- This topic has 17 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Looks like an announcement from William Hill is imminent on taking its online business to Gibraltar. Ladbrokes and others will almost certainly follow. Skybet have gone already.
The bookmaker PR machine will tell us of increased sponsorship and "voluntary" contributions
to offset the loss to the levy, not even a retarded chimpanzee believes this of course. The Levyboard’s figures of an annual contribution reduction something in the order 25 million pounds is a lot more plausible. A bodyblow to UK horseracing as the industry’s lifeblood is further syphoned into bookmakers offshore bank accounts.A brave new dawn as Government is forced to legislate on a new funding mechanism for horseracing that finally rids the game of the parasitic cancer it is behoven to, or the start of the endgame for the sport as we know it?
Huge changes are almost upon us.
What can the government actually do about it though? A tote monopoly is probably far fetched, but would be it be legal anyway? (From my understanding the french PMU monopoly is basically over now due to European law – I’m sure wit would be able to provide us with the exact details)
I thought the whole idea behind changing the way SP’s were returned was to ensure the long term funding of racing, through increased profits for the bookies from racing?
Makes the exercise pretty pointless now that they’re jumping ship.
The Government won’t do anything that will harm the bookies or inhibit the flow of free lunches.
Looks like an announcement from William Hill is imminent on taking its online business to Gibraltar.
Does that mean I’ll only be allowed 25 euro on instead of 25 quid?
The government is not duty bound to save racing.
Anymore than it was obliged to save the banks but when something is sufficiently important to your economy (isn’t the racing and breeding industry the third biggest employer in the country?) then laissez faire may not be the best approach.
Looks like an announcement from William Hill is imminent on taking its online business to Gibraltar.
Does that mean I’ll only be allowed 25 euro on instead of 25 quid?
25 quid? You must be one of those mug punters…
Who, in their right mind, uses the like of Hills, et al, for betting on racing anyway?
Ladbrokes heading south by years end.
The government is not duty bound to save racing.
.. of course it is.
The government runs racing through it’s quangos.
What can the government actually do about it though? A tote monopoly is probably far fetched, but would be it be legal anyway? (From my understanding the french PMU monopoly is basically over now due to European law – I’m sure wit would be able to provide us with the exact details)
Put back the 9% tax on all betting.
France PMU monopoly ends 1 January 2010.
Put back the 9% tax on all betting.
Which would be the quickest way of ensuring that the bookmakers and exchanges left in the UK would disappear off to join their ‘friends’ in tax havens quicker than you could blink!
Rob
We don’t need a Tote monopoly, just a genuinely robust Tote with greatly reduced takeouts which would lead to a genuine explosion in turnover. The current Tote system here is pathetic.
Put back the 9% tax on all betting.
Which would be the quickest way of ensuring that the bookmakers and exchanges left in the UK would disappear off to join their ‘friends’ in tax havens quicker than you could blink!
Rob
Not if the UK punter was paying the largest part of their tax bill.
The reason the gross profits tax was brought in 8 years ago was precisely because the 9% betting tax was causing the bookmakers to move abroad or consider moving abroad. On that basis re-introduction 9% betting tax is hardly likely to see the ‘money machines’ knocking on the door at Heathrow to be let back in.
The best solution for racing would be an off course Tote monopoly with the profits ploughed back into racing. Given that France is now going in the opposite direction then pigs are more likely to pilot Jumbo Jets.
Rob
The reason the gross profits tax was brought in 8 years ago was precisely because the 9% betting tax was causing the bookmakers to move abroad or consider moving abroad. On that basis re-introduction 9% betting tax is hardly likely to see the ‘money machines’ knocking on the door at Heathrow to be let back in.
The best solution for racing would be an off course Tote monopoly with the profits ploughed back into racing. Given that France is now going in the opposite direction then pigs are more likely to pilot Jumbo Jets.
Rob
You are missing the point.
Gross profits replaced the normal "higher" business taxes at the time.
The additional carrot was that zero punter tax would also increase turnover for bookmakers. Racing turnover percentage had nosedived so bookmakers now want to pay even less GP tax percentages or will walk away.
If GP is retained AND UK punters pay 9% upfront tax then the UK Government gets something back rather than nothing and bookmakers won’t find it so attractive to go offshore with its additional costs. The question was what can the Government do?Join with the BHA through their conduit of the Levy Board to make sure that racing is run on a ‘racing friendly basis’ rather than a ‘betting shop friendly’ basis. Programme meetings at time when people wish to attend racing rather than just to provide betting shop fodder. Racing and the Government would gain through extra on course income and extra tax revenue via VAT on services and on course sales. If attendances increase then Tote income would increase and the on-course bookmakers would be kept on side since their income would increase.
If the net result is that some courses can’t survive without the levy then they are a disaster waiting to happen anyway. It would certainly make a few course executives think hard about their marketing. After a while the racing programme would find its level in terms of being a less-Levy Board dependent sport.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.