CNBC had a segment...


Full Member
Sep 22, 2006
on Rep. Barney Frank's attempt to lift the on-line gambling prohibition in the U.S. today at about 1:30 p.m. If I heard correctly, the bill would attempt to make more regulations for on-line gambling, including an eventual method to collect tax for on-line winnings. Personally....I would like to see some of the casino's that opted to stop U.S. players from playing at their casino's allow us back. I miss playing at some of those casinos...but, I would rather keep it the way it presently is rather than lift the ban and end up being required to pay tax on winnings. In the number of times I have been lucky enough to win, I have always been paid and never been screwed by an on-line casino and that includes under current regulations. In my opinion, the worst thing about on-line gambling is the way on-line casinos hold you by a sensitive body part until they are good and ready to pay you. There is truly no technically good reason to make one wait a month for your winnings. Oddly enough, the casino hurts themself while making me wait because I will not play their casino again until I have my winnings in my pocket.
Anyway, glad to have this forum to express my thoughts.


Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht
Jan 18, 2007
I would almost prefer it to stay as it is too, but by July 9 the UIGEA is actually supposed to take effect (or at least the regulations are supposed to be issued to processors by then) and I'm afraid it will get harder and harder for us and every transaction will probabaly be at risk of siezure.

As it is now there are some pretty creative things going on for deposits and withdrawals - I expect many of them to dry up within a month or two.
Some transactions are going through several intermediaries and that in itself may become a red flag.
And with enough pressure US banks will soon stop processing the preferred card's bank transactions.

The good news is that the last operational bulletin issued by
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
(January 16) states that anything other than sports betting is not known to violate the law.

Although NACHA is working with the agencies to determine how the new
regulations will affect the ACH Network, NACHA understands that the Department of
Justice believes that existing federal law prohibits many Internet gambling transactions
and that in many cases the Internet Gambling Act merely restates the current law. For
example, a court has ruled that a sports betting Internet gambling site violated the Wire
Act and enjoined processing payments for that site.2 However, the full scope of any
existing prohibition against Internet gambling, and the processing of payments for
Internet gambling sites, under federal law is unclear and has not been fully tested in the
Financial institutions should be aware that Internet gambling operations may be
contrary to existing federal or state law. Knowingly originating or processing ACH
entries on behalf of companies that are directly involved in, or companies that facilitate,
illegal Internet gambling involves legal risk for ODFIs and merchant processors.
NACHA reminds financial institutions that (i) they should know their customers
and (ii) they should not be originating for companies doing illegal business. Also, in the
case of financial institutions processing entries that are received through a third-party
service provider, the financial institutions should know their customers customer.

Here's a link to a link to the actual bill THE BILL or
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I'm afraid the glory days are over Richtree, and it's a bummer, but we stand a small chance of something like guilt-free online gambling if the bill miraculously passes.

Good luck:thumbsup: