1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dismiss Notice
  3. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice

Poll:Best Screenshot of the Month?



Candidates Revealed...Cast your vote!.
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

UK licence query

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by citizenx, Jul 13, 2015.

    Jul 13, 2015
  1. citizenx

    citizenx Meister Member MM

    Occupation:
    Stuff
    Location:
    UK
    So, as a British citizen, if I decide to spend my money with an organisation which doesn't have the express permission of my government to do business with me then that it my right.

    I.may have little protection or recourse if there are issues but as an adult that is my problem.

    So, what right does the government have to restrict which overseas casinos I play with? What sanctions can they apply to those which serve me without a UK licence?

    Just curious and as a libertarian, not really keen on my government dictating the choices I can make.
     
    2 people like this.
  2. Jul 13, 2015
  3. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount.

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Not sure about the current UK situation, but indeed it's starting to look a lot like what we've faced every day for the past several years here in the states... :eek2:
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. Jul 13, 2015
  5. conker

    conker Super Moderator CAG MM webmeister

    Occupation:
    Marketer
    Location:
    UK
    I think you can take your chances with whoever will accept your money.

    Very recently many casinos turned their back on the UK following the introduction of a 15% gaming tax.

    I guess the more deeper you want to hide your casino play the more likely you are to run into the rogue element of this industry.
     
    2 people like this.
  6. Jul 14, 2015
  7. spintee

    spintee Meister Member webby mm2

    Occupation:
    gambler :)
    Location:
    Northants
    I do not think its the government stopping you but more like government stopping the casino,

    The way I see it is that if a casino is offering play to U.K than the Gov wants there share of the pie, I do not no what actions they will take towards casino's that not paying there share but good luck trying to find them ~:)

    I not being told what to do by a bunch of toffee nose plonkers, Most have been caught trying to cheat there tax avoidance any away, They govern them selfs, Look at all rich that was caught putting money in of shore banks & puting some to charity so there tax can be wiped, xxx.channel4.com/news/tax-avoidance-george-michael-melua-arctic-monkeys-liberty

    It started of a few years back when they was trying to tax Google, Amazon, Starbucks:

    xxx/news/magazine-20560359[/url]

    Our country has gone to ruins,
     
    2 people like this.
  8. Jul 14, 2015
  9. KasinoKing

    KasinoKing WebMeister & Slotaholic.. CAG MM PABnonaccred webmeister

    Occupation:
    House-Husband and Casino Advisor
    Location:
    Bexhill on sea, England
    My opinion is, it is exactly the same situation as USA players have been facing since 2006: The ONLY reason the government want to "regulate" online casinos is so that they can tax them like everything else we spend our hard-earned money on. End of story.

    Yes, I agree that having them UK regulated does give the players added protection - but do they really need to take 15% just to cover that? I think not. It's all about the extra tax money.

    KK
     
    6 people like this.
  10. Jul 14, 2015
  11. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount.

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Is there any difference?
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. Jul 14, 2015
  13. KasinoKing

    KasinoKing WebMeister & Slotaholic.. CAG MM PABnonaccred webmeister

    Occupation:
    House-Husband and Casino Advisor
    Location:
    Bexhill on sea, England
    Yes, a big difference!
    The government are not going to go after the individual players - but they WILL go after any casino based in the EU who are not licensed.

    KK
     
    3 people like this.
  14. Jul 14, 2015
  15. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount.

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    But in the end, it's the players that suffer :(
     
    1 person likes this.
  16. Jul 14, 2015
  17. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    I believe it is all about the money...for all governments' rather hollow assurances that the intention is to protect the consumer.

    And TBH I don't see that much evidence that the UK Gambling Commission has been that effective in protecting the consumer...the latest debacle with 666Bet and MetroPlay hardly covered them in glory; they pulled the licence but seemed to be repeatedly caught left-footed as the crisis developed and the management ducked and dived around their obligations to players.

    Now the company has been forced into liquidation, and the only advice the Commission has for players is to contact the liquidator.

    So I guess we will soon see how effective the regulations are on separation of player deposits from casino operational funds, and whether management adhered to them.

    As a general observation I believe governments generally are becoming far too intrusive in every aspect of our lives in areas where the decision and the risk rests with ourselves.
     
    7 people like this.
  18. Jul 14, 2015
  19. citizenx

    citizenx Meister Member MM

    Occupation:
    Stuff
    Location:
    UK
    The way I see it is that its my money and if I want to spend it offshore that is between me and the person or company I'm paying.

    The govt have no business taxing overseas spend of private individuals.

    Consider it like this - you fly out to Vegas and spend in their casinos. You get home and HMRC ask you to pau tax on that - what would you say?

    My response would be rather impolite to say the least!
     
  20. Jul 14, 2015
  21. citizenx

    citizenx Meister Member MM

    Occupation:
    Stuff
    Location:
    UK
    My sentiments exactly.
     
  22. Jul 14, 2015
  23. spintee

    spintee Meister Member webby mm2

    Occupation:
    gambler :)
    Location:
    Northants
    I agree, Before long we will have to have written permission to take a shit,

    Have you heard the latest? There trying to add extra tax on fizzy drink as making kids fat and losing there teeth, Its becoming a big joke, 1st there trying to save the heritage of U.K Pubs ect, So what do they go and do! Ban smoking in them, Which clever dick thought of that idea, Pubs are not youth clubs full of kids its where people go relax and enjoy, Than they sky rocket the price of them, They tried doing this to alcohol as well but so far that's not worked,
     
    1 person likes this.
  24. Jul 14, 2015
  25. citizenx

    citizenx Meister Member MM

    Occupation:
    Stuff
    Location:
    UK
    Indeed. Don't get me wrong even as a smoker (well, vaper these days) I was initially against the ban but now don't mind even if it does mean many pins stink. That said don't go to many these days.

    As for "fizzy drinks" I did hear that and kept thinking that not all.have sugar in them so it's a bit simplistic. Ultimately it boils down to personal responsibility and parents doing their jobs properly.

    We should have to pay just because their little fat brat can't control itself or they're too lazy to look after them properly.
     
    1 person likes this.
  26. Jul 14, 2015
  27. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    The first signs of how are now showing. The curious matter of the Neteller "geolocation error" when UK players deposit (mostly) at casinos that will accept them, but that don't have a UKGC licence. We have Neteller blaming the merchant, and the merchant blaming Neteller, but the result is a curb on UK players' freedom to take the risk and play without protection. One report is of a VISA deposit attempt suddenly encountering a "security issue" and failing.

    The persuading of financial institutions to block deposits to non UKGC licenced casinos was mooted as one measure that could be taken should casinos insist on ignoring the new rules.

    As for the tax on farting (the fizzy drink tax), this is another example of using the tax system for social engineering, the theory being that if you want people to stop doing something, you make sure it's taxed heavily, and if you want to encourage people to do something, you tax it less, or even offer rebates and grants.

    There is, however, a fundamental flaw in this system. The British citizen has now been conditioned to accept tax rate changes as a stimulus intended to change their behaviour, so when the government has to raise tax, but the citizens are not misbehaving sufficiently, they end up applying a stimulus that has the effect of deterring desired behaviours. The EU for example, has just ordered the UK to increase the tax on energy conservation measures by 15%. This will have an unintended consequence, UK citizens will think the urgency is over, and this is no longer a behaviour the government want to encourage, yet the truth is the complete opposite, people have not been doing enough despite the lower tax regime, so the correct stimulus would have been an even further lowering of the tax from 5% to zero, coupled with targeted grants and rebates.

    The tobacco tax is also a problem, as the government want to bring down the level of smoking, but they NEED the revenue generated by tobacco taxes, so are very reliant on smokers refusing to be swayed through higher taxes. Increasing the tax does mean that the revenue falls less due to people quitting than it would otherwise, but eventually there will be a point at which the tax is so high that reluctant smokers are forced to quit, and revenue will plummet.

    I worry that they might one day decide to apply a tax to gambling winnings, now that WILL hurt:eek2: even though my best games have been "taxed into non existence" by Microgaming.
     
  28. Jul 14, 2015
  29. interlog

    interlog Senior Member MM webmeister

    Occupation:
    Manager
    Location:
    London
    If they tax the winnings on gambling, then surely you should be able to offset the losses against your tax too. I believe that is the only reason why the Government in the UK hasn't taxed gambling winnings as yet.
     
  30. Jul 14, 2015
  31. spintee

    spintee Meister Member webby mm2

    Occupation:
    gambler :)
    Location:
    Northants
    @vinylweatherman, If they keep putting tax on shit than its going to end up like a few yeras back of some African countrys One day you can buy a car and the next day you could not even buy a loaf of bread with the same amount of money, It was useless,

    Before long the starling note is not going to be worth the paper its printed on, Greece was nearly wiped out and soon will not be long before others follow Including here,
     
  32. Jul 14, 2015
  33. dunover

    dunover Unofficial T&C's Editor Staff Member CAG PABnononaccred PABnonaccred PABinit mm3 webmeister

    Occupation:
    International Money Launderer
    Location:
    the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
    At the moment smokers pay more than enough tax via their products to cover the cost of treating their ailments on the NHS.

    Now big porkers who consume too much crap food and sugar have NO tax to cover their ailments which are accepted as costing the state far more than those of smokers.

    Therefore because some people DO eat bad food but are still healthy as they brush their teeth and do exercise so don't end up as bloaters it would be unfair (unlike in the case of smokers) to tax their products.

    The answer is we should tax THEM - the fairest way. Each year they should have an appointment with their GP and if they are still excessively fat then their tax-free allowance (or benefits as is often the case) should be reduced for that year. If their BMI has gone down a level on the chart then they get their benefits put back up or tax-fee allowance increased a level.

    Basically the GP's would have a chart that starts at 'normal' (full benefits/tax allowances) up to 'craned out of bed' (hugely obese - starvation benefits) and therefore the issue would slowly be resolved.

    Everyone attacks smokers, who have now been forced by law to indulge their habit outside together in the cold or in isolation so they don't affect you. Fair enough, but no measures have been taken against bloaters and their effects, which can include:

    Excessive sulphurous flatulence.
    Taking 2 seats on trains, planes and buses.
    Barging into you or slowing you down when entering places as you can't pass.
    Bad driving of motability scooters on pavements.
    Excess sweat.
    Producing fat children.

    So financial penalties may indeed work in this case, as they have reduced smoking. But unlike tobacco which is only consumed by smokers, bad food is consumed by healthy people so can't be fairly taxed.
    If this fails they could be put in a modern equivalent of the mediaeval 'stocks' where they are pelted with old fruit and vegetables, a far healthier diet.
     
    1 person likes this.
  34. Jul 14, 2015
  35. goatwack

    goatwack Denny, two is great, but three is a crowd CAG

    Occupation:
    Stuntman
    Location:
    Londonia
    Pretty special isn't it.

    Should've seen the report I read earlier today, according to the Royal College of Surgeons, parents ought to brush their kids' teeth, because the lazy little fat rotters can't do it for themselves.

    My morning coffee shot up via my nose when reading this :mad:
     
    1 person likes this.
  36. Jul 14, 2015
  37. cncas2123

    cncas2123 Senior Member MM

    Occupation:
    Manager
    Location:
    Belfast
    But what if they arent fat, just " big boned" !!!!!!!
     
  38. Jul 14, 2015
  39. spintee

    spintee Meister Member webby mm2

    Occupation:
    gambler :)
    Location:
    Northants
    That shits funny :D but true,
     

Share This Page