The Department of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board today announced the release of a joint final rule to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. The Act prohibits gambling businesses from knowingly accepting payments in connection with unlawful Internet gambling, including payments made through credit cards, electronic funds transfers, and checks.
The Board and the Treasury are required by the Act to develop a joint rule in consultation with the Department of Justice. The final rule requires U.S. financial firms that participate in designated payment systems to establish and implement policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent payments to gambling businesses in connection with unlawful Internet gambling. The rule provides non-exclusive examples of such policies and procedures and sets out the regulatory enforcement framework. For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.
Compliance with the rule is required by December 1, 2009.
The Department of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board today announced the release of a joint final rule to implement the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. The Act prohibits gambling businesses from knowingly accepting payments in connection with unlawful Internet gambling, including payments made through credit cards, electronic funds transfers, and checks.
The Board and the Treasury are required by the Act to develop a joint rule in consultation with the Department of Justice. The final rule requires U.S. financial firms that participate in designated payment systems to establish and implement policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent payments to gambling businesses in connection with unlawful Internet gambling. The rule provides non-exclusive examples of such policies and procedures and sets out the regulatory enforcement framework. For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.
Compliance with the rule is required by December 1, 2009.
can someone please explain to me how in the middle of an economic meltdown, which unfortunately with a new president might not be able to be solved, two wars which are continuing to get worse by the day, with our foreign policy getting worse and worse by the day, how the government has time to try to even think about regulating internet gambling. When you look at the legislationthe republicans are trying to pass, you understand why and how we are in the situation we are today. There are much more important things we need to worry about than internet gambling. I only hope that the next four years are nothing like the last eight years, but I am not stupid as much as I want internet gambling legal, I would take having our country turnaround for the better first, then make internet gambling legal, who is it really hurting. Just makes everyone have to go through a more rigourous process to do so
can someone please explain to me how in the middle of an economic meltdown, which unfortunately with a new president might not be able to be solved, two wars which are continuing to get worse by the day, with our foreign policy getting worse and worse by the day, how the government has time to try to even think about regulating internet gambling. When you look at the legislationthe republicans are trying to pass, you understand why and how we are in the situation we are today. There are much more important things we need to worry about than internet gambling. I only hope that the next four years are nothing like the last eight years, but I am not stupid as much as I want internet gambling legal, I would take having our country turnaround for the better first, then make internet gambling legal, who is it really hurting. Just makes everyone have to go through a more rigourous process to do so
The rule(s) seems to make us the initiaters guilty, a significant change from prior situation .
Offshore books, however, remain beyond the scope of US Govt control unless they voluntarily boot us out a la Pinnacle.
Does anyone see any threat to the safety of our $$$ here?
That's not quite what this means, taurus. Take a closer look at this....
"For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received or otherwise made," the Treasury said.
What this means is they have DEFINED for the banks what the "Unlawful Internet Gaming" part of the UIEGA is. That way a bank has a little more to go on. That's why they explain, "For purposes of the rule..."
People, this rule means absolutely nothing. You will still be able to deposit and you'll still be able to withdraw. Not to mention our buddy Barney is on the case LOL. Fuggedabout it.
The rule(s) seems to make us the initiaters guilty, a significant change from prior situation .
Offshore books, however, remain beyond the scope of US Govt control unless they voluntarily boot us out a la Pinnacle.
Does anyone see any threat to the safety of our $$$ here?
That's not quite what this means, taurus. Take a closer look at this....
"For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received or otherwise made," the Treasury said.
What this means is they have DEFINED for the banks what the "Unlawful Internet Gaming" part of the UIEGA is. That way a bank has a little more to go on. That's why they explain, "For purposes of the rule..."
People, this rule means absolutely nothing. You will still be able to deposit and you'll still be able to withdraw. Not to mention our buddy Barney is on the case LOL. Fuggedabout it.
That's not quite what this means, taurus. Take a closer look at this....
"For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received or otherwise made," the Treasury said.
What this means is they have DEFINED for the banks what the "Unlawful Internet Gaming" part of the UIEGA is. That way a bank has a little more to go on. That's why they explain, "For purposes of the rule..."
People, this rule means absolutely nothing. You will still be able to deposit and you'll still be able to withdraw. Not to mention our buddy Barney is on the case LOL. Fuggedabout it.
casheasy - The following is what I was referring to. Ialics are mine.
For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.
This is the first I have seen that says, suggests , or whatever-that initiating the bet is unlawful.
Being an ex resident for many years in Barney's district, I'm glad he's on our side. And being an ex-banker, I am well aware of the virtual impossility for my bank to reject a check sent to me by 5Dimes, Matchbook, or betjamaica.
That's not quite what this means, taurus. Take a closer look at this....
"For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received or otherwise made," the Treasury said.
What this means is they have DEFINED for the banks what the "Unlawful Internet Gaming" part of the UIEGA is. That way a bank has a little more to go on. That's why they explain, "For purposes of the rule..."
People, this rule means absolutely nothing. You will still be able to deposit and you'll still be able to withdraw. Not to mention our buddy Barney is on the case LOL. Fuggedabout it.
casheasy - The following is what I was referring to. Ialics are mine.
For purposes of the rule, unlawful Internet gambling generally would cover the making of a bet or wager that involves use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any applicable federal or state law in the jurisdiction where the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.
This is the first I have seen that says, suggests , or whatever-that initiating the bet is unlawful.
Being an ex resident for many years in Barney's district, I'm glad he's on our side. And being an ex-banker, I am well aware of the virtual impossility for my bank to reject a check sent to me by 5Dimes, Matchbook, or betjamaica.
Taurus- sorry it took so long for me to check this thread out again. LOL
Anyway, what that means is exactly what it says. It has to be ILLEGAL ALREADY in some jurisdiction. I am not sure what states it is illegal to do an internet wager, but I believe only Washington (state) and maybe NY City (?) have a law on the books banning gambling online. So no worries, mate.
Taurus- sorry it took so long for me to check this thread out again. LOL
Anyway, what that means is exactly what it says. It has to be ILLEGAL ALREADY in some jurisdiction. I am not sure what states it is illegal to do an internet wager, but I believe only Washington (state) and maybe NY City (?) have a law on the books banning gambling online. So no worries, mate.
Taurus- sorry it took so long for me to check this thread out again. LOL
Anyway, what that means is exactly what it says. It has to be ILLEGAL ALREADY in some jurisdiction. I am not sure what states it is illegal to do an internet wager, but I believe only Washington (state) and maybe NY City (?) have a law on the books banning gambling online. So no worries, mate.
Thanks, Cash. Yeah , I figured that one out myself, finally.
kevk - I do send via moneygram. What might be of concern is getting money out. Eliminate Credit Card because i don't use and bel;ieve that is a bad option.
Npormally I get bank wire to my bank account and that is something the banking system might be able to police. But I don't think a paper check from the book is in any jeopardy.
I might be a little skittish because I had most of my money frozen in Neteller ( from Pinnacle) for many months back a couple of years ago.
Taurus- sorry it took so long for me to check this thread out again. LOL
Anyway, what that means is exactly what it says. It has to be ILLEGAL ALREADY in some jurisdiction. I am not sure what states it is illegal to do an internet wager, but I believe only Washington (state) and maybe NY City (?) have a law on the books banning gambling online. So no worries, mate.
Thanks, Cash. Yeah , I figured that one out myself, finally.
kevk - I do send via moneygram. What might be of concern is getting money out. Eliminate Credit Card because i don't use and bel;ieve that is a bad option.
Npormally I get bank wire to my bank account and that is something the banking system might be able to police. But I don't think a paper check from the book is in any jeopardy.
I might be a little skittish because I had most of my money frozen in Neteller ( from Pinnacle) for many months back a couple of years ago.
Taurus- sorry it took so long for me to check this thread out again. LOL
Anyway, what that means is exactly what it says. It has to be ILLEGAL ALREADY in some jurisdiction. I am not sure what states it is illegal to do an internet wager, but I believe only Washington (state) and maybe NY City (?) have a law on the books banning gambling online. So no worries, mate.
2nd that. WASHINGTON (STATE) is the only one that I know of as well.
Taurus- sorry it took so long for me to check this thread out again. LOL
Anyway, what that means is exactly what it says. It has to be ILLEGAL ALREADY in some jurisdiction. I am not sure what states it is illegal to do an internet wager, but I believe only Washington (state) and maybe NY City (?) have a law on the books banning gambling online. So no worries, mate.
2nd that. WASHINGTON (STATE) is the only one that I know of as well.
dru- Washington St is the only one I know of as well.
However, the State Lottery bill that was rejected in Massachusetts last year would have made Internet Gambling illegal in this (MA) jurisdiction. Fortunately, the bill was defeated.
dru- Washington St is the only one I know of as well.
However, the State Lottery bill that was rejected in Massachusetts last year would have made Internet Gambling illegal in this (MA) jurisdiction. Fortunately, the bill was defeated.
what I find to be the most interesting is that this is soooo fucking unlawful, they are "protecting" us with these laws, yet it is legal to deposit and make wagers on horses on sites like TVG and YOUBET.com?
WHAT THE FUCK? OHHHHH, wait a minute, that's because the horseracing industry and online horsewagerings get taxed!
what I find to be the most interesting is that this is soooo fucking unlawful, they are "protecting" us with these laws, yet it is legal to deposit and make wagers on horses on sites like TVG and YOUBET.com?
WHAT THE FUCK? OHHHHH, wait a minute, that's because the horseracing industry and online horsewagerings get taxed!
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.