After GOP banned online gambling in 2006, Dems finally come through to reclaim our liberty

[letsgohoosiers]

From what I have read, HR 2267:

- Specifically distinguishes sports betting as a variety of online gambling not to be permitted
- Allows states to opt-out of the legislation
- Tax reporting (the purpose of the bill) and taxation of 50% of all winnings
- 2% tax on all deposits
- Makes non-regulated online gambling expressly illegal

I don't see how this will be good for us. He's essentially introducing a bill that makes sports betting illegal, all online gambling not from the regulated sites illegal, and heavily taxing any winnings you may have.

 

[letsgohoosiers]

Here's a link to the bill:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2267:

HR 2268 is the bill that talks about the taxation of gambling.

 

[Mistermj]

Thank God the Dems are reclaiming our "liberty"

Tax reporting (the purpose of the bill) and taxation of 50% of all winnings

 

[ScottL]

Tax reporting (the purpose of the bill) and taxation of 50% of all winnings

Rockets +1.5 -150? NO THANKS!

 

[mamatried]

I'm no lawyer (I proudly state), but it seems to me that this bill is far from perfect. And it's questionable as to whether it's even an improvement over UIGEA. Taxation of 50% on all winnings? Explicitly making internet sports betting illegal? WTF???

The only possible bright spots are that it doesn't seem to make it illegal to place sports bets, and it appears to remove the burden from financial institutions of blocking gambling related transactions. Although it's not clear to me if the latter only applies to those transactions involving legal licensees (which would exclude offshore sports books).

 

[barman]

Anyone with a link to the bill? From what I have heard it sounds awful for those who want to play offshore.

Not to beat you down, but a quick skim of the first page of this Thread should relieve any concerns you have in that area.

No matter what's in the language of the bill (presuming it even passes at all) it should have very little effect on those of us who have been and who will continue to place offshore sports wagers.

 

[barman]

From what I have read, HR 2267:

- Specifically distinguishes sports betting as a variety of online gambling not to be permitted
- Allows states to opt-out of the legislation
- Tax reporting (the purpose of the bill) and taxation of 50% of all winnings
- 2% tax on all deposits
- Makes non-regulated online gambling expressly illegal

I don't see how this will be good for us. He's essentially introducing a bill that makes sports betting illegal, all online gambling not from the regulated sites illegal, and heavily taxing any winnings you may have.

Even if that dire interpretation proved true in coming months, it's a virtually unenforceable law for anyone with much internet savvy.

 

[barman]

In short, this legislation if passed as reported so far, would have virtually no impact - pro or con - on the established offshore sports betting habits we each enjoy right now.

And if passed, it would certainly not be a "reclaimation of our liberties" as proposed by the Original Poster.

 

[mamatried]

Rockets +1.5 -150? NO THANKS!

At least you're on the right side, Scotty. :toast:

 

[Mistermj]

Even if that dire interpretation proved true in coming months, it's a virtually unenforceable law for anyone with much internet savvy.

If that were true...we would still be able to use Net teller, Pinnacle and Betfair.

So...as you can see....without much effort they have already in fact raised the risks, scared away investment and in fact destroyed a lot of offshore online business.

With the new emphasis on the tax angle it's easy for most of us to see the writing on the wall.

The thugs are coming...all in the name of liberty no less. LOL. :howdy:

All it's going to take is some high profile prosecutions, arm twisting of ISP's, more emphasis by the IRS on the tax angle and they will make it very risky and uncomfortable for anyone that wants to break the law online in the future.

It's very obvious where this is going...and it will work. The IRS and their infinite ability to harass Americans will be the main attack dog.

 

[barman]

If that were true...we would still be able to use Net teller, Pinnacle and Betfair.

.

I didn't say the feds can't apply pressure and alter the landscape.

What I submit is that the net effect will be negligble at worst.

It took less than 12 months for every other offshore to figure out easy ways to move money back and forth from US citizens.

As for Pinnacle and Betfair, their ownership decided it wasn't worth the risk since they routinely live in and/or visit the USA.

Owners of other offshores do not, so know they can continue doing business as usual with US clients.

There's plenty of legitimate concerns to have about what the Obama administration might or might not do during the next eight years.

But worrying about them being able to adversely interfere with our ability to use offshore sportsbooks is certainly not one of those concerns.

 

[barman]

All it's going to take is some high profile prosecutions, arm twisting of ISP's, more emphasis by the IRS on the tax angle and they will make it very risky and uncomfortable for anyone that wants to break the law online in the future.

It's very obvious where this is going...and it will work. The IRS and their infinite ability to harass Americans will be the main attack dog.

You again imply that the federal government can have some kind of notable impact on Americans civilly disobeying laws against adult consensual behaviors.

I know you don't honestly believe that, so we'll give you a hat tip for simple Shock Value