a pro is either legal or illegal, and I am trying to figure out which.

[cmac99]

I assume if you live in a state where there are casinos that the IRS would have to assume you were making it in a legal manner. If you live in someplace where there are no casinos this may send up a red flag.

[Ignignokt]

The fact that you don't have to put "Online Gambling" on your tax form makes this discussion moot.

Unless Congress secretly outlawed B&M cardrooms last night.

[Ryno]

The tax form is not the issue. If someone is in the business of betting or wagering and receives payment *in connection with* Unlawful Internet Gambling as defined, they have violated S5363. The "in connection with" would appear to cover cashouts, and any pro is in the business of betting or wagering by definition.

I would think the way out is that online poker playing is not Unlawful Internet Gambling if poker is legal where you live (i.e. here in California). But I have no idea. Also to be caught they'd have to connect your tax filing and a 3rd party electronic funds transfer that may or may not be related to Unlawful Internet Gambling. I know this is exceedingly remote but maybe I want to run for President of the United States someday.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
You can enter "drug dealer" or "child pronographer" on a IRS form and, in theory, they can't use that against you as long as you file lawfully. And this bill did very little to criminilize playing poker

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont know where this notion comes from but it is wrong. The IRS has electronic forms specifically designed to refer evidence of criminal activity garnered from tax filings for criminal investigation. Gambling has always been one of the codes for "type of activity".

[DING-DONG YO]

I would love to see someone read other posts before making one asking a question that has been discussed on here 1 million times before.

But what can you expect from someone that lives in "socal"?

[Ryno]

My question is, "is it legal to play online poker as a pro?" Other threads have talked about what the IRS tells the government without actually answering this question.

[derosnec]

Statutes are interpreted by the courts. So you have to wait to find out (even then it's often nebulous).