Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
26 Mar 26
21:52
Joined:
Date Joined:
29 Jun 05
British racing's fragile financial situation was dealt another blow by the government on Wednesday after it ruled out any prospect it would intervene to reform the levy system.
In response, BHA chief executive Brant Dunshea called on ministers to recognise the impact the decision would have on the economics of the sport and to stop the introduction of affordability checks.
A statement from gambling minister Baroness Twycross said the government did not feel it was appropriate to "pursue legislative changes to the rate of the horserace betting levy at this time" and that it did not "support the extension of the levy to overseas racing".
Dunshea said it was "disappointing" that it had taken almost three years since the last government launched a review of the levy to decide there should be no change in the rate, adding that ministers would be "genuinely congratulated" if they halted the introduction of affordability checks to ease pressure on racing's finances.
Affordability checks, the levy and tax - how government policy and gambling regulation have hit racing's finances
When the last Conservative government published its gambling white paper in 2023 it acknowledged that the plans for affordability checks would have an impact on British racing's finances, saying it was keen to ensure they did not "adversely affect the sector" and commenced a review of the levy system.
However, ministers did not intervene directly and left it to leaders of racing and bookmakers to thrash out a deal.
I know for a fact that gambling on the sport of kings went illegal ( for the high rollers ) when tax was 8%, 9% & 10 % !!
The Gambling Commission's sole raison d'etre is MONEY LAUNDERING !!!
Both tory/labour governments & the G C are completely clueless !
Sorry to say... the future for horse racing looks dire !
In response, BHA chief executive Brant Dunshea called on ministers to recognise the impact the decision would have on the economics of the sport and to stop the introduction of affordability checks.
A statement from gambling minister Baroness Twycross said the government did not feel it was appropriate to "pursue legislative changes to the rate of the horserace betting levy at this time" and that it did not "support the extension of the levy to overseas racing".
Dunshea said it was "disappointing" that it had taken almost three years since the last government launched a review of the levy to decide there should be no change in the rate, adding that ministers would be "genuinely congratulated" if they halted the introduction of affordability checks to ease pressure on racing's finances.
Affordability checks, the levy and tax - how government policy and gambling regulation have hit racing's finances
When the last Conservative government published its gambling white paper in 2023 it acknowledged that the plans for affordability checks would have an impact on British racing's finances, saying it was keen to ensure they did not "adversely affect the sector" and commenced a review of the levy system.
However, ministers did not intervene directly and left it to leaders of racing and bookmakers to thrash out a deal.
I know for a fact that gambling on the sport of kings went illegal ( for the high rollers ) when tax was 8%, 9% & 10 % !!
The Gambling Commission's sole raison d'etre is MONEY LAUNDERING !!!
Both tory/labour governments & the G C are completely clueless !
Sorry to say... the future for horse racing looks dire !
Show More
An agreement between racing and bookmakers to boost the levy was said to be on the verge of being announced in May 2024 only for the then prime minister Rishi Sunak to call a general election which halted further progress.
Talks between racing and the betting industry did not resume and the tax hikes announced in the budget last November made the prospect of a deal, especially one involving the levy being extended to bets placed on overseas racing, even more remote.
Twycross claimed the statement set out the conclusions of the previous government's review. She added: "First, in light of the recent changes to gambling taxation, we want to provide stability and certainty to the gambling sector. For this reason, the government does not feel it is appropriate to pursue legislative changes to the rate of the horserace betting levy at this time.
"Second, we do not support the extension of the levy to overseas racing. This is because the combination of the existing levy and commercial opportunities already appropriately reflects the specific relationship between the racing and betting industries in Great Britain."
Talks between racing and the betting industry did not resume and the tax hikes announced in the budget last November made the prospect of a deal, especially one involving the levy being extended to bets placed on overseas racing, even more remote.
Twycross claimed the statement set out the conclusions of the previous government's review. She added: "First, in light of the recent changes to gambling taxation, we want to provide stability and certainty to the gambling sector. For this reason, the government does not feel it is appropriate to pursue legislative changes to the rate of the horserace betting levy at this time.
"Second, we do not support the extension of the levy to overseas racing. This is because the combination of the existing levy and commercial opportunities already appropriately reflects the specific relationship between the racing and betting industries in Great Britain."
Responding to the government statement, Dunshea said it was "disappointing that it had taken almost three years to determine there should be no change in the levy rate".
Dunshea said British racing had provided "clear evidence" to the government of the substantial and growing gap between the costs of providing the sport and the return it received from betting.
He acknowledged that the government had spared racing from an increase in betting duties on the sport in the budget but pointed out the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) had advised the Treasury (HMT) that racing would not feel the benefit of the tax carve-out without an increase in the levy.
Dunshea said the government's statement "leaves unexplained why, only a few months after the budget, the DCMS now believes there is no need to change the levy rate".
Comparing British racing's much lower return from betting compared to France and Ireland, Dunshea said it was being compounded by "the failure to recognise that in refusing to extend the levy to bets placed on overseas racing, the sport in Britain is funding our international rivals, which diminishes our global standing".
Both bookmakers and British racing have called on the government to intervene over plans to introduce affordability checks – or financial risk assessments as they have been termed by the Gambling Commission – over fears they will not be frictionless and will drive bettors away, some to the black market. Checks already taking place have been blamed for wiping tens of millions of pounds from British racing's finances.
Dunshea said the government should not be bound by the policies of its predecessor. He added: "In which case it is surely time for the DCMS and HMT to recognise that adding more red tape to an already highly regulated sector will only fuel a significant rise in illegal betting, deprive horseracing of funding and prevent the government from collecting millions of pounds in much-needed taxation.
“The government would be genuinely congratulated if it took this moment to recognise the impact that no increase in the levy will have on horseracing’s finances and stopped the introduction of affordability checks which threaten the sport’s future."
While the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) welcomed the minister's comments for "providing some stability for the betting industry" in light of the budget's tax rises, the industry body echoed the BHA's comments on affordability checks and called for "urgent progress".
A BGC spokesperson said: "If implemented as currently proposed, they will drive customers away from the regulated market and towards the illegal black market, where there are no protections for customers and no contribution to sport. We remain committed to working with racing to grow this fantastic sport and secure its future."
The Horseracing Bettors Forum said it supported the BHA's view that affordability checks were not a "realistic option" in the absence of levy reform. In a post on X it added: "Politicians once again need reminding of the cultural, historical and financial importance of a healthy racing industry."
Dunshea said British racing had provided "clear evidence" to the government of the substantial and growing gap between the costs of providing the sport and the return it received from betting.
He acknowledged that the government had spared racing from an increase in betting duties on the sport in the budget but pointed out the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) had advised the Treasury (HMT) that racing would not feel the benefit of the tax carve-out without an increase in the levy.
Dunshea said the government's statement "leaves unexplained why, only a few months after the budget, the DCMS now believes there is no need to change the levy rate".
Comparing British racing's much lower return from betting compared to France and Ireland, Dunshea said it was being compounded by "the failure to recognise that in refusing to extend the levy to bets placed on overseas racing, the sport in Britain is funding our international rivals, which diminishes our global standing".
Both bookmakers and British racing have called on the government to intervene over plans to introduce affordability checks – or financial risk assessments as they have been termed by the Gambling Commission – over fears they will not be frictionless and will drive bettors away, some to the black market. Checks already taking place have been blamed for wiping tens of millions of pounds from British racing's finances.
Dunshea said the government should not be bound by the policies of its predecessor. He added: "In which case it is surely time for the DCMS and HMT to recognise that adding more red tape to an already highly regulated sector will only fuel a significant rise in illegal betting, deprive horseracing of funding and prevent the government from collecting millions of pounds in much-needed taxation.
“The government would be genuinely congratulated if it took this moment to recognise the impact that no increase in the levy will have on horseracing’s finances and stopped the introduction of affordability checks which threaten the sport’s future."
While the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) welcomed the minister's comments for "providing some stability for the betting industry" in light of the budget's tax rises, the industry body echoed the BHA's comments on affordability checks and called for "urgent progress".
A BGC spokesperson said: "If implemented as currently proposed, they will drive customers away from the regulated market and towards the illegal black market, where there are no protections for customers and no contribution to sport. We remain committed to working with racing to grow this fantastic sport and secure its future."
The Horseracing Bettors Forum said it supported the BHA's view that affordability checks were not a "realistic option" in the absence of levy reform. In a post on X it added: "Politicians once again need reminding of the cultural, historical and financial importance of a healthy racing industry."
you're saying betting on racing's going down the tube?
Swifty, bloke's will only bet on the gee gees ! Who wants the G C/government & the tax man knowing everything about you !! ?..
Organised crime to fill the void !
Organised crime to fill the void !
Swifty, I've been on the Exchange since 2005. Turnover on a Class 6 A W race was a min of £500,000 ! Today sometimes it doesn't make £200k !! Many high roller's have gone... this will extenuate it.... 1.01 !!!!
The BHA's statement is years too late.
They should have stood up against the GC and taken them to Court a long time ago to stop their lunatic actions .
It is a bit late now
They should have stood up against the GC and taken them to Court a long time ago to stop their lunatic actions .
It is a bit late now
Why should the government care?
Less than six months back, it gave racing what it asked for, a carve-out from betting tax rises, and in return for that they received no gratitude, just another begging bowl from racing and an FU from the bookmakers who used the Chancellor's largesse to further screw racing and Britain. And that's not to mention the anti-gambling sentiment among MPs.
Less than six months back, it gave racing what it asked for, a carve-out from betting tax rises, and in return for that they received no gratitude, just another begging bowl from racing and an FU from the bookmakers who used the Chancellor's largesse to further screw racing and Britain. And that's not to mention the anti-gambling sentiment among MPs.
^^^^ That may all be true R ! But, how does H R survive without an enhanced ''levy'' coming into the sport & reduced sponsorship from big bookmakers ! ?...
Been underground since time began in a lot of quarters…..
Well known Scottish individual (deceased) had many racing fraternity on his books (allegedly)…..
Behind the bar in most pubs used to be the norm…..
Well known Scottish individual (deceased) had many racing fraternity on his books (allegedly)…..
Behind the bar in most pubs used to be the norm…..
point to point,s ,flapping tracks,horse will always race and people will always bet on the outcome of those races
I heard it many a time “ don’t touch it davie the rider is on so and so with me “ lol…..you couldn’t make it up,comedy gold…..
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539