Bookmakers should be forced to pay tax on bets placed in the UK , a Tory MP has urged.
Matthew Hancock, a former aide to Chancellor George Osborne, warned that the move offshore by big bookmakers taking advantage of internet betting was depriving horseracing of vital funding and also hitting the Exchequer.
He called for all bets placed in the UK to be subject to tax and the horseracing levy on a “point of consumption” basis.
The call comes as Chief Minister Fabian Picardo warned of this threat to the gaming industry. It is also strongly opposed by gaming companied.
Matthew Hancock, a former aide to Chancellor George Osborne, warned that the move offshore by big bookmakers taking advantage of internet betting was depriving horseracing of vital funding and also hitting the Exchequer.
He called for all bets placed in the UK to be subject to tax and the horseracing levy on a “point of consumption” basis.
The call comes as Chief Minister Fabian Picardo warned of this threat to the gaming industry. It is also strongly opposed by gaming companied.
Mr Picardo last week signalled a major battle ahead for Gibraltar with London over its plans to introduce gaming transaction taxation in UK on online gaming provided from abroad including the Rock.
London is taking a protectionist stance and wants to take a cut of from profits of companies that fled the UK over high taxation there.
“There are issues on the horizon for Gibraltar. Those issues affect businesses in Gibraltar, and it is not always the usual common enemy that is responsible,” Mr Picardo said last Thursday following meetings in London on this issue.
Mr Hancock, whose West Suffolk seat includes the racing industry’s Newmarket home, said the move would also give gamblers greater consumer protection.
He told the Commons: “Racing has suffered a devastating fall in funding. The horseracing levy, the annual payment from betting to racing in return for the product on which so many bets are placed, has declined from over £100 million in 2009 to under £60 million last year.
“Prize money, the lifeblood of the sport, has fallen by half in two years. Even second place will no longer cover the cost of diesel for many of our smaller fixtures.
“The number of mares in foal is declining and more of our best stock is sent overseas into training, especially to France.
“Racecourses, trainers, jockeys and staff are struggling and livelihoods are under threat.
“But with attendances at courses at record levels, why this decline? Because since 2007, 18 of our 20 biggest bookmakers have moved offshore.
“According to bookmakers’ own estimates they avoid £300 million in tax and tens of millions in contribution to the levy.”
His solution was to “define the location of the bet, not where the bookie is but where the punter is”.
He added: “If the bookmaker wants to market to, and take bets from, British punters they must be licensed by the Gambling Commission. Tax and levy must be paid. A simple change with a big effect.”
In the longer-term, the levy could be replaced with a more sustainable system such as a “racing right” and the level of tax could be reduced to ensure bookmakers remained competitive, he said.
Mr Hancock’s Offshore Gambling (Licensing) Bill was given a first reading in the Commons without a vote, but stands little chance of making further progress due to a lack of parliamentary time.
The Government is already considering the changes demanded by Mr Hancock.
Tory Philip Davies (Shipley), a racehorse owner, said the Bill was a “blunt instrument” and the focus should be on cutting tax.
He said: “We need to focus on why some betting companies are based abroad: that reason is the level of taxation and the level of taxation alone.”
London is taking a protectionist stance and wants to take a cut of from profits of companies that fled the UK over high taxation there.
“There are issues on the horizon for Gibraltar. Those issues affect businesses in Gibraltar, and it is not always the usual common enemy that is responsible,” Mr Picardo said last Thursday following meetings in London on this issue.
Mr Hancock, whose West Suffolk seat includes the racing industry’s Newmarket home, said the move would also give gamblers greater consumer protection.
He told the Commons: “Racing has suffered a devastating fall in funding. The horseracing levy, the annual payment from betting to racing in return for the product on which so many bets are placed, has declined from over £100 million in 2009 to under £60 million last year.
“Prize money, the lifeblood of the sport, has fallen by half in two years. Even second place will no longer cover the cost of diesel for many of our smaller fixtures.
“The number of mares in foal is declining and more of our best stock is sent overseas into training, especially to France.
“Racecourses, trainers, jockeys and staff are struggling and livelihoods are under threat.
“But with attendances at courses at record levels, why this decline? Because since 2007, 18 of our 20 biggest bookmakers have moved offshore.
“According to bookmakers’ own estimates they avoid £300 million in tax and tens of millions in contribution to the levy.”
His solution was to “define the location of the bet, not where the bookie is but where the punter is”.
He added: “If the bookmaker wants to market to, and take bets from, British punters they must be licensed by the Gambling Commission. Tax and levy must be paid. A simple change with a big effect.”
In the longer-term, the levy could be replaced with a more sustainable system such as a “racing right” and the level of tax could be reduced to ensure bookmakers remained competitive, he said.
Mr Hancock’s Offshore Gambling (Licensing) Bill was given a first reading in the Commons without a vote, but stands little chance of making further progress due to a lack of parliamentary time.
The Government is already considering the changes demanded by Mr Hancock.
Tory Philip Davies (Shipley), a racehorse owner, said the Bill was a “blunt instrument” and the focus should be on cutting tax.
He said: “We need to focus on why some betting companies are based abroad: that reason is the level of taxation and the level of taxation alone.”
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment