£2 for FOBTS max - WILL be

The Times reporting the same - it sounds like the Chancellor was blocking it but is now on board. Rather ominous what "levies on other forms of gambling to meet the shortfall" will entail though.

Hills shares down 12%.

.........................................................


Philip Hammond accepts £2 limit for addictive fixed odds betting terminals

A move to cut the maximum stake on highly addictive gambling machines to £2 is set to be announced within weeks as the Treasury signalled a deal last night.

Philip Hammond had delayed signing off the move in a Whitehall dispute over how lost taxes would be replaced. However, the chancellor is understood to have accepted expert recommendations that stakes for fixed odds betting terminals (FOBTs) should be reduced to £2. His allies said that there was growing optimism that an agreement with Matt Hancock, the culture secretary, was imminent. “We are very nearly there,” one said.

The government promised in January that the maximum stake on the machines, called the “crack cocaine of gambling”, would be lowered from £100 a spin to somewhere between £50 and £2, with the final level to be decided after submissions from industry and campaigners.

Yesterday Treasury insiders said that Mr Hammond has never opposed moves to reduce the stake to the minimum demanded by campaigners but has insisted that other public services do not lose out from lost gambling levies. The machines raise more than £450 million a year for the exchequer.

They say he believes that he is close to a deal with Mr Hancock, which will see levies rise on other forms of gambling to plug the shortfall. A source at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said that talks were back “on track”. Election purdah rules mean that any announcement must wait until after next week’s local elections.

The change in tone from the Treasury came after a number of high- profile Tory MPs suggested that they were willing to rebel if the government did not back a £2 limit. A former minister and the influential heads of two select committees said on social media yesterday that they would only support a £2 maximum stake, adding to a growing list of Tory backbenchers who have backed the reduction.

Sarah Wollaston, chairwoman of the health and social care select committee, tweeted: “I will not be supporting any moves that allow high stakes #FOBT to continue to destroy lives. The Treasury needs to look at the long term financial and personal cost of the catastrophic harms to individuals, families and society.”

Nick Boles, who was minister for skills until 2016, retweeted Ms Wollaston, adding that he “will not support half measures”. Tom Tugendhat, chairman of the foreign affairs committee, added: “I agree with Nick and Sarah. £2 is the right level.”

Their intervention means that 22 Tory MPs have publicly backed a £2 limit but many more are understood to support the level. Last month, a YouGov survey of Conservative MPs found 46 per cent in favour of £2 with 18 per cent against. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the DUP all also support a £2 limit, meaning that the government may have faced an embarrassing defeat in the House of Commons if it had failed to cut the maximum stake to £2.

While a final decision has yet to be signed off by Theresa May, the Treasury’s change in tone will be met with dismay by bookmakers. The industry has been hoping that the Treasury’s reluctance to sign off a deal would result in a compromise limit of £20 to £30.

May's tiny majority is the gift that keeps on giving!

You don't pay your commission (or premium charge) to the government. You pay it to Betfair, and HMRC take a percentage of that commission (or premium charge) as tax. That is, the Treasury taxes the operator's profit. Currently that profit is taxed at 15% (I think), while the profits on FOBTs are taxed at 20% (I think).

Maybe the plan is to raise the tax on all types of profit to 20%, though that could be counter-productive, as even more shops would simply close.

What you'd hope is that there's no thought of a resumption in taxing turnover, because that would mean the complete closure of exchanges (along with the complete demise of FOBTs and a return to punters paying 10% tax on every bet they make). But there's a real anti-gambling sentiment been let loose by the anti-FOBTs campaign, so who knows?

Why the glee? Would you have preferred a Corbyn/McDonnell government, with all gambling taxed out of existence for our own good? (Apart from the Tote, with a 30% takeout, obviously).

Looks like you guys have got what you wanted, I see the exchanges and on-line firms having to contribute to the shortfall now. Maybe an introduction of a 2% tax on stakes coupled with the bookies 15% tax on gross profit?

There is no need to tax stakes. But of course there's plenty in power that haven't a clue regards betting so you never know.

Maybe if on course betting remained tax free it would reinvigorate the on course market?

The bookies said they would go to court to contest the ruling if it were reduced to £2.  Let's see what happens next.

But.. if it's finally true and confirmed then this is MASSIVELY GOOD news !!

Are you in the binocular business ?

The major bookies are the only ones to blame for any anti-gambling sentiment.

Would love to see the on course market helped as a thriving ring is an attraction as part of a day at the races.

you'll be reet howard you can become the new alec bird making a killing on photos

Fingers crossed

On balance I think it would be better for Society for the limit to be set at £2. I'm not sure why the Treasury need to replace the lost 'tax' from the betting industry in its entirety as there are soft benefits arising from the cap which would need to be monetised in order to assess the net result. The side effect of bookmakers having to relearn their trade will be a massive advantage  to punters and will generate proper competition within the industry. No chance of a betting tax (in my view) being resurrected.

If you can't see how this how important this decision is for horse racing, then you shouldn't be wasting your time on the horse racing forum, Sweetnsour.

Delighted, hope this shows the bookies that People don't always know what's right for themselves and need more protection. Fact is walking into a bookies now is the equivalent of been in a Casino full stop. Punters are lambasted every second be it cartoon racing, numbers , Horse racing, Greyhounds, etc. Oh I nearly forgot too mention they do have a little sign saying Bet Responsibly which encompasses everything I imagine...

True wonky if you lose money on hosses its your judgement, every think else is a game of chance with the odds in favour of the house.

Sweetnsour, horse racing is funded mainly by media rights that the bookmakers pay to show live racing in the betting shops and to a lesser extent a levy on punters losses on horse racing. If Government slash the maximum spin down to £2, thousands of betting shops will be forced to close overnight reducing the revenue the BHA receive massively. Terrible news for horse racing if the rumours are correct and the spin figure is reduced to £2.

Pixie, the BHA have sold racing down the Swanee imo, bookies pay nothing on Cartoon racing , pop into any shop for a minute on your way into town and you'll see what i mean. The money that punters put into those machines never makes it way into racing...

Why should the bookies pay a slice of their profit that they make on other gambling forms to horse racing, Workrider? Long are the days when punters walked into a betting shop to only bet on horses. Football is massive these days and so are the machines.

A major reason FOBTs are so addictive is because the margin in the houses favour is so small. A 2 per cent tax on all FOBT winning bets ( very similar to 2 per cent on turnover but easier to implement) would have been a major deterrent whilst at the same time preserving income to the exchequer.