There wouldn't really be a need to actually move over - you could just pop over on your own for short periods as and when needed.marksmeets302 wrote:Moving to the UK, as some have mentioned is not viable for me. Still have kids at school, don't want to pull them away from their friends just because daddy wants to save a few euros.
Tax question
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
-
Grinderman
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 2:44 pm
I have been a Betfair user for 12 years, a Bet Angel user for 3 years and a regular reader of the forum, but this is my first post.
The tax side of what I (most of us?) do has always concerned me, but I believe that essentilly all that I am doing is gambling on horses and gambling is not taxable.
I was very interested in what Rufus posted concerning Graham v Green and at first thought it covered my position. However, the more I read it, the less I am convinced.
BIM22015
That seems to me to be organising an effort in the same way that a person organises an effort if he sets out to buy himself things with a view to securing a profit by the difference in what I may call their capital value in individual cases.
The key feature is that the taxpayer is likely to be involved in the organisation of the activity. They are not mere punters. They are carrying on an activity where the odds are in their favour.
Isn't that backing at a price and laying at another? I would think that most of us do this to make the odds in our favour.
Graham v Green concerns an individual making bets at SP and being systematic (‘studying form’).
How many of us do that?
The tax side of what I (most of us?) do has always concerned me, but I believe that essentilly all that I am doing is gambling on horses and gambling is not taxable.
I was very interested in what Rufus posted concerning Graham v Green and at first thought it covered my position. However, the more I read it, the less I am convinced.
BIM22015
That seems to me to be organising an effort in the same way that a person organises an effort if he sets out to buy himself things with a view to securing a profit by the difference in what I may call their capital value in individual cases.
The key feature is that the taxpayer is likely to be involved in the organisation of the activity. They are not mere punters. They are carrying on an activity where the odds are in their favour.
Isn't that backing at a price and laying at another? I would think that most of us do this to make the odds in our favour.
Graham v Green concerns an individual making bets at SP and being systematic (‘studying form’).
How many of us do that?
Oh, haha, were you at the trader's conference too?Euler wrote:Just listening to a presentation on taxation on gambling winnings.
I wasn't massively impressed with the accountant's knowledge. He didn't really add anything useful that we haven't already talked about on this thread, except that he kept contradicting himself. "You definitely can't be taxed, but be careful because you might still be taxed, but don't worry because you won't be".
Essentially be careful if you are operating a "trade" and have customers in some form, have set up a company around your gambling, or have set up lots of structure and complexity around it. That last one is a bit vague.
I also kind of disagreed with whether you should declare gambling earnings or not if you fill out a self-assessment form. He said you should declare everything. I think declaring a huge amount would attract attention, plus there isn't even a box to declare gambling winnings. Next year if I'm asked to complete one I might just add a short sentence in the "further comments" section saying any other income is from gambling but not state how much.
Well I do both. But in relation to the backing and laying, my argument would be that the lay side is just another bet. Betfair have shown in court that their customers are not considered bookmakers, do not need a license, and are just placing bets with Betfair as a counterparty. How Betfair choose to manage their risk (offsetting against other customers) is up to them.Grinderman wrote:Isn't that backing at a price and laying at another? I would think that most of us do this to make the odds in our favour.
Graham v Green concerns an individual making bets at SP and being systematic (‘studying form’).
I think that large scale market makers are a real grey area and might well be running a business and be subject to tax. They are probably being ignored as it is difficult to precisely differentiate their activities from gambling and that might open the door to people offsetting "business" losses against other income.
The key point about "gambling" activity imo is that opportunities have to be available to take advantage, i.e. it isn't a "model" that can be applied to all sporting events - there must be an initial entry point or incorrect price in place and that might not happen. Whereas a bookmaker (in theory) opens up his stall and sets odds on any event with such a wide spread that even if he makes the odd mistake he still makes a profit as long as he has enough customers.
The key point about "gambling" activity imo is that opportunities have to be available to take advantage, i.e. it isn't a "model" that can be applied to all sporting events - there must be an initial entry point or incorrect price in place and that might not happen. Whereas a bookmaker (in theory) opens up his stall and sets odds on any event with such a wide spread that even if he makes the odd mistake he still makes a profit as long as he has enough customers.
Euler, just wanted to give you a gentle prod to remind you about this post, i would be intrested in what you where going to write when you get the time to post.
ty
ty
Euler wrote:Just listening to a presentation on taxation on gambling winnings.
I'll update the forum on Friday when I'm back in the office properly.
Just did a bit of digging around and found some responses from HMRC which relates to tax on gambling during the racing levy board consultation. You can find all the documents here:
http://corporate.betfair.com/media/pres ... 0-27a.aspx
But the relevant section is:
In particular the argument that they will never tax gambling winnings because it would allow gambling net losses to be used as tax deductible expenses just seems naive to me (and the view expressed by the accountant at the Trader's Conference). In the end the government can/will come up with whatever laws they want to achieve their intended goal.
http://corporate.betfair.com/media/pres ... 0-27a.aspx
But the relevant section is:
Now this isn't to say that HMRC won't change their opinions in the future.5.2 With regard to the tax treatment of betting exchange customers, HM Treasury considered that this raised two issues:
First, whether it “should tax persons who lay bets on betting exchanges on the grounds that they are bookmakers”. HM Treasury decided that “taxing layers on exchanges, purely on the basis that they lay bets, would not be fair or proportionate” and it explained this on the following basis: ”Whilst tax law does limit tax liabilities for bookmakers to their gross profits from lay bets, it does not link being a bookmaker to laying a bet. Instead it defines a bookmaker as someone who receives or negotiates bets by way of business. For bookmakers, it is clear that laying bets is a business activity, in the sense that it is carried out for the purposes of a trade and has an inbuilt system of profit. This is not generally true for layers on exchanges who are not conducting a trade, nor are they generally able to build in a profit margin to their price. The decision not to tax layers on exchanges is also consistent with social policy set out in the Gambling Act. I should stress that bookmakers are already liable for duty on their gross profits from lay bets on exchanges, and HMRC will continue to ensure compliance with this.” [Emphasis added].
Second, as to “whether there are persons who are in business on the betting exchanges more generally and whether these people should be taxed as bookmakers.”
HM Treasury stated:
“We have looked more widely at whether there is a group of users on betting exchanges who are acting by way of business and are not currently being taxed. Whilst there are clearly differing levels of activity on exchanges and some users do bet in high volumes, there is not sufficient evidence to characterise these users as running a business, as opposed to merely being high-volume gamblers, who have traditionally been outside the tax net.”
In particular the argument that they will never tax gambling winnings because it would allow gambling net losses to be used as tax deductible expenses just seems naive to me (and the view expressed by the accountant at the Trader's Conference). In the end the government can/will come up with whatever laws they want to achieve their intended goal.
I don't believe there's anything telling you NOT to declare gambling winnings. But at the same time there's not actually a question or box asking for it.staker72 wrote:Does anybody still fill in a paper tax return? Its a few years since I did but I seem to remember a specific statment on it saying not to declare betting winnings or something to that effect!
It isn't naive when considering an attempt to distinguish the winnings of a "professional" gambler from any other type under the present system. They have to prove it is a trade to make it subject to income tax and unless the activity they seek to tax is very tightly defined, they will enable offsetting.xitian wrote:
In particular the argument that they will never tax gambling winnings because it would allow gambling net losses to be used as tax deductible expenses just seems naive to me (and the view expressed by the accountant at the Trader's Conference). In the end the government can/will come up with whatever laws they want to achieve their intended goal.
The government could introduce a new tax schedule ring-fencing gambling winnings and losses, but if the intention was to only catch profitable gamblers, the take would be low as the population of winners is low and avoidance would be easy. Virtually the entire population would need to complete a tax return. So huge costs for little return.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
In the past when gambling was taxed either at the point of placing the bet or on your winnings it was not possible to deduct losses so I am not sure why the argument that people could deduct losses is always used as a reason as to why gambling is not taxed.
The reasons why they removed tax on gambling from customers are well known and led to a much higher tax take by the government.
The reasons why they removed tax on gambling from customers are well known and led to a much higher tax take by the government.