UK pokerstar players to move to pokerstars.co.uk

R

RamdeeBen

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Total posts
7,745
Chips
0
Just logged into the pokerstars client and a message popped up saying as of 1st October the .com gaming site won't be available to UK players so got on goggle and found one news item about it.

At first I was bit worried but after reading it, it's just so pokerstars have to pay the 15% tax for operating. The same player pool will be the same, but the only real concern for me is because they are to abide to a 15% tax for the rake they charge, does this mean rake will be going up to compensate for their losses in taxs? I've got no idea how much or if they was paying taxes to the UK government prior to this. I just know UK players pay zero tax on gambling. If they didn't pay tax, or paid a smaller amount than the 15% I can't help but think rake is going to get bad.

The only real differences they state are going to be no auto rebuy in tournaments and auto top ups being available for cash game players. This I imagine will be quite bad for the cash game players playing multiple tables having to top up manually. This apparently is to comply with the law for British gambling.

Here is a link to the changes.
 
tenbob

tenbob

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 16, 2005
Total posts
11,221
Awards
1
Chips
20
It looks like they intend to re-coop the 15% tax from a revised VIP system from next year.

Completely sucks that there will be no auto top-up for cash game players though, I wonder how long it will take some budding programme to have a script for sale.
 
R

RamdeeBen

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Total posts
7,745
Chips
0
Ahh suppose that makes sense.

I see they say "rewards will be reduced slightly" Just can't see "slightly" being a true unless they increase the rake too because they are going to be losing so many many millions for this 15% tax. I guess we will have to wait until 2015.
 
tenbob

tenbob

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 16, 2005
Total posts
11,221
Awards
1
Chips
20
They will probably do it in a few slight ways.

-Increase the required fpp's to reach each teir slightly.
-Decrease the value of fpp's slightly.
-Increase the rake slightly.
-Decrease the frequency and availabilty of promotions slightly.
 
Martin

Martin

Scokyl's Scoundrels
Administrator
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Total posts
30,762
Awards
18
GB
Chips
1,175
Yep got that too yesterday, any ideas what it means for other clients, wonder if a few might just take away our ability to play there?
 
R

RamdeeBen

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Total posts
7,745
Chips
0
Yep got that too yesterday, any ideas what it means for other clients, wonder if a few might just take away our ability to play there?

I think some smaller company poker sites might quit the market and some might just increase rake. They won't have the funds pokerstars do to sustain such a loss.
 
Carl Trooper

Carl Trooper

Degenerate Idiot
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Total posts
3,381
Awards
6
Chips
0
Lame. 15% is too high I feel like.

It should be 5% with the player pool they would still make a killing.
 
antejacker

antejacker

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Total posts
2
Awards
1
GB
Chips
6
The UK conservative government are ruining everything, they are not looking to protect the consumer, just take advantage of them. Its appalling truly :(

Sorry for the lack of posts guys, slight off the topic Q but important nonetheless - this account is linked to my Sports Betting activity - when i played Poker for fun - but i know play more seriously under a synonymous alias.. how'd i go about changing? I assume a multiple account is off limits? To clarify though - i want to post more here - quality of course! - as well as promote the site via Social Media. But i do need a little 'give' appreciating i've lost my affiliation with main sites yaknow?

As for Pokerstars changes - they won't be good lets just hope things go back to normal once we get rid of this poxy government & are able to undo the damage caused by campaigning for the abolition of gaming tax AGAIN!

:eek:
 
D

drugsterr

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Total posts
19
Chips
0
in 5 or 6 year will be no Pokerstars eu...just Pokerstars.country:)
 
C

Chemist

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 17, 2009
Total posts
1,480
Chips
0
Just not cricket.
The tax is supposed to be on profits of licensed operators.
They shouldn't be trying to recover it from individuals.

Even if it is still less than the 20% corporation tax other companies are supposed to pay.

( can't even avoid it in scotland :-( , unless the devolved powers can be used to over ride it.)
And losing Pokerstars.fr (a lucrative site for many) on 1st October as pokerstars pulls it from the UK market.
Are there not EU laws about free trade across member states?
 
R

rhombus

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 1, 2012
Total posts
2,601
Chips
0
Just not cricket.
The tax is supposed to be on profits of licensed operators.
They shouldn't be trying to recover it from individuals.

Even if it is still less than the 20% corporation tax other companies are supposed to pay.

( can't even avoid it in scotland :-( , unless the devolved powers can be used to over ride it.)
And losing Pokerstars.fr (a lucrative site for many) on 1st October as pokerstars pulls it from the UK market.
Are there not EU laws about free trade across member states?

not cricket more like tennis with lots of holes in it. :rolleyes:

Will it eventually mean we will only be able to play with British Players LOL and does it mean the likes of Vodafone and Amazon will pay proper taxes instead of basing themselves in Tax havens like liechenstein or in amazons case in ireland to get away with lower taxes.

Problem is theres always knock on effects for the consumer higher prices etc in the case of Pokerstars just looks like the VPP which comes into effect 2015.

Whats the deal with the auto top up in cash and Tournaments, is that to stop the people with gambling problems losing too much money.

I'd be more worried about the Fixed Odd Terminals in Bookmakers which are often refered to as the crack cocaine of the gambling world

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...--be-banned-from-the-high-street-9488270.html

Also others will eventually folllow suit, Titan already has and MAnsion poker pulled out of the UK Market
 
Keith_MM

Keith_MM

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 13, 2013
Total posts
1,334
Awards
1
Chips
3
there are potentially huge benefits as a result of this change.

1. the regulator actually has teeth....its already shut down pokercent.com

2. sites have to segregate player funds which stops sites running off with players money see cereus,full tilt,everleaf, lock, purple lounge + a whole lot of others.

3. INternational player pool is retained and could lead to a sizeable tax revenue from poker without making it unprofitable for sites. Once the other EU countries with national player pools and dwindling tax revenues see how succesfull the UK method is it could bring all of their player pools (and their fish) back into the marketplace.

4. It could have a huge impact on US regulation. If US states see a succesful UK model it could initially help facilitate multiple states agreements and an eentual return to worldwide player pools.

5. we get to keep our poker winning tax free at a cost of a smallish VIP reduction.

6. Auto topups may just be a short term problem as it is designed to help degens on "house edge" slots/casino games from inadvertently busting and not from poker and according to Richas on 2+2 the UKGC is likely to reveiw auto topups for poker.
 
C

Chemist

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 17, 2009
Total posts
1,480
Chips
0
One good point to highlight (from 3&4 above), other comments added for completeness and laughs.

1. the regulator has teeth....Yeah right, like Utilities and Telecoms supposed regulators, Laugh Out Loud.

2. sites have to segregate player funds >> Pokerstars always did.

3 and 4; Yes it could demonstrate a local tax collecting model that would interest other countries including US, and an eventual return to worldwide player pools.
But would be a programming update nightmare with a separate client for each country.

5. Shame it is still only Lloyds Names that are allowed to claim their gambling losses as tax write-offs.

6. That's what happens when things are rushed in without thought or understanding, but it will take a lot longer and a strong lobby to correct it.
 
Last edited:
T

thatgreekdude

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 23, 2014
Total posts
1,024
Awards
1
Chips
1
I didn't see anything about them disabling auto top up but I only clicked the pokerstars link, that's really going to be a pain for me I have a hard enough time running 6 zoom tables with auto top up enabled, i'd hate to think what it's going to be like without it.
 
F

floweryhead

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Total posts
300
Awards
4
Chips
0
We get charged enough already. In the last month I've closed two separate poker accounts (party poker and 888) as they were charging me for inactive accounts (If I don't get the traffic or the software doesn't work for me why should I play there), and now it looks as though we'll be charged more from everywhere. This is looking bad for poker in general. Not just for me
 
R

RamdeeBen

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Total posts
7,745
Chips
0
We get charged enough already. In the last month I've closed two separate poker accounts (Party Poker and 888) as they were charging me for inactive accounts (If I don't get the traffic or the software doesn't work for me why should I play there), and now it looks as though we'll be charged more from everywhere. This is looking bad for poker in general. Not just for me

Eh? the UK market for gambling was and still is the best around. We aren't limited to sites in general, cash outs are easy and quick and more importantly we don't pay taxes on our winnings..The majority of countries have strict laws on gambling and pay big taxes on winnings. Not sure what you mean by charged enough already, we're never charged or very rarely charged for anything in regards to gambling - we're lucky.

As for inactive accounts, I think it's fair you get charged for not using them. I assume it costs them something to keep your account active with funds and if you just use the account for basically holding funds then it's no good to them. You're not generating any rake for them. Also in regards to that, why keep money in inactive accounts to start with? Either move them to your bank account or savings account or put onto a site which you currently are playing. You say low traffic and crappy software so you intend on not playing on their site, so explain the logic in keeping the money there?
 
maik357

maik357

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 14, 2013
Total posts
218
Chips
0
Typical the State or Country always mixing thier hands in where they shouldn´t and messing everything up for the average Joe. Everybody wants the big piece of the pie. Do other sports also have thier players having to pay a double tax because they live somewhere different as where they play. I do not think so. Who says the Govt. is corrupt. hmmmmm
 
R

rhombus

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 1, 2012
Total posts
2,601
Chips
0
One good point to highlight (from 3&4 above), other comments added for completeness and laughs.

1. the regulator has teeth....Yeah right, like Utilities and Telecoms supposed regulators, Laugh Out Loud.

2. sites have to segregate player funds >> Pokerstars always did.

3 and 4; Yes it could demonstrate a local tax collecting model that would interest other countries including US, and an eventual return to worldwide player pools.
But would be a programming update nightmare with a separate client for each country.

5. Shame it is still only Lloyds Names that are allowed to claim their gambling losses as tax write-offs.

6. That's what happens when things are rushed in without thought or understanding, but it will take a lot longer and a strong lobby to correct it.

But would be a programming update nightmare with a separate client for each country.
Wouldnt it just be like iPoker where lots of sites play on the same platform

Didn't realise Point 5.
Typical that the rich have a loophole for everything
 
Last edited:
Keith_MM

Keith_MM

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 13, 2013
Total posts
1,334
Awards
1
Chips
3
One good point to highlight (from 3&4 above), other comments added for completeness and laughs.

1. the regulator has teeth....Yeah right, like Utilities and Telecoms supposed regulators, Laugh Out Loud.
Judge this regulator on its actions not on other regulators misactions. shutting down pokercent is a good start. If players and their funds are protected it can only be good for players.
2. sites have to segregate player funds >> Pokerstars always did.
Conveniently ignoring the point that many sites have claimed segregated funds in the past but when push came to shove the sites ran off with players money. A single site available to uk players in pokerstars is bad for players .Nobody thought Full tilt was virtually bankrupt at the point black friday hit , least of all their pros running it.Pretty sure Everleaf claimed segregated funds.
3 and 4; Yes it could demonstrate a local tax collecting model that would interest other countries including US, and an eventual return to worldwide player pools.
But would be a programming update nightmare with a separate client for each country.
most parts of the client would be universal with some options just being turned off on some countries clientsTax issues would be dealt with by the sites back end

5. Shame it is still only Lloyds Names that are allowed to claim their gambling losses as tax write-offs.
I'm pretty sure thats classed as insurance and not gambling and the profits are taxed. As such insurance loses are tax deductible. UK Poker players pay no tax on profits hence you can't set your losses against profits. If players did offset losses against profits/income it would be a huge tax revenue cost so there is no way that govt want to go down that road. The aim is to regulate the industry and raise tax from it

6. That's what happens when things are rushed in without thought or understanding, but it will take a lot longer and a strong lobby to correct it.[/QUOTE]

its hardly been rushed in , there has been consultation on the proposed changes and this has slipped through the cracks. The intent of the rule is to stop slots and/or casino games from wiping out a players bankroll without them realizing i.e if disconnected or fall asleep and play continues with wagers taken. There is currently a discussion of a revised change to the rule on 2+2 to reflect the fact that disconnects/falling asleep means person is sat out and no unknown further bets are taken from players roll without them being able to do anything about it. http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/5...petition-ukgc-rebuy-topup-1476488/index2.html

The UKGC has also pushed back the deadline for using only UK lienced softwares suppliers twice, it is now 31st March 2015 dues to similar lobbying. TEchnical standard 8 has also been suspended temporarily so UKGC has shown that t will listen and react to problems.
 
Last edited:
F

floweryhead

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Total posts
300
Awards
4
Chips
0
Eh? the UK market for gambling was and still is the best around. We aren't limited to sites in general, cash outs are easy and quick and more importantly we don't pay taxes on our winnings..The majority of countries have strict laws on gambling and pay big taxes on winnings. Not sure what you mean by charged enough already, we're never charged or very rarely charged for anything in regards to gambling - we're lucky.

As for inactive accounts, I think it's fair you get charged for not using them. I assume it costs them something to keep your account active with funds and if you just use the account for basically holding funds then it's no good to them. You're not generating any rake for them. Also in regards to that, why keep money in inactive accounts to start with? Either move them to your bank account or savings account or put onto a site which you currently are playing. You say low traffic and crappy software so you intend on not playing on their site, so explain the logic in keeping the money there?

We pay rake and tournament charges and it's hard enough to break even in poker where there is no house advantage. So yes I think it's unreasonable for these extra charges. Beginning players may only put in $20 dollars or so and may only come and play once in a while. If sites like Party Poker and 888 eat away at dormant accounts it'll discourage these players from playing as they'll remember the $20 they put in a few months ago that is now $2. The sites get paid anyway by all players so to tax some of the fish out of the market is all round bad for poker
 
guicor30

guicor30

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Total posts
548
Chips
0
:O this will be like in Spain.
benefits them or hurts them ?; will be to discuss the issue
 
PokerStars Reviews: Français, Nederlands, Deutsch, Dansk, Italiano, Español, Polski, Norsk, Português, Svenska - PokerStars Mobile - Deutsch Mobile - PS Casino Related UK Guides: UK Casinos - Mobile Casinos - UK Gambling - Sports Betting - Mobile Poker
Top