| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 11:49 am Post subject: |
 |
|
On the role of DoJ, federalism and the future of the WTO gambling dispute:
The Register
Antigua attorney speaks out on landmark WTO case
DOJ, USTR keep heads in sand
By Burke Hansen
July 16/07
| Quote: | What role does the DOJ play in this? The USTR represents the US at the WTO, but they still work with the DOJ on establishing the legal position of the US government, correct? The DOJ has taken a very hard line position on the internet gambling industry, and that seems to be reflected in this case.
... Again, it really isn't a moral issue. Although you hear a bunch of that nonsense from the halls of Congress, all you need to do is look at gambling in America to know that the morality thing, if it ever was an issue, has long been thrown out the window.
In some ways it is a federalist issue, as the United States is almost unique among nations today in the powers it gives to its member states. On the other hand, the WTO agreements are member-to-member only and countries like Antigua are entitled to look to the central government for redress. That being said, it drawing its commitments schedule to the GATS, the United States could have addressed the gambling issue on a state-by-state basis, as it did in other areas such as financial services and legal services. But here, it did not do that, so whatever a state says about gambling is, from a completely legal perspective, irrelevant to Antigua and its rights under the GATS. |
| Quote: | You have intimate knowledge of this case - just where do you think it really goes from here?
The Big Lebowski
DVD
To paraphrase The Dude, Antigua abides! We are going to press on here. Everything we are facing currently is unchartered territory, and the good thing about that is that you are free to make whatever claims you feel you can justify and take whatever trail you think you can convince the WTO to follow. Our thinking in this case has never been square-headed and it is not about to get to be at this point. What we really hope for here is that the United States will gain some reason and look to compromise, finally.
Antigua didn't bring this case so it can sell cheap Microsoft products or DVDs. This case was brought on behalf of a regulated, fair domestic gambling and betting industry. Antigua wants to be able to provide these services to American consumers, who very clearly want them. While there is still large ground for compromise, at the end of the day Antigua wants and deserves to be able to offer these services on some agreed and rational basis. Let's hope that wisdom prevails here, and this whole dispute becomes just a footnote to WTO history rather than a defining moment. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=630#630
Last edited by legal on Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:59 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Reuters
U.S. could reap billions taxing Web gambling: study
By Doug Palmer
Feb. 25/09
| Quote: | The United States could raise nearly $52 billion in revenue over the next decade by lifting a three-year-old ban on Internet gambling and taxing the activity instead, according to a study. Gambling supporters hope the new analysis prepared by accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers will help propel efforts in Congress this year to repeal the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.
"There is a dramatic need to have a regulated system that protects American consumers. Right now, it's the Wild West," Jeffrey Sandman, a spokesman for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative, told Reuters on Wednesday. That group includes the London-based Remote Gambling Association, which represents European online companies that lost billions in market value after Congress passed the 2006 law and they withdrew from the U.S. market. The legislation attempted to squash online gambling in the United States by barring businesses from knowingly accepting payments in connection with unlawful Internet gambling, including payments made through credit cards, electronic fund transfers and checks.
But PricewaterhouseCoopers' latest estimate of how much the United States could raise from regulating and taxing Internet gambling is about 22 percent higher than it was in 2007 because U.S. online gambling has grown despite the ban, Sandman said. The accounting firm's study was specifically done for UC Group, an online payment service company that would benefit from U.S. action to legalize Internet gambling.
House of Representatives Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank plans to reintroduce a bill this year to overturn the 2006 ban, which was approved when Republicans still controlled both houses of Congress and Republican George W. Bush was in the White House. Gambling advocates hope the U.S. government's need for new revenue in the aftermath of huge bailout and stimulus packages will boost chances for Congress to replace the ban with new measures to regulate and tax online gambling.
The threat of a possible European Union trade challenge also could improve the bill's prospects this year. The Remote Gambling Association accuses the U.S. Justice Department of singling out European online gambling companies like PartyGaming and 888.com for prosecution while allowing U.S. companies to operate freely. The European Commission, acting on industry petition, began a formal investigation into that issue last year and is expected to release a report next month saying it has grounds to take action at the World Trade Organization.
Anurag Dikshit, a founder of PartyGaming, pleaded guilty in December to Internet gambling charges and agreed to pay $300 million in fines. He still faces possible jail time under a deferred sentencing arrangement. EU industry officials said the pressure on Dikshit to make a deal showed the Justice Department had crossed a major line in its prosecution of cases. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=637#637 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
U.S. online gambling regulation/legalization a slow train comin'.
The New York Times
Magazine Subscription
A New Chance for Online Gambling in the U.S.
By Eric Pfanner
April 26/09
| Quote: | ... now, executives of some of the European companies whisper excitedly that they may soon get a second chance in the United States. Meanwhile, a number of European countries that have long maintained barriers are moving, under pressure from regulators, to legalize, and tax, online gambling. “There’s still a lot of gambling going on, where there’s no revenue coming in to the governments,” said Gavin Kelleher, an analyst at the research firm H2 Gambling Capital in Ireland. “They realize they could use the revenue.”
The biggest potential change would be in the United States, where, perhaps within days, Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, is expected to introduce legislation aimed at overturning the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. (emphasis added)
“He supports the repeal and wants to move forward on it,” said Steve Adamske, communications director for the House Financial Services Committee, of which Mr. Frank is chairman. Mr. Frank tried and failed to do so once before, in 2007. But advocates of liberalization think they might get a friendlier hearing in Washington this time around.
President Barack Obama, they note, boasted of his poker prowess during the election campaign. And the Democrats, who are seen as less hostile to Internet gambling than the Republicans, have tightened their grip on Congress. A study by PricewaterhouseCoopers says the U.S. government could raise more than $50 billion over 10 years from taxes on legalized online gambling. (emphasis added)
“I’d be amazed if it didn’t happen over the next two or three years,” said Clive Hawkswood, chief executive of the Remote Gambling Association, a trade group based in London. “It’s just a question of what exactly the regulations will say.”
Some analysts say that may be getting a little bit ahead of the game. Opponents of a repeal, including the Christian Coalition of America and the National Football League, have vowed to fight any new effort to end the ban. Michele Combs, a spokeswoman for the Christian Coalition, said the group was gearing up for a “massive campaign” of letter-writing and lobbying to try to prevent any loosening of the law. “We’re not saying people shouldn’t go to Las Vegas,” she said. “But when it’s in your home, it’s too easy. It breaks up families.”
U.S. sports leagues, meanwhile, worry that the ease of online betting increases the chances of game-fixing. Even the most bullish advocates of online gambling acknowledge that Internet sports betting — as opposed to poker or casino games — is highly unlikely to be legalized.
“There’s a better chance now for some sort of gaming legislation to be approved,” said Nick Batram, an analyst at KBC Peel Hunt, a brokerage firm in London. “But it took longer than expected to put anti-gaming legislation in place, and it will probably will take longer than expected to remove it.”
... H2 says online gambling generated revenue of $6 billion last year in North America, more than a quarter the global total of $22.6 billion, up from $17.6 billion in 2006.
Pulling out of the United States cost PartyGaming about three-quarters of its business. Its position as the biggest online poker provider has been taken over by PokerStars, a privately held operator based on the Isle of Man. This month, PartyGaming agreed to a $105 million settlement with the U.S. attorney’s office in New York, involving the period before 2006, when it acknowledged that its activities had been “contrary to certain U.S. laws.” In turn, the U.S. authorities agreed not to prosecute the company, which is listed on the London Stock Exchange, or its executives.
The agreement fueled speculation that PartyGaming might be trying to position itself for a return to the U.S. market, if online gambling were legalized. Analysts say one possibility for European companies like PartyGaming, should the ban be lifted, would be to form partnerships with American casino operators. That would allow the European companies to share their online expertise. Operating alone, they might struggle to obtain licenses, given their history of run-ins with U.S. law enforcement, analysts said. (emphasis added)
“It’s my feeling that even if the market were opened up, the U.S. government, in a palatable way, would probably find a way to give local companies a favorable position,” Mr. Batram said. So far, Las Vegas executives have maintained a cautious stance about legalization of online gambling. Steve Wynn, chief executive of Wynn Resorts, said in an e-mail message that he thought it would be “impossible to regulate. Even though it would be a benefit to our company, we are strongly opposed,” he said. But speculation that Las Vegas casino operators were looking into the possibilities was fueled by recent reports that Harrah’s Entertainment, which owns Caesars Palace and other casinos, recently hired Mitch Garber, former chief executive of PartyGaming, for an unspecified role. Harrah’s did not return calls. Mr. Ryan said that PartyGaming planned to focus on acquisition opportunities to increase its market share in Europe and elsewhere, something that was difficult as long as investors were worried about the U.S. litigation. “We think Mr. Frank’s efforts are quite meaningful to the sector,” he said.
Several other online gambling companies whose shares are traded in London, including 888 Holdings and Sportingbet, are still in talks with the U.S. Justice Department. Analysts expect them, along with companies like Bwin International, whose stock is traded in Vienna, to be involved in a round of consolidation in the industry — along with a possible eventual move back into the United States.
As they await developments in Washington, online gambling companies are looking for growth in Europe and Asia. Under pressure from regulators in Brussels, several European Union members, including France, Italy, Spain and Denmark, have been moving to legalize some kinds of online gambling, turning it into a regulated and taxed business. Britain was the first big European country to do so, in 2005. Other countries, like Germany, Greece and the Netherlands, continue to hold out, though, in what the European Commission sees as an effort to protect government-sponsored gambling monopolies from private competition. The commission in March published a report arguing that the United States was violating World Trade Organization rules by keeping out European online gambling companies, given that online betting on horse racing is permitted in the United States. But the commission said that it favored negotiations, rather than legal action, to end the dispute[/b][/i][/color]. Also in March, however, the European Parliament adopted a separate measure supporting the right of individual E.U. member states to make their own rules on online gambling. ... |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=655#655 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 9:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Los Angeles Times
A push to legalize Internet gambling
Supporters tell Congress that online gaming can be regulated and taxed. Critics worry that such easy access to betting could worsen addictions.
By Ben Meyerson
May 13/09
| Quote: | The online gambling industry is waging a campaign in Congress to legalize Internet betting, arguing that it is here to stay and can be regulated and taxed. But opponents are raising moral objections. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), head of the House Financial Services Committee, is leading the fight for gamblers. A previous effort by Frank failed to get out of committee, but the combination of grass-roots and corporate support -- as well as the weakening of the Republican Party -- might improve the odds, advocates said. "The poker players and other online gamblers have gotten organized," Frank said, adding that he supported the legislation as a matter of personal freedom.
I. Nelson Rose, a professor at Whittier Law School in Costa Mesa and coauthor of the book "Internet Gaming Law," thinks Frank will have the power to push legislation through the House this time around. "It will pass, although there will be changes," Rose said. "Very few people in Congress really care at all about Internet gambling."
The legislation's prospects in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has opposed it in the past, are not clear. Many Las Vegas casinos object to Internet gambling. Reid spokesman Jim Manley said that although gambling was "a very important industry to the state," the senator had concerns about whether online gaming could be regulated.
The Poker Players Alliance, which claims more than 1 million members, has enlisted former Sen. Alfonse M. D'Amato (R-N.Y.) in its campaign.
In the past, the biggest opponents have been socially conservative organizations and professional sports leagues. Chad Hills, an analyst for gambling research and policy at Focus on the Family, said the group was gearing up for a fight.
"There's something to be said for people having to get in their car and actually go to a casino," Hills said. "If you have this available in your living room and it's accessible 24/7 . . . this is like the perfect storm for addiction."
John Pappas, executive director of the Poker Players Alliance, acknowledged the social ills linked to gambling, but said the best way to help addicts was to legitimize online poker. "As with anything, people abuse it -- online shopping, eating, drinking, smoking," Pappas said. "Playing poker is not immune to vice, but we truly believe that the best way of addressing problem gaming is to license and regulate the industry, not drive it underground."
Experts said sites such as Party Poker and Poker Stars that advertised in the U.S. operated questionably with regard to the law. Each has two sites -- one with an Internet address that ends in ".net," where players play with fake money and cannot bet, and one that ends in ".com," which instructs players in the U.S. how they can transfer money to and from their accounts. The Justice Department has long maintained that such transactions are illegal under a 1961 law aimed at bookies, but at least one federal judge has ruled the law does not apply to online transactions (see Re Mastercard). Congress in 2006 passed a law banning U.S. banks, credit card and financial companies from processing online gambling transactions. Regulations governing enforcement of the law were adopted by the Bush administration in January and will take effect Dec. 1 if Frank's legislation does not succeed.
A 2007 study for the gambling industry claimed another benefit for legalization: tax revenue. The study predicted that Frank's 2007 bill, which was similar to the current version, would have brought in between $8.7 billion and $17.6 billion from 2008 to 2017. (emphasis added) |
View the committee's summary of the bill:
| Quote: | SUMMARY
The Internet Gambling Regulation Consumer Protection & Enforcement Act would establish a federal regulatory and enforcement framework under which Internet gambling operators could obtain licenses authorizing them to accept bets and wagers from individuals in the U.S., on the condition that they maintain effective protections against underage gambling, compulsive gambling, money laundering and fraud, and enforce prohibitions or restrictions on types of gambling prohibited by states, and Indian Tribes.
LICENSING
This bill would provide the Department of the Treasury with the exclusive authority to establish regulations and license Internet gambling operators. License applicants would be:
Subject to review of their financial condition and corporate structure, business experience, suitability, and criminal background checks, and agree to be subject to U.S. jurisdiction
Prohibited from accepting any type of bet or wager that is initiated or terminated in a state or tribal land that prohibits that type of Internet gambling, or any sports gambling or wager prohibited under the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act.
ENFORCEMENT
This bill would provide Treasury the authority to revoke or terminate the license of any operator who fails to comply with the bill’s provisions. Violators could be fined or imprisoned for up to five years, or both.
SAFEGUARDS AND PROTECTIONS
Any Internet gambling operator receiving a license would be required to have the appropriate safeguards in place to:
Ensure an individual placing a bet or wager is of legal age as defined by the law of the State or tribal area in which the individual is located at the time the bet or wager is placed
Ensure an individual placing a bet or wager is physically located in a jurisdiction that permits Internet gambling at the time a bet or wager is placed.
Protect the privacy and security of individuals engaged in internet gambling
Combat fraud and money laundering as prescribed by regulations issued by the Secretary of the Treasury or designee
Combat Compulsive Internet Gambling |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=661#661 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Recent Poker.com
NEW U.S.T.R. EASE TENSIONS WITH ANTIGUA - EU - WTO
Accessed May 15/09
| Quote: | US President Barack Obama's nomination for US Trade Representative, former Dallas mayor Ron Kirk (confirmed by Senate March 18/09), has made an encouraging first impression, telling Senate confirmation hearings considering his appointment that he will push for strict enforcement of global trade rules.
That could be a refreshing change from his predecessor, Susan Schwab, who presided over a regime that went to extraordinary lengths to do just the opposite as far as online gambling was concerned, embroiling her country in serious and long-running World Trade Organisation disputes with a list of countries which includes the European Union and Antigua and Barbuda. (emphasis added)
"This [Obama] administration's starting point on trade will be to ensure the strongest possible enforcement of existing rules and increase the transparency of current and future trade agreements," Kirk said at his confirmation hearing in the Senate. "As I've said to many of you in private, I don't come to this job with deal fever, and we're not going to do deals just for the sake of doing some," he said.
Kirk, the first black mayor of Dallas from 1995 until 2001, will also become the first black trade representative if approved by the Senate.
The current USTR, Susan Schwab, has presided over lost legal tussles, an abandonment of global trade obligations, WTO penalities against the US, missed deadlines and a negotiating process that has taken an excruciatingly lengthy time to deliver minimal progress, doing little for the reputation of the US with its trading partners in the process. In the world of online gambling, few will be dismayed to see her go. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=664#664 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
... Is there a message here for Congress?
New York Exposed
Photographs from the Daily News
Hardcover
Edited by Shawn O'Sullivan
Captions by Richard Slovak
| Quote: | | Jersey City police enforce Prohbition at 252 Paterson Plankroad, where a raid in early January, 1932, turns up vats containing 5,800 gallons each of mash. Nevertheless, the speakeasies throughout the United States bnever ran dry. In New York City alone, estimates of the number of illegal saloons during Prohibition ranged as high as 32,000 - twice the number of bars that existed when drinking was legal. Leonard Detrick (Cutline with a photo of Jersey's finest surrounding a gi-normous vat of illicit hootch, p. 78) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=667#667 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Casino Advisor
Delay In Discussion On Frank's Bill Likely
By: Shirley Spicer
Aug. 25/09
| Quote: | Richard Bryan seemed to give voice to the general apprehension that debate on Barney Frank's anti-UIGEA bill will not take place any time soon. Bryan is a former United States Senator from Nevada. He now is a professional gaming attorney and is therefore aware of both the online gambling scenario in the country and the way Washington functions.
In an interview given to the Las Vegas Review-Journal Bryan opined that the debate on Frank's bill probably would take place only next year. He gave two reasons for this conclusion. The first reason was that there were other more important issues like national health care and the economic meltdown before the legislature. The second reason was that the Congress moves at "glacial pace" and therefore will not take up the less important issues in a hurry.
There is no doubt that the economic downturn has spoilt the party for online gaming enthusiasts. The introduction of Frank's bill was itself delayed. The new administration took over in January 2009 and at that time Frank had indicated that his bill to overturn the UIGEA would be introduced in March 2009. The date was pushed to Easter and the bill was finally introduced to May. The bill was supposed to come up for discussion around Independence Day, but Frank said more important matters had to be discussed first and that the bill would positively be discussed in September 2009. August is almost over and there is as yet no confirmation that the bill would come up for discussion next month. It must be noted that Barney Frank is the Chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services that has to discuss the bill.
The online gaming industry is perhaps aware only of the work that Frank has put in for opposing the UIGEA in the legislature. However Frank's body of work is much larger than that. After the new administration has taken charge Frank has sponsored 32 bills most of which concern the financial sector, but also include online gambling, gay rights and education. He has also co-sponsored 256 bills. This would give a fair idea of what his online gambling bill is up against.
The online gambling industry has been knocked out by the executive and the judiciary. The Obama administration was expected to be soft in implementing the existing laws against online gambling. But the Department of Justice is acting with greater fervor than before. For the first time payments to online gambling customers were seized by the government. iMEGA was expected to easily win its case in the US Court of Appeals. Though the judgment is not yet out, the proceedings of the appeal indicate that the verdict will be against iMEGA. Therefore the online gambling industry has all its hope pinned on the legislature.
Bryan said, "My sense, however, is that there is a gathering, gradual momentum where, eventually, Internet gaming will occur and be regulated. I'm just not sure if it has reached critical mass yet." |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=689#689 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
