| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters 12:00 - Oct 19 with 2864 views | WeWereZombies |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5ydpmy7mj1o
It's a win/win isn't it ? If the government get a smash and grab windfall (over three billion pounds maybe) from taxing the betting companies and the opportunities for chancers to fleece the unwary are reduced. On top of that there is an incentive for seven and a half thousand people to get out of an immoral industry and retrain for more productive work. |  |
| |  |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:09 - Oct 19 with 1928 views | redrickstuhaart |
They wont close shops if they are profitable.
If they are not profitable, then a tax wont make a huge difference and it certainly wont be a loss to our high streets. |  | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:17 - Oct 19 with 1894 views | WeWereZombies |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:09 - Oct 19 by redrickstuhaart |
They wont close shops if they are profitable.
If they are not profitable, then a tax wont make a huge difference and it certainly wont be a loss to our high streets. |
Well exactly, a billionaire saying his company are struggling to make a profit in a far less regulated market than they previously experienced is just blathering. | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:19 - Oct 19 with 1883 views | stickymockwell |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:09 - Oct 19 by redrickstuhaart |
They wont close shops if they are profitable.
If they are not profitable, then a tax wont make a huge difference and it certainly wont be a loss to our high streets. |
something doesn't look quite right with Betfred????
Cash: £67.7M Net Worth: £-98,046,000 Assets: £716.1M Liabilities: £489.9M
Coral have a net worth of 2B |  |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:20 - Oct 19 with 1872 views | nrb1985 |
Agreed.
Also, why is there no CGT on gambling wins?
Utterly bizarre concept that something that often requires a degree of skill like picking good investments gets taxed @ 24% but you don't pay anything lumping on the four dog at Wimbledon... | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:25 - Oct 19 with 1840 views | J2BLUE |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:20 - Oct 19 by nrb1985 |
Agreed.
Also, why is there no CGT on gambling wins?
Utterly bizarre concept that something that often requires a degree of skill like picking good investments gets taxed @ 24% but you don't pay anything lumping on the four dog at Wimbledon... |
Because most people lose so you would need tax breaks for that. |  |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:27 - Oct 19 with 1837 views | J2BLUE |
Thanks for judging my career industry. Nice that you can so flippantly react to job losses.
Imagine if someone posted about being pleased pubs were closing.
(I don't work for Betfred but do work in the industry) | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:31 - Oct 19 with 1814 views | WeWereZombies |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:27 - Oct 19 by J2BLUE |
Thanks for judging my career industry. Nice that you can so flippantly react to job losses.
Imagine if someone posted about being pleased pubs were closing.
(I don't work for Betfred but do work in the industry) |
I know, but I have a couple of family - shall we say incidents - and you are judging the devastation that is caused flippantly. Be glad that I can smile ruefully about it all still. And I did suggest a solution to job losses. | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:32 - Oct 19 with 1809 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:27 - Oct 19 by J2BLUE |
Thanks for judging my career industry. Nice that you can so flippantly react to job losses.
Imagine if someone posted about being pleased pubs were closing.
(I don't work for Betfred but do work in the industry) |
Its is an entirely parasitic industry, which causes enormous harm in many instances. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:35 - Oct 19 with 1780 views | nrb1985 |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:25 - Oct 19 by J2BLUE |
Because most people lose so you would need tax breaks for that. |
So? 80% of retail investors lose money in markets.
The CGT is for the other 20%. | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:39 - Oct 19 with 1762 views | J2BLUE |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:31 - Oct 19 by WeWereZombies |
I know, but I have a couple of family - shall we say incidents - and you are judging the devastation that is caused flippantly. Be glad that I can smile ruefully about it all still. And I did suggest a solution to job losses. |
I literally manage the finances of a close family member due to their gambling addiction.
I don't judge anything flippantly. | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:07 - Oct 19 with 1652 views | WeWereZombies |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:39 - Oct 19 by J2BLUE |
I literally manage the finances of a close family member due to their gambling addiction.
I don't judge anything flippantly. |
Then you should know that the best path for you is to leave gambling as soon as possible and forge a new career, by the way my losses go a bit further than having to manage someone's finances. | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:11 - Oct 19 with 1635 views | stickymockwell |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:39 - Oct 19 by J2BLUE |
I literally manage the finances of a close family member due to their gambling addiction.
I don't judge anything flippantly. |
There's huge taxes on alcohol and cigs! Taxes on sugar. Drugs are illegal. Why should something that's so addictive not be targeted?
I know anyone in the industry would be protective of it, but the misery gambling brings in comparison to its joys is negatable IMO. Its on a level with alcohol and drug addiction. The sooner they ban advertising the better I reckon and I realise that's not going to be popular on here. | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:30 - Oct 19 with 1555 views | nrb1985 |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:18 - Oct 19 by DJR |
That's a killer point. 
Interestingly, prior to 2001 general betting duty was charged on individuals at 6.75% of the value of stakes at bookmakers. But this was abolished and the tax was instead put onto bookmakers.
Maybe one way of softening the blow on high street bookies would be to reintroduce this, perhaps at a lower rate. But no doubt that would be criticised as a tax on the "working man". [Post edited 19 Oct 13:46]
|
Given the cost of living crisis the "working" man who choses to p1ss money up the wall on gambling should be taxed to the hilt. [Post edited 19 Oct 13:33]
| | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:52 - Oct 19 with 1420 views | DJR |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:30 - Oct 19 by nrb1985 |
Given the cost of living crisis the "working" man who choses to p1ss money up the wall on gambling should be taxed to the hilt. [Post edited 19 Oct 13:33]
|
The thing that always puzzled me is that it was a Labour government (with a Chancellor who was a "son of the manse") which, with the Gambling Act 2005, introduced the greatest liberalisation of the gambling industry in a generation.
I personally never thought was a Labour thing to do.
EDIT: I came across this abstract from the following link.
"This article explores the forms of harmful practices and harms experienced by individuals since the implementation of the Gambling Act 2005. Employing the state-corporate crime paradigm as an analytical lens through which to examine the narratives of individuals who gamble and affected family members, and supporting secondary sources, it illustrates the ‘collateral damage’ that has resulted from an industry that embeds harmful practices as a means of capital accumulation. By providing insight into the often-hidden array of economic, physical, emotional, and psychological, and cultural harms that result from the entrenchment of a leisure culture that institutes ever more potent forms of aleatory consumption, the article offers a rare sociological critique of an industry that has been able to flourish as a consequence of an alliance between state and business."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/13607804211072263
This is part of the conclusion.
"Under the Gambling Act 2005, the UK has rapidly developed into a gambler’s paradise. Facilitating rather than constraining gambling provision, the Act has served to consolidate a marketplace that is unencumbered by regulatory measures focused on minimising harm. Advertisements encouraging citizens to gamble are unremittent and help structure an environment in which gambling is increasingly normalised. Marketing strategies mitigate the dangerous risks posed by gambling, while constructing it as a life affirming and (potentially) life changing experience. Alongside the widespread promotion of gambling products and services, opportunities to gamble proliferate, with casinos becoming bigger, gaming machine numbers growing, and the penetration of the domestic sphere by myriad forms of remote wagering continuing unabated. In short, we are now sheep-dipped in gambling." [Post edited 19 Oct 14:07]
|  | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:54 - Oct 19 with 1411 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:52 - Oct 19 by DJR |
The thing that always puzzled me is that it was a Labour government (with a Chancellor who was a "son of the manse") which, with the Gambling Act 2005, introduced the greatest liberalisation of the gambling industry in a generation.
I personally never thought was a Labour thing to do.
EDIT: I came across this abstract from the following link.
"This article explores the forms of harmful practices and harms experienced by individuals since the implementation of the Gambling Act 2005. Employing the state-corporate crime paradigm as an analytical lens through which to examine the narratives of individuals who gamble and affected family members, and supporting secondary sources, it illustrates the ‘collateral damage’ that has resulted from an industry that embeds harmful practices as a means of capital accumulation. By providing insight into the often-hidden array of economic, physical, emotional, and psychological, and cultural harms that result from the entrenchment of a leisure culture that institutes ever more potent forms of aleatory consumption, the article offers a rare sociological critique of an industry that has been able to flourish as a consequence of an alliance between state and business."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/13607804211072263
This is part of the conclusion.
"Under the Gambling Act 2005, the UK has rapidly developed into a gambler’s paradise. Facilitating rather than constraining gambling provision, the Act has served to consolidate a marketplace that is unencumbered by regulatory measures focused on minimising harm. Advertisements encouraging citizens to gamble are unremittent and help structure an environment in which gambling is increasingly normalised. Marketing strategies mitigate the dangerous risks posed by gambling, while constructing it as a life affirming and (potentially) life changing experience. Alongside the widespread promotion of gambling products and services, opportunities to gamble proliferate, with casinos becoming bigger, gaming machine numbers growing, and the penetration of the domestic sphere by myriad forms of remote wagering continuing unabated. In short, we are now sheep-dipped in gambling." [Post edited 19 Oct 14:07]
|
I think it was only then that a wager became enforceable in law. And now its in your face all day everyday, whethe ryou like it or not.
Talksport is possibly the worst culprit. Endless betting advertising disguised as "news" or football content. Normalising the betting as a major and fundamental part of an interest in sport. | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 14:25 - Oct 19 with 1326 views | DJR |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:54 - Oct 19 by redrickstuhaart |
I think it was only then that a wager became enforceable in law. And now its in your face all day everyday, whethe ryou like it or not.
Talksport is possibly the worst culprit. Endless betting advertising disguised as "news" or football content. Normalising the betting as a major and fundamental part of an interest in sport. |
It must be bad if it's worse than Sky Sports.
"During the West Ham United v Aston Villa match, researchers counted 6,491 gambling messages - equalling around 30 per minute.
https://news.sky.com/story/gambling-messages-shown-in-opening-premier-league-wee
If it were down to me, I'd severely limit advertising but no doubt that would go against the "pro-growth" agenda. | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 14:28 - Oct 19 with 1299 views | J2BLUE |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 13:07 - Oct 19 by WeWereZombies |
Then you should know that the best path for you is to leave gambling as soon as possible and forge a new career, by the way my losses go a bit further than having to manage someone's finances. |
I am sorry for your loss.
If you don't mind me asking, was it sports betting or casino/FOBTs? I know it's usually not exclusive but what was the initial issue? My family member never placed a sports bet as far as I know but got addicted to FOBTs.
I have posted on here many times I would support radical legislation on casino games. The fact you can lose £1000 in a couple of minutes on slots is a huge issue. FOBTs are considered the crack cocaine of the gambling industry. As I said, I would support all sorts of legislation to make this safer.
If that is the crack cocaine I would say sports betting (for 99% of people) is the equivalent of having a beer. Most people have the odd few quid on an acca or place a bet on first scorer on a Sunday afternoon.
I love sports and quite frankly I love sports betting. I've made a lot of money from it. Someone above said it takes skill to make a profit and it does. I put a lot of work in. This industry is as close as I will ever get to working in sport. The best path for me is to do what I am good at. The actual company I work for in the industry does not offer casino games or try to get anyone to gamble on casino games. I am perfectly comfortable morally with the work I do.
I understand that I am not as morally pure as 99% of you seem to so effortlessly be and by having a bit of Tesla stock, occasionally checking team news on Twitter and working in this industry I am basically Hitler. | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 14:47 - Oct 19 with 1265 views | OldFart71 |
I do like a little flutter on a Saturday. But as someone who has been betting since before I was allowed and now in my seventies I do believe it is the hardest I have known it to make a profit and whilst my stake is considerably less than it was forty years ago I don't have much sympathy with bookies and whilst it's an individual choice as to whether you bet or not it does have a hold on you like a drug or ciggies.
One of my gripes concerns what bookies did during the pandemic. They closed shops, furloughed staff and then made more than the combined total of shops and online takings.
Therefore they were in effect taking money they didn't need from the government. But due to the lax way governments work they only went after people like Baroness Mome because of her husbands firm selling crap PPE to the NHS.
I understand the concerns of the horse racing industry with regards to job losses. But a huge amount of meetings put on rubbish racing with little prize money and are just there to keep the turnover of the betting firms going. | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:09 - Oct 19 with 1185 views | DJR |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 14:28 - Oct 19 by J2BLUE |
I am sorry for your loss.
If you don't mind me asking, was it sports betting or casino/FOBTs? I know it's usually not exclusive but what was the initial issue? My family member never placed a sports bet as far as I know but got addicted to FOBTs.
I have posted on here many times I would support radical legislation on casino games. The fact you can lose £1000 in a couple of minutes on slots is a huge issue. FOBTs are considered the crack cocaine of the gambling industry. As I said, I would support all sorts of legislation to make this safer.
If that is the crack cocaine I would say sports betting (for 99% of people) is the equivalent of having a beer. Most people have the odd few quid on an acca or place a bet on first scorer on a Sunday afternoon.
I love sports and quite frankly I love sports betting. I've made a lot of money from it. Someone above said it takes skill to make a profit and it does. I put a lot of work in. This industry is as close as I will ever get to working in sport. The best path for me is to do what I am good at. The actual company I work for in the industry does not offer casino games or try to get anyone to gamble on casino games. I am perfectly comfortable morally with the work I do.
I understand that I am not as morally pure as 99% of you seem to so effortlessly be and by having a bit of Tesla stock, occasionally checking team news on Twitter and working in this industry I am basically Hitler. |
Not in my view.
Each to their own is my philosophy. | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:11 - Oct 19 with 1174 views | OldFart71 |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 12:20 - Oct 19 by nrb1985 |
Agreed.
Also, why is there no CGT on gambling wins?
Utterly bizarre concept that something that often requires a degree of skill like picking good investments gets taxed @ 24% but you don't pay anything lumping on the four dog at Wimbledon... |
I think if you levy a tax on winnings then you would have to make some concession on losses. Maybe as with many forms of tax you could tax winnings above a certain amount. Say £5000 -£25,000 at 5%, £25,000 -£50,000 at 10% and anything above that at 20%.
That would hit the high rollers who have money to throw around.
Smaller punters probably don't win large amounts that often and to tax someone winning a couple of hundred would kill off betting altogether meaning the government wouldn't make anything out of it. | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:18 - Oct 19 with 1140 views | WeWereZombies |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 14:28 - Oct 19 by J2BLUE |
I am sorry for your loss.
If you don't mind me asking, was it sports betting or casino/FOBTs? I know it's usually not exclusive but what was the initial issue? My family member never placed a sports bet as far as I know but got addicted to FOBTs.
I have posted on here many times I would support radical legislation on casino games. The fact you can lose £1000 in a couple of minutes on slots is a huge issue. FOBTs are considered the crack cocaine of the gambling industry. As I said, I would support all sorts of legislation to make this safer.
If that is the crack cocaine I would say sports betting (for 99% of people) is the equivalent of having a beer. Most people have the odd few quid on an acca or place a bet on first scorer on a Sunday afternoon.
I love sports and quite frankly I love sports betting. I've made a lot of money from it. Someone above said it takes skill to make a profit and it does. I put a lot of work in. This industry is as close as I will ever get to working in sport. The best path for me is to do what I am good at. The actual company I work for in the industry does not offer casino games or try to get anyone to gamble on casino games. I am perfectly comfortable morally with the work I do.
I understand that I am not as morally pure as 99% of you seem to so effortlessly be and by having a bit of Tesla stock, occasionally checking team news on Twitter and working in this industry I am basically Hitler. |
It goes back much further than the modern disease of internet enabled gambling or any of the other methods enabled by the 2005 Act. I was there when the follow on of the addiction was made evident but as a seven year old I didn't understand what was happening, my childlike plea to Dad to cheer up had no effect. More than sixty years later I can still see the adverse results that have taken a great deal from my family's life, and a stark illumination happened to me in my working life when my Personnel manager almost taunted me about gullible farmers at The Belstead Brook Hotel. Other people do not always have that much sympathy for the lives of people affected by gambling. It's something to snigger about behind your back. So, no one died but everyone was poorer and things really fell apart.
The other incident is too recent and too raw to discuss at the moment.
And I do mean it, get the hell out of gambling and never indulge in it again | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:31 - Oct 19 with 1096 views | J2BLUE |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:18 - Oct 19 by WeWereZombies |
It goes back much further than the modern disease of internet enabled gambling or any of the other methods enabled by the 2005 Act. I was there when the follow on of the addiction was made evident but as a seven year old I didn't understand what was happening, my childlike plea to Dad to cheer up had no effect. More than sixty years later I can still see the adverse results that have taken a great deal from my family's life, and a stark illumination happened to me in my working life when my Personnel manager almost taunted me about gullible farmers at The Belstead Brook Hotel. Other people do not always have that much sympathy for the lives of people affected by gambling. It's something to snigger about behind your back. So, no one died but everyone was poorer and things really fell apart.
The other incident is too recent and too raw to discuss at the moment.
And I do mean it, get the hell out of gambling and never indulge in it again |
I won't be doing that but wish you all the best. | |
| |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:37 - Oct 19 with 1078 views | DJR |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:18 - Oct 19 by WeWereZombies |
It goes back much further than the modern disease of internet enabled gambling or any of the other methods enabled by the 2005 Act. I was there when the follow on of the addiction was made evident but as a seven year old I didn't understand what was happening, my childlike plea to Dad to cheer up had no effect. More than sixty years later I can still see the adverse results that have taken a great deal from my family's life, and a stark illumination happened to me in my working life when my Personnel manager almost taunted me about gullible farmers at The Belstead Brook Hotel. Other people do not always have that much sympathy for the lives of people affected by gambling. It's something to snigger about behind your back. So, no one died but everyone was poorer and things really fell apart.
The other incident is too recent and too raw to discuss at the moment.
And I do mean it, get the hell out of gambling and never indulge in it again |
Sorry to hear that. | | | |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 16:31 - Oct 19 with 977 views | nrb1985 |
| Get in, Rache, lump on 'em...but tax the companies not the punters on 15:11 - Oct 19 by OldFart71 |
I think if you levy a tax on winnings then you would have to make some concession on losses. Maybe as with many forms of tax you could tax winnings above a certain amount. Say £5000 -£25,000 at 5%, £25,000 -£50,000 at 10% and anything above that at 20%.
That would hit the high rollers who have money to throw around.
Smaller punters probably don't win large amounts that often and to tax someone winning a couple of hundred would kill off betting altogether meaning the government wouldn't make anything out of it. |
Yes of course.
It should simply be taxed as CGT so you can offset loses etc.
But to have no CGT on winnings seems bizarre. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
