Internet Gambling Bill

[Smokewagons 0]

Like how seriously misinformed are you?From HR 4411 itself:Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (Reported in House)`Sec. 5363. Prohibition on acceptance of any financial instrument for unlawful Internet gambling `No person engaged in the business of betting or wagering may knowingly accept, in connection with the participation of another person in unlawful Internet gambling-- `(1) credit, or the proceeds of credit, extended to or on behalf of such other person (including credit extended through the use of a credit card); `(2) an electronic fund transfer, or funds transmitted by or through a money transmitting business, or the proceeds of an electronic fund transfer or money transmitting service, from or on behalf of such other person; `(.3) any check, draft, or similar instrument which is drawn by or on behalf of such other person and is drawn on or payable at or through any financial institution; or `(4) the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction, as the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may jointly prescribe by regulation, which involves a financial institution as a payor or financial intermediary on behalf of or for the benefit of such other person.

I think the loophole that people are referring to is that Neteller is not based in the US and is thus not subject to US laws. What I don't know for sure is if this bill also forces banks to prevent transfer of funds to these "middle man" sites. If it doesn't then we should still be able to get around it. Also, from what I've heard, Neteller doesn't only work with poker/gambling sites so preventing transfers to Neteller wouldn't be possible since they don't know for sure the purpose of your transfer to Neteller

[Suited_Up 2]

I think the loophole that people are referring to is that Neteller is not based in the US and is thus not subject to US laws. What I don't know for sure is if this bill also forces banks to prevent transfer of funds to these "middle man" sites. If it doesn't then we should still be able to get around it. Also, from what I've heard, Neteller doesn't only work with poker/gambling sites so preventing transfers to Neteller wouldn't be possible since they don't know for sure the purpose of your transfer to Neteller

$100,000 Question right there folks.

[HoosierAlum 0]

dskghasdfkljsajgasdfjajsdgasdgdh.So depressing.

[Uppie_ 0]

Partygamming ALONE has enuf money to pay a lobbyist more money than Ibrahmoff was making.

Party gamming has no where close the money MLB NFL NBA and the NHL have alone, not to metion all the horse tracks that are competing for the gambling dollar. Major sports are extremely worried about tampering with there sports through online sports betting. There is a ***` load of money on the support side of this bill. We just have to hope our buddies in the Mafia have enough senators in there pocket to stop it from going through.The loop hole isn't not nettellar being outside the US, your money is in the US and they will make transfers to these nettellar banks illegal and prohibit the banks from sending money or echecks to them or cashing moneys from them or getting money from them DD to your accountGuys and gals these are extremly smart people who cover there arse before they bring a bill like this to the floor. They know the law how to write it with no loop wholes and what people to keep happy to help it pass

[epistemic 0]

I think the loophole that people are referring to is that Neteller is not based in the US and is thus not subject to US laws. What I don't know for sure is if this bill also forces banks to prevent transfer of funds to these "middle man" sites. If it doesn't then we should still be able to get around it. Also, from what I've heard, Neteller doesn't only work with poker/gambling sites so preventing transfers to Neteller wouldn't be possible since they don't know for sure the purpose of your transfer to Neteller

I can't see the loophole. Earlier I brought up the fact that you cannot open a Neteller account or fund it whatsoever if you live in Maryland. The state government told the "offshore" company to restrict access and they complied. So if the Feds are using language like this:`(2) an electronic fund transfer, or funds transmitted by or through a money transmitting business, or the proceeds of an electronic fund transfer or money transmitting service, from or on behalf of such other person;`(4) the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction, as the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may jointly prescribe by regulation, which involves a financial institution as a payor or financial intermediary on behalf of or for the benefit of such other person.How will there possibly be a loophole?

[cwik 0]

-1FU.CK BUSH UNLESS HE VETOS THIS BAN

I'm pretty sure in Bush's 6 years of presidency, he is the only president to have never veto'd a bill.

[Uppie_ 0]

I'm pretty sure in Bush's 6 years of presidency, he is the only president to have never veto'd a bill.

Vetoing this bill would do nothing they have the 2/3rd to override it so that point is m00t.

[....Ian.... 0]

so that point is mute.

i think you mean 'moot'grammar police raid!!!

[KDawgCometh 2]

I can't see the loophole. Earlier I brought up the fact that you cannot open a Neteller account or fund it whatsoever if you live in Maryland. The state government told the "offshore" company to restrict access and they complied. So if the Feds are using language like this:`(2) an electronic fund transfer, or funds transmitted by or through a money transmitting business, or the proceeds of an electronic fund transfer or money transmitting service, from or on behalf of such other person;`(4) the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction, as the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may jointly prescribe by regulation, which involves a financial institution as a payor or financial intermediary on behalf of or for the benefit of such other person.How will there possibly be a loophole?

do you actually believe that this current bill will stay in this form if it gets passed by the senate. The simple answer is no. Bills are always loaded up on before they hit the floor of the house and then in the senate they are usually shredded apart so that they can pass. This current bill in this form will not likely pass. I'd be very willing to bet that the only thing that would pass would be the first point of order in it since that adds to the illegal wire acts. The other parts are very much up for debate and would have a hard time passing. This bill is designed to widen the illegal wire acts laws. It also would have a hard time passing as is because it can be fairly easily challenged in court if someone has enough standing to make a successful challenge. THere is a lot going against it for it to ultimately be passed. lets see what it looks like if it gets passed before we start decrying that this is the end of online gambling

[aadams_22 3]

Or Gary, IN.(Sorry, didn't wanna rain on the parade, but I had to do it)

Gary isn't in Illinois which is why I didn't include it. Besides Metropolis and East St. Louis are the two closest to me therefore they are the two that I am the most familiar with.

[Smokewagons 0]

I can't see the loophole. Earlier I brought up the fact that you cannot open a Neteller account or fund it whatsoever if you live in Maryland. The state government told the "offshore" company to restrict access and they complied. So if the Feds are using language like this:`(2) an electronic fund transfer, or funds transmitted by or through a money transmitting business, or the proceeds of an electronic fund transfer or money transmitting service, from or on behalf of such other person;`(4) the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction, as the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may jointly prescribe by regulation, which involves a financial institution as a payor or financial intermediary on behalf of or for the benefit of such other person.How will there possibly be a loophole?

Because they legally don't have to comply. That is the loophole. Using a third party intermediary, that is not subject to US laws, to get your money on and off the gaming sites. Like I said before, the biggest question is if they block this loophole by forcing banks to restrict transfers to these intermediary sites. There's big difference between not accepting accounts from Maryland and not accepting accounts from the entire US.

[mcpickl 0]

Yea, this is all truely not suprising to me at all, online poker is pretty much an untaxible item, therefore the gov't doesn't want billions of dollars to be untaxed and people to have lives were they can make thousands of dollars and not pay a cent to the gov't. Find a way to tax it like B&M casinos and you will save this industry, if not bye bye

Ladbrokes actually offered to pay taxes on their American income to the US Government and were turned down. I guess the govt figured if they accepted the taxes, they'd be accepting internet gambling as a legit business.

[shinychicken 0]

If anything, everyone please contact your senate representative and let him/her know how you feel about this situation. Many of you have just sat around and said that this would never happen, but the truth it is there is a very good chance that this will pass all the way. You don't have to give any money, but visit www.pokerplayersalliance.org and contact your rep. as soon and as much as possible. Take a stand for something we know you all like...

[gilbertology 0]

Neteller is not allowed in Maryland because they deemed it a very unsafe and unsecure company that the state didn't want their citizens doing business with. Witness half the players here having 3k magically stolen from their Neteller accounts and then having Neteller pay it back, instead of their banks. It has nothing at all to do with poker, as Neteller and Firepay are used to pay for things at a number of sites online. If the bill does pass the Senate, I would be more worried about the right for the government to look into personal bank account transactions to determine if there is something illegal going on. I'm sure many players do direct deposit to their checking account through Firepay or Neteller and their account history is filled with hundreds of deposits and withdrawals for large sums of money which would be hard to explain to the feds. However, everyone isn't making a major deal out of this yet, so my prediction is it will not prevent most players from playing online poker. It might affect online sites more as their new users may be scared and start drying up, so that's why there eventually needs to be a rally in front of the House like the million man march. I live in Maryland right outside DC, so if for some reason the Senate looks like they're passing the bill as is, I'll join the campout and the egg throwing at senators walking by.

[FatBurger 0]

I just called Neteller, representing an online magazine some friends and I started. I spoke with a random "agent". He wouldn't answer most of my questions, including how many customers they have in the US. I asked why Maryland residents can not use their services, and he said it was a "business decision". That's as much information as I could get out of them. He either had not heard of the bill going through the House, or was playing dumb.

[aadams_22 3]

I just called Neteller, representing an online magazine some friends and I started. I spoke with a random "agent". He wouldn't answer most of my questions, including how many customers they have in the US. I asked why Maryland residents can not use their services, and he said it was a "business decision". That's as much information as I could get out of them. He either had not heard of the bill going through the House, or was playing dumb.

most likely playing dumb

[phildo41 0]

If neteller was somehow regulated, could someone not transfer money from neteller to say Paypal, and then cashout, or the other way around?

[Suited_Up 2]

If neteller was somehow regulated, could someone not transfer money from neteller to say Paypal, and then cashout, or the other way around?

They're not connected.

[FatBurger 0]

most likely playing dumb

Or a minimum wage customer service rep who was playing Tetris the whole time I was on the phone

[Pug_Fugly 0]

Is this Bill on the Senate's schedule yet?

[thrillsoft 0]

Because, what so many of the younger people on here that think they are democrats don't realize is, (true) republicans believe that the government should stay the hell out of peoples private lives and the democrats believe that you all are too stupid to make good decisions for yourselves so they want to do your thinking for you like an overbearing mother.That is all.

You're completely wrong on this. I really don't want this to turn into a political debate, but if you think that the Republicans are against getting involved in people's daily lives, why do you suppose that they want a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage? And funding faith-based initiatives (sponsoring religion)? And tapping our phones without a warrant? And grabbing our bank records without a warrant (Patriot Act)? And accessing our phone records (not tapping) without a warrant (and this is being done on EVERYONE right now. The New York Times just ran an article on it a couple weeks ago.) The only reason they are against this particular piece of legislation is because they voted against it a while ago when Jack Abramov paid them too and if they change their minds now, they're practically admitting that their previous vote was paid for! Don't fool yourself. The Republicans are NOT about staying out of your personal life any more than the Democrats. Personally, I'm a Libertarian and am not a fan of either party, but the lesser of the two evils is definitely the Democrats when it comes to personal freedom.

[spikymarv99 0]

I am probably going to get flamed for this, but I think that Republican has a good idea. There should be legislation done with respects to Internet poker. In an ideal world, any bill will focus on (1) making these offshore companies relocate to the US to establish more jobs; (2) taxing these off shore companies; (3) establishing a regulatory body to decide disputes arising from the poker sites (the current regulatory body is a joke); this will help keep our courts from getting bogged down; (4) regulate the growing problem of very young kids playing on the sites.Lets face it, the majority of players on the rooms are Americans. I think our government should get a piece of the pie. This has been done in the past with other buisnesses where the US was the target audience. Would anyone support this type of bill??? Am actually seriously considering going into politics when I finish up my MBA... if so, this might be priority #1

[bascomeb 0]

I am probably going to get flamed for this, but I think that Republican has a good idea.

u can stop right there

[spikymarv99 0]

u can stop right there

Did you read the rest???? Or is that your idea of being funny? Read the rest and tell me if you like it..... This is a serious post that I thought out. If after reading you think it's still stupid then fair enough.

[bascomeb 0]

Did you read the rest???? Or is that your idea of being funny? Read the rest and tell me if you like it..... This is a serious post that I thought out. If after reading you think it's still stupid then fair enough.

i still think its stupid. Relocating to the US and having it taxed would not be good.