- This topic has 9 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Good news that an amendment to the gambling act will now mean that bookies who have based themselves abroad will now have to contribute to the levy.
No Sir the bookies wont be closing any shops , as long as the roulette machines stay as is
lets keep it real
imo
No Sir the bookies wont be closing any shops , as long as the roulette machines stay as is
lets keep it real
imo
FOBTs already announced to be severely restricted and Gambling Commission told by Minister to do their job properly.
Offshore bookmakers do not want to take horse racing bets.
The UK Government is one of the very worst to foster offshore tax evasion scams. They cannot even collect tax from Google, Starbucks, Amazon etc from UK business activities actually in the UK let alone overseas. The offshore internet companies without UK affiliation will just register somewhere else in the World where they cannot be touched. The EU may also rule that UK is acting against competition and free trade.so how will this be enforced ?
formally, they haven’t worked out that bit:
column 1301 of the debate: >>this amendment will give the Secretary of State power to use secondary legislation to secure extension of the levy to offshore remote operators<<.
informally though, it seems pretty clear from other parts of the debate how it will go:
column 1282:
>> this is a small, five-clause Bill focusing on consumer protection. As a result of it, all overseas operators selling to British consumers—around 85% of the market—will be required to hold a British Gambling Commission licence.
……in relation to enforcement …it would enable the Gambling Commission to give direction to financial institutions to stop financial transactions with operators which do not hold a Gambling Commission licence. This is known as financial transaction
blocking…..…. the Gambling Commission has reached agreement with major payment systems organisations—notably MasterCard, PayPal and Visa Europe—to work together to block financial transactions with unlicensed operators <<
if operator licensing and financial transaction blocking are the means, IMO the end will pretty soon be subverted from one of everyone paying levy on GB racing, to one of
levy being charged on all stakes placed by GB-based punters on horses,
whether it is on GB racing or overseas racing.
after all that is a declared aim of those who consume the levy.
fairly soon an argument will be made about >>the administrative ease of treating all horseracing the same, rather than having separate rules according to where the horses run; GB punters overwhelmingly bet on GB racing; only interested in those overseas races where GB horses run anyway; so artificial to treat non-GB races differently, etc <<.
and so the ordinary GB punter will come to be gouged for GB levy on races held outside GB.
link to the debate (starts col 1276 on page 34 of the pdf, with the specific levy bit being Amendment No 5 starting col 1298 on page 45):
Robert , fair enough , I will believe FOBT restriction when I see it
forgive my scepticism ..but thats not the way the bookie lobby works
cheers
imo
Robert , fair enough , I will believe FOBT restriction when I see it
forgive my scepticism ..but thats not the way the bookie lobby works
cheers
imo
The bookmaker lobby actually has lost hands down on this and for the first time. They tried to fob Government off with a voluntary code but amazingly ungullible Minister saw through that within a week and announced new rules will be mandatory. Minister was talking about £2 maximum bets before. A lot of bookie PR and legals will be looking for new jobs.
Wit,
As you will know the US law stops certain bank and credit card betting by its own citizens and fails to do it to overseas bettors. It also fails to stop huge offshore betting by US citizens with companies who pay zilch to US. US has strong regulation enforcement and if they cannot mange it UK has no chance.
As I understand it the Levy board want levy paid on UK racing both by UK and overseas bettors on UK racing. They can only do the overseas bit with near world-wide agreement. They have zero agreements and if leaving the EU after 2017 won’t even have EU backing if they were ever to get that. EU unlikely to ever vote for anything that only benefits UK.
I think the key thing that will happen is that many countries will ask why should UK horseracing have a levy when other sports survive with none. It will be looked on as an unfair irrelevant and trumped up tax and they will refuse to endorse payment or prosecutions.
I think there might be a few loopholes Wit. I was betting on some racing overseas today with funds from a foreign currency account at UK-government owned bank. Said government-owned bank insisted that this account be located offshore, away from erm UK government regulation, in order that I be granted the multi-currency facility.
It’s the way Britain works.
If the Pauls ever declare war on foreign racing, it’s London to a brick that that the briefing documents taken into cabinet for crisis talks will have ‘under no circumstances should Glenn’s punting on trots in Ulan Bator be disrupted’ underlined in red.
If the Pauls ever declare war on foreign racing, it’s London to a brick that that the briefing documents taken into cabinet for crisis talks will have ‘under no circumstances should Glenn’s punting on trots in Ulan Bator be disrupted’ underlined in red.
Betting on some poor blokes toiletry habits in the back and beyond is a new one on me. Each way betting on the first two is it with no prize for being turf
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.