Interesting Conversation with bank guy about implementation of UIGEA

[Hock_]

So I was at a dinner party tonight and by total coincidence ended up talking to some guy who's (partly) responsible for a major financial institution's compliance with the UIGEA. Now I know that at least some of this has been posted about here before, and maybe there's nothing new here, but FWIW:

he said, for starters, that the proposed regs are due to be out by early July, but that it looks like they'll actually be issued earlier. He said that his bank is ready to start blocking transactions as soon as he gets instructions from his legal department. The blocking will be based on some kind of 4-digit code associated with all online financial transactions. Apparently, though, it's not that simple, since there's one code for ALL gambling-related transactions, including lotteries and horse racing. Which means that to block only transactions covered by the UIGEA, they'll need also to screen the "POS" information of the transaction, which will be much more difficult.

Finally, he volunteered that the easy way around the (expected) regs, will be for the sites just to use a code different from the one for gambling.

Overall a somewhat encouraging conversation.

[scrapperdog]

Does not sound that encouraging to me. IMO we have to hope the regulations themselves are not strict, as banks will enforce whatever regulations come out to the best of their ability.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Does not sound that encouraging to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You miss this?:

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, he volunteered that the easy way around the (expected) regs, will be for the sites just to use a code different from the one for gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

The sites already do a lot of sureptitious stuff to fly under the radar, so why wouldn't they do something this easy? Of course it does take the cooperation of their banks, but the banks who don't have a problem dealing with the sites right now likely won't have a prob with that.

Maybe that Billmandude will come here with some theory though as to why that won't happen and we should panic now instead of waiting a few months to see.

[scrapperdog]

Anyone that thinks banks will be looking the other way when the regulations are issued is fooling themself. What exactly do they have to gain by doing this other than getting themselves in trouble with the government? Banks are doing exactly what the OP said they are doing, geting ready to enforce when that day comes and they find out the regulations.

Something tells me codes are issued and poker sites dont get to pick and choose the code they want to use. I dont think it will be that easy. Guess we will see though.

[BluffTHIS!]

Yeah, issued by *the sites' banks*. Any bank being used by the sites still doing biz in the US doesn't have a problem with same, and won't for changing codes to help their customers. Why should they? They already don't care. And on the US side, a changed code means they can't block, not won't block as in "looking the other way".

[scrapperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, issued by *the sites' banks*. Any bank being used by the sites still doing biz in the US doesn't have a problem with same, and won't for changing codes to help their customers. Why should they? They already don't care. And on the US side, a changed code means they can't block, not won't block as in "looking the other way".

[/ QUOTE ]

That does seem to be somewhat good news then. Gives a little hope for a possible workaround.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
talking to some guy who's (partly) responsible for a major financial institution's compliance with the UIGEA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really, what's his job title? On the business or IT side? Corporate or Branch?

[Lucky]

any word on whether his bank has any plans to block checks from poker sites?

It's not part of bill, but i keep hearing rumors, hopefully from trolls, having probs cashing checks. Also, sites are having to switch processors, so hopefully thats not because banks are cracking down on the checks originating from them.

[Hock_]

Checks are specifically covered by the legislation.

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
Checks are specifically covered by the legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]Not "checks from poker sites".