New Internet Gambling Tax Bill Introduced

[garyscpa]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

This is not about horse bettors. It is all about getting poker back on the web. Sorry to say it, but nobody cares about horse players anymore. Horse racing in the eyes of most people is a dead gambling game. Poker is a growing gambling game.

It may not be about horse bettors, but I'll bet it affects them if the law passes as is.

[garyscpa]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

As i understand it the tax would be on be on new deposits only. They would probably deduct it off top of the depositor's account when the deposit was made. More paper work for the ADW, but it effect on the bottom form an expense point of view is probably minimal. The effect on the number people making deposits could be another story. One thing is for sure gamblers would not be so quick to cash out their short term profits, if they knew they were going to hit with a reloading tax when they hit a losing streak.

So how many percent is this adding to the takeout? Or do you get around it by leaving large sums of money in the ADW account so that you don't have to redeposit?

Somehow, I don't like that so much.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Poker started to decline well before the FBI stepped in and began shutting access to these sites down.

That's what happens when all the "fish" lose their shirts...and don't think for a second there are all these long term winning poker players milling about as opposed to 99% of horse players with nothing but lint in their pockets.

Hell, a great many of these "pros" that you see bust out and have to be "staked" by someone to keep things going...

Spiderman in the news lately a case in point:

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/1686...o-dicaprio.htm

Online poker took a big hit when the UIGEA was first passed. The then largest poker site Party Poker and many others left the US market. Funding accounts became a real pain for a while as Poker Stars and FTP figured out new ways to get deposits from US players. The sites were growing when the DOJ shut them down in April, but online poker had not returned to its pre UIGEA levels and the games were much harder. But pre April, Online poker was still miles ahead of Online horse racing. In 2006 pre UIGEA the difference was staggering. It really should not have been that way but the horse racing industry does very poor job in the way they treat their customers and promote their product.
As for the "Spiderman" game. These kind of games have operated forever. A well heeled fish has never had a problem find sharks to fillet him. This group of sharks just happened to be famous.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by garyscpa

So how many percent is this adding to the takeout? Or do you get around it by leaving large sums of money in the ADW account so that you don't have to redeposit?

Somehow, I don't like that so much.

That is a good question. I don't know. You should be able to mimumize it by keep large balances. Keep large balances in a non interesting bearing, non garenteed is not a good thing. As a horse player I hate this. As an online poker player, it is acceptable to get the games running again. I made money playing poker. As a handicapper, I am at best a break even player these days although I had few decent years in the late 90s. I am just not able to do the work that I need to do make money playing the ponies anymore. Poker at least for me is not so labor intensive.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The online poker business was THRIVING before the sites were shut down.

Then how come one of the biggest sites in existence (Full Tilt) can't even pay its US players? If they were thriving, shouldn't they have little problem coughing up account balances to their US players?

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Then how come one of the biggest sites in existence (Full Tilt) can't even pay its US players? If they were thriving, shouldn't they have little problem coughing up account balances to their US players?

It was not the lack of players that is causing FTP's problems. Exactly what their problems are isn't known at this point(but there is no shortage of guesses and most of them involve "bad accounting"), but any ADW would kill to have number of regular customers they had.

[TimesTheyRAChangin]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

It was not the lack of players that is causing FTP's problems. Exactly what their problems are isn't known at this point(but there is no shortage of guesses and most of them involve "bad accounting"), but any ADW would kill to have number of regular customers they had.

Isn't Phil Ivey a part owner of Full Tilt?
And yet he still sued them over the very inaction PA mentioned.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by TimesTheyRAChangin

Isn't Phil Ivey a part owner of Full Tilt?
And yet he still sued them over the very inaction PA mentioned.

The exact status of the pros associated with FTP has always been a murky question. They were advertised as owners, but who own what or how much of what is not generally known.There has been some rather nasty breakups over the last few years.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by TimesTheyRAChangin

Isn't Phil Ivey a part owner of Full Tilt?

He better hope he isn't...

[Gulchy]

Read the bill before speculating.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...12hr2230ih.pdf

[garyscpa]

Originally Posted by Gulchy

Read the bill before speculating.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...12hr2230ih.pdf

So the ADW can't subtract it from the depositer's account, but it's DDDDDstill increasing the ADW's costs. Do you think they are going to just absorb it, or pass on the cost in other ways, such as reduced rebates?

[Gulchy]

Originally Posted by garyscpa

So the ADW can't subtract it from the depositer's account, but it's DDDDDstill increasing the ADW's costs. Do you think they are going to just absorb it, or pass on the cost in other ways, such as reduced rebates?

I'm sure they will do what they can to reduce their cost and at the same time try not to pass it on directly to the customer. They all must stay competitive so if some ADW's begin directly or indirectly charging customers it could be an opportunity for a competitor to attract customers by making a selling point of "NO FEES".

[Robert Goren]

Anybody who thinks this bill is going pass without a lot of changes, if it passes at all, doesn't understand how congress works. At this point all we can do is speculate. I would say if this bill passes(and that is mighty big "if") there are only 2 sure things. Some form of online poker will be legal in some places and there will be a tax of some amount on it. Everything else is on the table including somethings that aren't in the bill now.

[garyscpa]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

Anybody who thinks this bill is going pass without a lot of changes, if it passes at all, doesn't understand how congress works. At this point all we can do is speculate. I would say if this bill passes(and that is mighty big "if") there are only 2 sure things. Some form of online poker will be legal in some places and there will be a tax of some amount on it. Everything else is on the table including somethings that aren't in the bill now.

Hate to say it, but House is Republican, Senate is Democrat. It will only get worse if it passes.

[Some_One]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

It was not the lack of players that is causing FTP's problems. Exactly what their problems are isn't known at this point(but there is no shortage of guesses and most of them involve "bad accounting"), but any ADW would kill to have number of regular customers they had.

FT's problems seem quite known, they let US players play with deposit that they could never actually get from player's bank accounts, they simply don't have the money in their accounts (Frozen/unfrozen) to cover all players listed balances.