GPWA
Welcome, Guest  [Log In -or- Join GPWA]
  Advanced Search

 
Go Back   Gambling Portal Webmasters Association > Public > Industry Buzz
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

  #1 (permalink)  
Old 27th-February-2008, 12:31 AM
The Buzz's Avatar
The Buzz Offline
Gossip-hound
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Newton, MA
Posts: 856
Thanks: 10
Thanked 52 Times in 39 Posts
Default Senators send letter to Treasury Dept. critical of UIGEA regulations

Two Republican Senators have sent a letter to the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve critical of their response to the UIGEA. The letter is quoted below ...

Quote:
Dear Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke,

The effectiveness of any law is reliant on sound implementation. Federal regulations are intended to provide clarity and guidance for those subjected to their reach. The value of such regulations is to prevent non-compliance while minimizing wasted effort, time, and cost by those being regulated. Clear rules also promote interstate commerce by facilitating uniform enforcement.

In this spirit, your agencies have an opportunity to provide additional guidance in the implementation of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of2006 (UIGEA). While the October Notice of Proposed Rulemaking contains certain guidance for the regulated community, it leaves sufficient ambiguity as to what sort of transactions are to be blocked. In failing to provide more detail, the proposed rules would inordinately burden every bank, credit union, credit card company, money transmitting business and payment system in the country, leading to non-uniform compliance and confusion. This issue is particularly important, as most federal and state gambling laws predate the Internet, and are less than specific as to their application to particular practices or circumstances.

The extensive public comments received on this issue highlight the likelihood that risk-averse financial institutions will simply choose to block every transaction that may be interpreted or could resemble gambling, whether legal or not. Knowing that this is not your intention, we write to urge that any final rules contain a list of restricted transactions and instances that are covered by the law and the corresponding rules.

As an alternative, we suggest you consider separating the rules into those forms of activities for which there is settled federal law (i.e., defined by the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA)) and those that are not. This would allow immediate implementation for known activities, while providing greater time to determine what other transactions are to be captured.

We thank you in advance for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Sen. John E. Sununu [R-NH]
Sen. Pete Domenici [R-NM]
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00 PM.
Mark Forums Read | View Forum Leaders

 Contact Us  |  Top