Today's PPA Update...

[Talking Poker]

This is the first I've heard about a couple of these bills. I wonder if Kurn will approve of the one that has the "revenue component."

[Invigilator]

I remember seeing Fulltilt run a Bad Beat on Cancer tournament that included Furst and Gordon. It was $5+$5 to raise money.

Has Stars or site done something like that for the PPA.

Get some star power in a tournament to get donations fromt he schmoes?

[Talking Poker]

I believe they got MOST of their membership when a couple of the sites (Full Tilt was first) offered large bonuses for becoming a member. ie, donate $100 and get a $200 bonus - that sort of thing.

[lightfungus]

I may be too lazy to read where this money is going, but could anyone summarize what they are doing with millions of dollars of donations? A bi-annual email?

[Kurn]

I wonder if Kurn will approve of the one that has the "revenue component."


I just read the outline of the Revenue Amendment which is basically a tax-enforcement rider. I'm sure it simply outlines the proceedures that need to be put in place to ensure reporting and collection of all internet-gambling generated revenues.

What it is not is a bill to amend the tax code. Why would the supporters of the Frank bill want to amend the tax code in such a way that would decrease expected tax revenues from the legalization of internet gambling?

IMO this will be a nightmare, and the only solace that I take is that the Frank bill, once the NCAA, MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL lobby get going, has no chance of passing.

I stand by all my previous posts. I favor the status quo of a toothless UIGEA than the brave new world of legal internet gambling watched over by a fanged IRS.

[Invigilator]

I remember seeing that. I see a tournament as a easy fundraiser that a lot of people, both members and non-members would play if they had some star power (ie team pokerstars) in the game. It won't make millions but it would help raise money and maybe new members.

[Talking Poker]

You always call it toothless, yet here I am not playing on Party Poker, let alone offering you guys rake back there. And did I mention that the gums of said tiger (since there are no teeth) have wiped out (total guestimate to follow) 70% of the completely dead money players, leaving the more skilled players behind.

I don't know about you, but for me, those false teeth bite a lot harder than me paying taxes on my online poker winnings, which I do anyway.

[Reel Deal]

Yes, please Barney, bring back the fish!

[Kurn]

But my point is, and always has been, that once all the moderately losing and break even fish who aren't property owners get their tax bills, they're going to leave anyway.

How do you think a break-even player who has, say $6,500 in winning sessions and $6,500 in losing sessions will react when 6-15 months after the first year of legaliztion he gets a letter from the IRS asking him for the $900 in back taxes plus $500 more of interest and penalties? Do you think he'll say "Oh well, that's the cost of my hobby" and keep playing?

What about the casual player with a little bigger bankroll who all of sudden finds out he can't deduct student loan interest or contribute to his Roth because his break-even poker playing has added 6 figures to his AGI?? Will he keep playing?



Party will return, affiliate programs will return and both of those will be back to stay. The fish will return for a year, then be gone forever.

That's my last word on this. I'm not going to all worked up anymore about a bill that has less than a snowball's chance in Hell of becoming law.

[Invigilator]

That would make for some interesting family discussion at the dinner table at the very least!

[Talking Poker]

I understand your point - believe me, I do. But I think you are missing my points:

1. The people you are describing are cheating on their taxes already if they aren't reporting their poker income (and losses) properly.

2. Legalizing online gambling and the tax codes related to gambling are two very different things. Yes, they both have gambling in common, but that's it. Don't hate online gambling because it won't be as easy to cheat on your taxes any more. It is what it is. Hate the tax laws (which are horribly out of date - we all agree) and attack those separately. There is no chicken/egg relationship here. In fact, the tax laws ALREADY suck (for the very few of us who apparently don't cheat on our taxes and report all of our wins and losses), regardless of the legality of online gambling, so call you congressman and get him to introduce a bill to change those now.

They are two different things, and you are insisting on lumping them together. You're a math guys. Basically, this is what you are saying:

(Illegal online gambling + shitty tax laws) > (Legal online gambling + shitty tax laws)

SURELY you can see if the "shitty tax laws" are what you hate about the above equation, they cancel out on both sides and have nothing to do with the legality of online gambling:

(Illegal online gambling + shitty tax laws) > (Legal online gambling + shitty tax laws)

So that leaves us with you saying:

(Illegal online gambling) > (Legal online gambling)

And that's where we disagree. Me - I want it legalized. I'll worry about everyone else's taxes a couple of years (minimum) after online gambling is legalized.

The day that Party Poker has your SSN and is sending giant reports of all of your wins and losses to the IRS is far, far, far down the road. In fact, I would guess that day will never come. You will likely get 1099G'd for your either your total income over the year, or more likely, you'll get hit with individual 1099Gs for big tourney wins only - just like happens in B&M casinos now.

You talk about the UIGEA being a toothless tiger, despite the bite it's had on numerous poker sites, Neteller, etc, etc, etc. Meanwhile, you seem to be much more afraid of an invisible, sleeping tiger.

[Kurn]

In a way, this discussion is futile. Legal is better than illegal. But, you and I clearly have a different philosophical perspective on the morality of complying with certain laws, which seems to be the basis for the friction we're having on this topic. And that's cool. As Mark Twain said "differences of opinion are what make horse races."

<dreaming of a 21st century equivalent to the burning of the HMS Gaspee>

[Talking Poker]

Don't get me wrong - I think the gambling related tax laws are ridiculous. I guess what it boils down to is your "main point:"

I think online poker (and more specifically, the amount of money I take home from it at the end of the year) will be better off if it's legalized and regulated. You don't. And that's fine. It's a difference of opinion.

All I'm saying is that there are better way for you to hate/protest/FIX the gambling tax laws than to be Mr. Anti-PPA and Mr. Anti-Legalizing online gamble.

Edit: Also, I hope you realize that pleading ignorance DOES NOT WORK when it comes to tax evasion. THAT is one thing that is very clear in our tax laws.

[Kurn]

While the IRS can be real hard-ass about some things, on others they can be remarkably reasonable. I think this is one of the situations where they will be reasonable.