According to a report in the London Financial Times of Tuesday
last week, the banking sector has warned the US Treasury that regulations
proposed for the online gambling ban will be impossible to comply unless the
Bush administration clarifies conflicting views on the online gambling bill.
The Financial Services Roundtable, which represents dozens of
banks and other financial services firms, said it was “very concerned” that
adoption of the rules could impose “significant” and costly compliance burdens on banks.
“The statute and the proposed rule expand the role of
financial institutions to police laws that are more appropriate for law
enforcement agencies,” the Roundtable said in public filings to the Treasury
and Federal Reserve.
The criticism raises new questions about whether dominoqq regulators
will be able to enforce a law that, in effect, requires banks and other
institutions to know the purpose and legality of payments in an industry -
online gambling - in which federal and state rules often conflict. To make matters worse, the one-year old law
allows for some form of online gambling like horse betting, which will make it
nearly impossible for banks to differentiate between the “good” web betting
horse racing and the “bad” web betting online poker.
At the centre of concerns raised by the Financial Services
Roundtable is the fact that it is far from clear whether banks would also have
to block payments from US-based gambling sites, including websites that take
bets on horses.
The justice department has long held the view that online
interstate betting within the US on horses is illegal. However, the handful of
established horse betting sites have never been prosecuted. The horse-betting
industry maintains that state laws allowing wagers on horses trump federal
laws. Legislators left the issue alone last year by including language in the
anti-gambling legislation that said it did not apply to wagers on horses.
The proposed rules would require US financial companies with
designated payments systems to have policies and procedures that are
“reasonably designed” to prevent payments being made to illegal gambling
businesses. But that cost money - to the
tune of billions of dollars, according to the banking sector. Already, use of checks have been ruled out
after a determination that such monitoring would be impossible at this juncture
in time.
In comments about the proposed rules, Bank of America said the
US should provide a list of entities with whom banks are forbidden to take
payments in the absence of an “unambiguous”
definition of what is legal. The problem
with such a list is that most online gambling establishments do not engage in
banking using their website name for example, Full Tilt Poker would not be
listed as the recipient or the authorized agent making payment to customers.
Web: https://ezproxy.cityu.edu.hk/login?url=https://www.oilscams.org/
Social links:
https://www.imgpaste.net/image/KVt6H6
https://ext-4356121.livejournal.com/160224.html
https://txt.fyi/-/21197/f9863738/
Comments
Post a Comment