Poker Players Alliance Forums » Poker Players Alliance

PPA requests delay in UIGEA implementation

(10 posts)
  • Started 4 months ago by Big Jim Slade v2.0
  • Latest reply from Big Jim Slade v2.0

No tags yet.


  1. Big Jim Slade v2.0
    Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    Will we still be playing poker online on December 1st?

    http://www.onlinepoker.net/poker-news/poker-law-industry-news/poker-players-alliance-delay-uigeas-december-1st-deadline/1695
    U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has now received a petition from the PPA ‘interest group’ requesting an extension of one year to the December deadline under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)....

    http://www.pokernews.com/news/2009/10/poker-player-alliance-files-petition-to-delay-uigea-complian-7373.htm
    The letter called the statute "flawed" and said it would put "an unreasonable burden on regulators and the financial services industry at a time of economic crisis."

    Posted 4 months ago #
  2. Robert Hughes
    Member
    Visit User Profile

    Why would we want Barney Franks Bill to become law exactly? I am having no issues playing online anywhere and who wants to be taxed more? As I understand this Bill, the Feds would regulate and tax our play. What is wrong with leaving well enough alone? I suppose I am missing something, but I can't figure out what exactly. Please advise?

    Posted 4 months ago #
  3. TheEngineer
    State Director & Forum Admin
    Visit User Profile

    Ssiman,

    What is "well enough"? Didn't you notice the DoJ seizing our funds. Didn't you notice good sites bailing on the US? Didn't you notice your fellow poker players' bank accounts getting closed? Didn't you notice the games getting tougher every day? Which part if this is "well enough" for you?

    Check out http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/152/fight-poker-rights-ppa/why-should-poker-players-support-federal-online-poker-legislation-567829 and http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=14329638&postcount=63 for more.

    P.S. This bill does not add new taxes to players.

    Posted 4 months ago #
  4. Big Jim Slade v2.0
    Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    I have to ask about your comment of no new taxes for players. Just where is this new tax money coming from?

    My understanding is that the bulk of this new tax money is coming from players in the form of state and local income taxes on their winnings. I understood that under the current unregulated situation income taxes are not paid. Under regulation I thought it had been determined that new tax income would be derived by the reporting and taxing of winnings.

    If this is so, then technically there are no new tax laws for players, but it is tax money players will be newly paying.

    What sort of breakdown on the new tax money is there? What is the source of the new tax money?

    Posted 3 months ago #
  5. Big Jim Slade v2.0
    Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    We got a six month delay in the implementation of the UIGEA. So now the 2006 law cannot be implemented until June 1, 2010 at the earliest.

    http://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/8053-poker-players-grateful-as-uigea-delayed-six-months

    What I find most interesting about this is that it was not a PPA only effort. At least in name this was a coalition of several groups all joined to a common cause. The petition to the Treasury included the National Thoroughbred Racing Association and the American Greyhound Track Operators Association.

    If the PPA wants to get wins it is my belief that they are going to have to form even broader coalitions on future issues.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  6. TheEngineer
    State Director & Forum Admin
    Visit User Profile

    Originally posted by Big Jim Slade
    I have to ask about your comment of no new taxes for players. Just where is this new tax money coming from?

    My understanding is that the bulk of this new tax money is coming from players in the form of state and local income taxes on their winnings. I understood that under the current unregulated situation income taxes are not paid. Under regulation I thought it had been determined that new tax income would be derived by the reporting and taxing of winnings.

    If this is so, then technically there are no new tax laws for players, but it is tax money players will be newly paying.

    What sort of breakdown on the new tax meny is there? What is the source of the new tax money?

    Why wouldn't players be paying taxes today? I guess some have been evading taxes, but I've been paying mine and I assume many others have been as well.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  7. Big Jim Slade v2.0
    Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    The Engineer said:

    Why wouldn't players be paying taxes today? I guess some have been evading taxes, but I've been paying mine and I assume many others have been as well.

    I do not have visibility on who has or hasn't been paying taxes on online poker winnings. That would be speculation on my part, and I'm not in a position to speculate.

    So I am left uncertain as to your answer. Apparently you are either saying that online poker players will not be providing this "new" tax revenue because they already pay their taxes. Or you are saying that the new tax revenue is primarily from other sources.

    The various studies talk of millions of dollars in new tax revenue. I've not read the primary material -- the actual studies. So I am uncertain as to where it comes from. I don't understand how the bill does or does not add new taxes to players.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  8. TheEngineer
    State Director & Forum Admin
    Visit User Profile

    BJS,

    Some of the increased revenue does indeed comes from improved tax compliance from winning players. True, some of that is newly paid, but it's money that was already owed.

    The rest comes from the licensing fees, which range from 2% of deposits in the Frank bill to 10% of deposits in the Menendez bill (payable by sites, not players).

    Posted 3 months ago #
  9. CJP711
    Member
    Visit User Profile

    Here is what you guys are failing to realize

    #1 All money EARNED from poker is considered EARNED income
    #2 If the alliance is not successful at this ALL online PAY Poker will cease to
    exist, it will be ILLEGAL to get PAID by the financial institutions
    #3 This will improve play and pay, because most of the PAY and PLAY sites,including the Big One, is located off shore from the United States and this will bring them into
    the US.
    #4 Around 10 - 15% of online poker players earn a very significant income playing
    online and in tournaments and casinos

    Posted 2 months ago #
  10. Big Jim Slade v2.0
    Moderator
    Visit User Profile

    CJP711 admonished us by saying

    what you guys are failing to realize [is] all money EARNED from poker is considered EARNED income

    You are correct. I did not realize this. In fact I had often considered that until 1986 all money EARNED from poker was NOT earned income.

    To some degree that was changed, depending upon which agency you ask and under which conditions. In 1986 future poker hall of fame inductee Billy Baxter sued the government in the case Baxter v. United States to try to get the government to reverse the idea that poker winnings were UNEARNED INCOME. Baxter wanted them to be treated as EARNED INCOME, which the IRS refused to allow. Baxter's concern was that UNEARNED INCOME is taxed at a maximum 70% rate, while EARNED INCOME is taxed at a maximum 50% rate. This was a difference of $178K in taxes on his $1.2 million in winnings.

    Poker tournament winners tend to qualify for the maximum tax rate :)

    Earned income is income based on active work you do - wages, tips, etc. Unearned income is based on passive earnings such as rental properties, interest, and dividends. For the average person the EARNED distinction allows the income to be applied towards an IRA. So generally, a poker player wants his earnings to be EARNED income.

    However, even with the court ruling, it would appear that poker winnings are generally UNEARNED income. In the court case Baxter's attorneys attempted to apply the question of was he engaged in a trade or business with personal services income. The court noted that "if Baxter derived his gaming income actively from his expenditure of time, energy, and skill rather than passively from his use of his property, then his gaming income constitutes 'earned income'."

    The government argued that his bankroll was a capital investment in his passive activity of playing poker.

    The trial court considered two tests - the goods and services test, and the facts and circumstances test.

    Based on the circumstances test, the court sided with Baxter and declared that Baxter did in fact have EARNED income. But for other people this only applies in some circumstances. For many, income from poker is still UNEARNED income. Unless you can tell me of a later ruling that encompasses all poker winnings.

    And yes. People do think I am crazy. But not because I don't know enough, but because I know too much.

    Posted 2 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.