Study says U.S. would raise billions taxing online gaming

[The Buzz]

With the U.S. economy tanking, many people in our industry say that a good way to raise revenue would be to legalize and tax online gambling.

Well, one of the "Big Four" accounting firms agrees.

PricewaterhouseCoopers released a study that said the U.S. raise nearly $52 billion in revenue over the next decade by lifting a three-year-old ban on Internet gambling and taxing the activity instead.

From Reuters:

"There is a dramatic need to have a regulated system that protects American consumers. Right now, it's the Wild West," Jeffrey Sandman, a spokesman for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative, told Reuters on Wednesday.

[Betpartners]

Indeed

Also seems that the EU is putting pressure on behind the scenes, a theory backed up by the fact the European gaming companies have lost tons of money

A three-year-old ban on Internet gambling may have to be lifted so the US government can tax gambling companies.

European online companies lost billions when the US Congress passed a 2006 law to squash online gambling by barring businesses from accepting payments in connection with Internet gambling.

Despite the ban, US online gambling has grown to a point that a tax on Internet gambling would be 22 percent higher than it was in 2007.

PricewaterhouseCoopers has released a report to say the US needs a regulated Internet gambling system that protects American consumers.

source

[Caruso]

With the U.S. economy tanking, many people in our industry say that a good way to raise revenue would be to legalize and tax online gambling.

PricewaterhouseCoopers has released a report to say the US needs a regulated Internet gambling system that protects American consumers.

I think I just pissed myself.

Assuming 40% tax, PWC are saying that introducing the means to cause the US population as a whole to lose $120,000,000,000 anually is somehow desirable, representing a form of "protection".

And that's at a time when the US economy is reeling.

Err, no.

PWC have it backwards.

Why would anyone wish a $50,000,000,000 windfall for the government, when that tax take represents $120,000,000,000 in financial hardship for US citizens?

What profit-driven opportunism and moral bankruptcy.

[LuckyLove8]

Why would anyone wish a $50,000,000,000 windfall for the government, when that tax take represents $120,000,000,000 in financial hardship for US citizens?

What profit-driven opportunism and moral bankruptcy.

hmm... well Obama's health care plan and all his other left wing goodies are going to need to be bankrolled somehow.. taxing the rich only works in the short term until highly paid accountants work out ways to pay less tax than the average joe.. bleeding hearts can't cry both ways, this kind of tax revenue represents alot of teachers, policeman and nurses.

and in anycase we are still talking about adult entertainment. Online casinos are never going to put a gun to peoples head and force them to gamble. There is a strong utilitarian argument of free choice and that the demand for online gambling represents good entertainment, enjoyment and pleasure for many adults. People are best off being allowed to choose how to spend their own money as they see fit and its not anyone's place to tell them otherwise.

[Caruso]

People are best off being allowed to choose how to spend their own money as they see fit and its not anyone's place to tell them otherwise.

Would you legalise heroine and crack?

[casinoranking]

Tthe USA could easily afford to provide universal health care like every other 1st world country in the world. The reason the USA is in the toilet is because of the endless war mongering. Look at how much Bush is willing to spend on a dozen helicopters.

Over 50% of the budget goes to defense/military and other spending. So you have education, healthcare, transportation, and anything else of vital importance receiving less than half of your your tax dollars.

So maybe redirect the blame where its due. How many nuclear warheads, biological weapons, and tanks do you need?

Right now money has to be spent for damage control.

But back to this post, even if the government received 50 billion in taxes it would hardly amount to anything with all of the spending I have to agree with this.

[Caruso]

Can't argue with that.

My point was only in relation to the matter at hand.