Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
From 15 to possibly 20-25% according to yesterday's Financial Times. Huge increase if true 
Budget to be presented next monday.
Budget to be presented next monday.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 15
|
By:
base commission 6% then
|
|
By:
to do with decreased revenue from FOBT's
|
|
By:
If the business could survive at 6%, wouldn't they have already raised it to that level?
|
|
By:
they want to maintain optimum revenue, so they can either accept reduced revenue by paying the tax themselves or increase commission to a level that reduces revenue, but not as much as taking the entire hit themselves.
They have already increased commission in many countries that charge higher tax. |
|
By:
The absolute final nail in the coffin of independent bookmakers, already in place, being hammered in.
While the big firms originate their accounts and offices offshore. Everything as ever, helps the biggest firms. |
|
By:
they could use the higher commission to advertise the exchange (as previously promised)
and not use the brand to lure folk straight to the sportsbook/casino |
|
By:
It won't affect the online stuff much as that is all off shore, and there seems to be no burden of proof of taxable profits.
|
|
By:
Fair enough, dave. We'll see.
Not sure whether the comparison with other countries is necessarily valid though. The competition might be less severe in those jurisdictions. Over here you still have a range of betting shops in some sort of competition with each other to offer commission-free low margins. That sort of thing isn't really a factor overseas. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
UK customers using online companies based offshore, lose that money to offshore companies. That profit is then self-declared.
I think it unlikely that the true numbers for full tax revenue is provable. Fiddling is never checked, because, as I understand it, the tax office has no jurisdiction over foreign based companies. Betting shops will now go the way of banks and there will be the odd one or 2 in each high street (now that the FOBTs are limited - Thank feck -) unless there is a return to horse racing reducing its rights costs and there is more radio/TV/newspaper coverage of that sport. And that bookmakers ease off on the number of "betting opportunities". Licensing is a province of the (appalling) gambling commission. They have no remit when it comes to checking duty payments. |
|
By:
the wannabee self regulating bookies are happy to advertise in shop that you can
still spin £100 a pop on the fobt if you register with them ! and £50 if you do not register. |
|
By:
studyform
It is the simplest possible calculation money received from UK customers minus money paid to online customers. That can be audited incredibly easily. If it can't the company in question is probably being defrauded by multiple employees. Defrauding HMRC would result in loss of licence, that isn't the slightest bit debatable. "Defrauding" customers fine tho obv. |
|
By:
Dave.
They don't check. They never have. |
|
By:
because it is irrelevant. listed companies like most of the big books are audited and aren't* going to file false accounts to avoid the tax.
*obviously one will at some time to prove the rule  |
|
By:
21%
|