4 of a kind
Repeated violations of forum rule 1.16 - troll
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Location
- New York
Joint decision by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve push the deadline for enforcement of the UIGEA back to next June.
Joint decision by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve push the deadline for enforcement of the UIGEA back to next June.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) The U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve on Friday delayed the implementation date for a new Internet gambling payment ban for six months, a move that gives lawmakers time to overturn it or end confusion over illegal practices.
In a joint statement, the Treasury and Fed said the December 1 implementation date for the law passed in 2006 would not be achievable for some financial institutions. They set a new compliance deadline of June 1, 2010.
"Commentators expressed concern that the act and the final regulation do not provide a clear definition of 'unlawful Internet gambling,' which is central to compliance," the two agencies said.
In addition, they said certain members of Congress have "expressed an intent to consider legislation that would allow problematic aspects of the act to be addressed."
The 2006 law, which cost European Internet gambling companies billions of euros in lost market value, prohibits credit card, check, and electronic fund transfer payments by U.S.-regulated financial institutions in connection with "unlawful Internet gambling."
But rather than define what types of gambling are illegal online, the bill relied on existing federal and state laws to answer that question. It also still allowed any online horse race betting permissible under the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978.
FRANK SEEKING TO OVERTURN BAN
Congress passed the anti-gambling legislation in 2006, when Republicans still controlled both the House and Senate. The final regulations issued to enforce the ban were issued by the Treasury and Fed just before former President George W. Bush left office in January.
Representative Barney Frank, who chairs the House Financial Services Committee, in October urged a 12-month delay in the implementation because of confusion over what kinds of online gambling were illegal under the bill.
Frank's committee in September 2008 passed a bill to overturn the ban, but the full House never acted on the measure. Frank earlier this year reintroduced the bill, which would effectively overturn the ban and create a framework for the Treasury to license Internet gambling operators, collect taxes from them and enforce rules for transparency.
On Friday, Frank praised the Treasury and the Fed for delaying the regulations, which he said would "curtail the freedom of Americans to use the Internet as they choose" and put unrealistic burdens on financial institutions.
"This will give us a chance to act in an unhurried manner on my legislation to undo this regulatory excess by the Bush administration and to undo this ill-advised law," Frank said in a statement.
Frank has scheduled a hearing next Thursday on the legislation, dubbed the "Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection and Enforcement Act."
The six-month delay will allow banks to establish policies and procedures to require gambling businesses to document the legality of their activities, the Treasury and Fed said.
this is the story i saw in the newspaper.
we have a reprive
pevangel
Thanks to you and 4ofakind for this positive news but what newspaper are we talking about?...WASHINGTON (Reuters) The U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve on Friday delayed the implementation date for a new Internet gambling payment ban for six months, a move that gives lawmakers time to overturn it or end confusion over illegal practices.
In a joint statement, the Treasury and Fed said the December 1 implementation date for the law passed in 2006 would not be achievable for some financial institutions. They set a new compliance deadline of June 1, 2010.
"Commentators expressed concern that the act and the final regulation do not provide a clear definition of 'unlawful Internet gambling,' which is central to compliance," the two agencies said.
In addition, they said certain members of Congress have "expressed an intent to consider legislation that would allow problematic aspects of the act to be addressed."
The 2006 law, which cost European Internet gambling companies billions of euros in lost market value, prohibits credit card, check, and electronic fund transfer payments by U.S.-regulated financial institutions in connection with "unlawful Internet gambling."
But rather than define what types of gambling are illegal online, the bill relied on existing federal and state laws to answer that question. It also still allowed any online horse race betting permissible under the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978.
FRANK SEEKING TO OVERTURN BAN
Congress passed the anti-gambling legislation in 2006, when Republicans still controlled both the House and Senate. The final regulations issued to enforce the ban were issued by the Treasury and Fed just before former President George W. Bush left office in January.
Representative Barney Frank, who chairs the House Financial Services Committee, in October urged a 12-month delay in the implementation because of confusion over what kinds of online gambling were illegal under the bill.
Frank's committee in September 2008 passed a bill to overturn the ban, but the full House never acted on the measure. Frank earlier this year reintroduced the bill, which would effectively overturn the ban and create a framework for the Treasury to license Internet gambling operators, collect taxes from them and enforce rules for transparency.
On Friday, Frank praised the Treasury and the Fed for delaying the regulations, which he said would "curtail the freedom of Americans to use the Internet as they choose" and put unrealistic burdens on financial institutions.
"This will give us a chance to act in an unhurried manner on my legislation to undo this regulatory excess by the Bush administration and to undo this ill-advised law," Frank said in a statement.
Frank has scheduled a hearing next Thursday on the legislation, dubbed the "Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection and Enforcement Act."
The six-month delay will allow banks to establish policies and procedures to require gambling businesses to document the legality of their activities, the Treasury and Fed said.
this is the story i saw in the newspaper.
we have a reprive
pevangel
Thanks to you and 4ofakind for this positive news but what newspaper are we talking about?...
For Immediate Release:
November 27, 2009
Frank Statement on Implementation of Internet Gambling Regulations
Washington, DCHouse Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank today made the following statement after the announcement by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve that it would delay implementation of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) for six months:
The Department of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors deserve a great deal of credit for suspending these midnight regulations promulgated by the Bush administration which would curtail the freedom of Americans to use the internet as they choose and which would pose unrealistic burdens on the entire financial community, said Congressman Frank. This will give us a chance to act in an unhurried manner on my legislation to undo this regulatory excess by the Bush administration and to undo this ill-advised law.
I just posted a great video where CNBC's Melissa Francis interviewed Height Analytics managing partner Andrew Parmentire and Oppenheimer gaming analyst David Katz to discuss what their thoughts were as far as online gambling soon being legalized in the United States. The article is located Old / Expired Link
____
____
I certainly hope that regulation of online casinos is not going to benefit just online versions of current brick and mortar casinos, but also Wagerlogic, Galewind, RTG, Microgaming, Playtech, and other casino software platforms.
It seems like they made much ado about Harrah's coming online as if existing land casinos are the only ones to be "allowed" online in the regulated environment.
I got a strong feeling that ANY casino that currently takes US players... will be denied a license if regulation comes to pass.
I have mixed feelings. I do know there are a few very good and honest casinos that currently operate inside the US.I'm certainly not complaining if this happens....
Yea, I agree
Accordingly, the way they are supposedly setting it up is for any online gaming company to be able to be licensed and regulated as long as they can submit to and pass the rigorous standards that are to be set in place. This is a good thing though.
Only the brightest and best will be allowed to operate in the legalized market. Once the legalized online gaming market is set in place then why would anyone venture away from that to play at an online casino that was not regulated?
I do hope that some of my personal online favorites will be able to pass the stringent tests.
____
____
I think we can all rest assured that if online gambling gets regulated inside the US we will only see companies that have followed the letter and the 'spirit' of the law to a tee allowed in the market.
All the officials that have voiced support of regulation have also said that 'stringent' requirements and a history of following laws will be REQUIRED to be licensed in the US.
I got a strong feeling that ANY casino that currently takes US players... will be denied a license if regulation comes to pass.
I think your right to a point about unlicensed casinos. However, as someone already pointed out, why would anyone, with a working brain, play at a an unlicensed, unregulated online casino when there would be government licensed and regulated online casinos to play at?Agreed but I doubt whether the ones already operating there will just walk away. What I guess it menas is that the licenced ones will be the ones that get the attention.
The most interesting thing about the Harrahs deal IMO is that they have teamed up with 888. That's a big tell.