Online Casino Edition – Casino News News about online casinos and gambling

With this being the second time, a federal appeals court has ruled that a pair of professional gamblers can sue a narcotics officer that seized $97,000 in cash, when he suspected that the pair had been taking part in drug trafficking. The case came before a panel in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday, and the decision came down that the pair, Gina Fiore and Keith Gibson had the right to sue Anthony Walden, the DEA agent who confiscated the cash.

The decision was 2 to 1, and now the suit will be heading back to the District Court in Las Vegas. It is expected that both the gamblers will continue with their claim, and make an attempt to retrieve the funds that were taken from them. Walden, visibily upset with the decision, argued that since he had no property in the Nevada area, that the Nevada court should have no jurisdiction over this case, in an attempt to have the case stay on the federal level.

He asked that the full circuit court hear the case, but was rejected at the time. Despite this fact, the suit was allowed to continue, and both gamblers are likely going to be pursuing the money that was confiscated from them illegally. They had been returning from gambling in the casinos in Puerto Rico, when they were stopped by a number of federal agents in the airport, and were asked questions about possible drug and gun connections. The couple explained to the officers that there $30,000 that they originally had was their original gambling money, and the amount that they came back with was their winnings from the trip.

It was at that time that a narcotics dog started scratching at the back of Gibson, and the agency seized the money on grounds that it may have been used in several narcotics dealings in Puerto Rico. The couple had no money on them at this point, not even enough for a taxi in Las Vegas. Once the couple had arrived in Las Vegas once again, they were able to send the federal agents tax returns that show that they were indeed professional gamblers, including records of some of their trips, and receipts from their payouts and purchases. The money was not immediately returned at the time, and the federal agents maintain that they believe that the affidavit that they received in order to return the money, had been forged. As a result, the money was never returned, and since that time, the couple has been attempting to put together a case.

To help the budget, Ohio State is looking at construction of new casinos to raise revenues. But the imposition of Commercial Activity Tax got these plans derailed. This law was promulgated in 2005. It replaced the state’s Corporate Franchise tax and property taxes levied on the inventory, equipment of businesses, and fixtures. The new CAT system was supposed to be simple as compared to the old tax scheme which generated about $1.3 billion annually for state and local schools. The older system was considered too high and too complicated because too many exemptions over time have been incorporated.

CAT for New Casinos of Ohio

The new CAT system would reduce the tax on Ohio’s declining manufacturing industry and shift the burden to the growing service industry. This means CAT would apply to the state’s new casinos. CAT is 0.26 percent for every $10,000 in revenue. The problem is not the rate but the disagreement between Ohio Department of taxation and Casino owners regarding exactly what constitutes taxable revenue for casinos.

The casino industry defines the revenues as the total loss by gamblers in that casino or the NET winnings of the casino. But a March 2010 memo of Department of Taxation stated that tax should be applied on total bets placed in the casino. If a gambler bets $100 in total, but loses only $19, the CAT is applied to $100.

Early this month, the Ohio House of Representatives approved a proposal to its effect. This means the difference between an estimated $5.2 million and $59 million that needs to be paid by the casinos every year. This amount is enough to turn a profitable casino into a losing one. These extra taxes could make a casino a bad investment or an unprofitable one.

The American Gaming Association, a gambling trade group, points out that other casino states like Illinois, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia base the tax on what the casino wins, not on total betting as Ohio wants to. But the Government argues that “The CAT was designed to apply to a business’ total gross, not a net calculation of receipts after expenses.” There is a strong argument that the CAT should extend to a casino’s gross wagers.

Other Forms of Gambling Have Different Rules

In case of racetracks, taxes have been levied based on commissions the track makes on bets, not on the bets placed. The Department gives the argument that gambling system on racetracks is different from that in a casino. The racetrack gamblers bet against each other and the track only collects the commission. But in casinos the gamblers bet against the casino. Therefore, CAT is applied only on commission in racetracks, but on all bets at casinos.

As far as lotteries are concerned, they are not taxed because they are run by state, therefore are tax-exempt. Lottery sellers pay CAT only on the commissions they make from ticket sales. As compared to other forms of gambling, casino gambling is at a loss, tax-wise. Therefore, casino owners have placed construction of new casinos on hold until the issue is resolved. For example, a Cincinnati-based casino’s opening, which was supposed to be done in a few months, has been pushed back to 2013.