Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Poker Legislation & PPA Discussion hosted by Rich Muny Discussions of various poker-related laws and steps players can take to push for better laws.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-26-2012, 05:21 AM   #51
Golfing_Stud
4L Fantasy Football Champion '14
 
Golfing_Stud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: I'm with her!
Posts: 4,999
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf View Post
Can't say for sure, but it will be a couple of months before this one passes (if it does), so you have time.
Just started playing on Merge would hate to do jail time for playing a .50 cent SNG.
Golfing_Stud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 06:45 AM   #52
PokerXanadu
Commander X-2
 
PokerXanadu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,368
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfing_Stud View Post
Thanks Dark I see where PX had addressed this and edited my post, do you think they'd allow us to get our money off the non-Californian site or have a some sort of grace period after it's enacted ?
If the bill passes, it will immediately be a misdemeanor to either play on an unlicensed site in CA or to offer play to CA players. But it won't be illegal under CA law to get your money off a non-CA site. There won't be a grace period where you can legally continue to play on non-CA sites until the CA sites are live.
PokerXanadu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 07:04 AM   #53
TheDarkElf
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,667
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Look on the bright side. If the state puts a bunch of players in jail for playing on unlicensed sites, it will be easy to get some games going while you are there.
TheDarkElf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 07:24 AM   #54
22hard4
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 97
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf View Post
Look on the bright side. If the state puts a bunch of players in jail for playing on unlicensed sites, it will be easy to get some games going while you are there.
hahaha
22hard4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 09:02 AM   #55
LOLRussians
old hand
 
LOLRussians's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ciudad Colon, Costa Rica
Posts: 1,374
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

This is pretty awesome!
LOLRussians is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 01:13 PM   #56
Hired Goons
newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 43
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf View Post
Look on the bright side. If the state puts a bunch of players in jail for playing on unlicensed sites, it will be easy to get some games going while you are there.
You are dark.
Hired Goons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 01:22 PM   #57
spacegod
journeyman
 
spacegod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Lazytown
Posts: 371
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerXanadu View Post
If the bill passes, it will immediately be a misdemeanor to either play on an unlicensed site in CA or to offer play to CA players. But it won't be illegal under CA law to get your money off a non-CA site. There won't be a grace period where you can legally continue to play on non-CA sites until the CA sites are live.
How does this not violate the dormant commerce clause?
spacegod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 01:27 PM   #58
TheDarkElf
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,667
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by spacegod View Post
How does this not violate the dormant commerce clause?
Each state gets to define it's own penal laws. It's been that way in this country for a couple of 100 of years.
TheDarkElf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 01:33 PM   #59
nyyy1927
journeyman
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 378
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

This could be wicked awesome.

So what would the likelihood of other states joining? And a reasonable timeline for them joining if it passes in CA? I'm in Mass.
nyyy1927 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 01:49 PM   #60
spacegod
journeyman
 
spacegod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Lazytown
Posts: 371
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf View Post
Each state gets to define it's own penal laws. It's been that way in this country for a couple of 100 of years.
Ok. All online commerce in my state requires you to pay a $30 million license fee to my state. Residents of my state cannot engage in commerce with unlicensed businesses.
spacegod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 02:30 PM   #61
tamiller866
Pooh-Bah
 
tamiller866's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,651
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by spacegod View Post
How does this not violate the dormant commerce clause?
Since they made it a crime to play on unlicensed sites, not just unlicensed out of State sites, the barrier to commerce could be viewed as regulatory rather than protectionist.

That argument would probably hold up against offshore competition, and presumably a player pool agreement would be reached before they need to defend that position v licensed outer State competition.
tamiller866 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 02:33 PM   #62
TheDarkElf
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,667
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by spacegod View Post
Ok. All online commerce in my state requires you to pay a $30 million license fee to my state. Residents of my state cannot engage in commerce with unlicensed businesses.
Concerning the licensing fee, here is what the bill actually states:

"19990.58. (a) Any entity licensed to operate an intrastate
Internet gambling Web site shall remit to the Treasurer for deposit
in the General Fund a nonrefundable license fee in the amount of
thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). This amount shall be credited
against fees imposed pursuant to subdivision (b) on the licensee’s
gross gaming revenue proceeds for the first three years of operation.

Upon depletion of the license fee, the department shall notify the
licensee to commence monthly payments to the state in accordance
with subdivision (b).
(b) A licensee shall remit to the Treasurer on a monthly basis
for deposit in the General Fund, an amount equal to 10 percent of
its gross revenues
."

Not sure what your point is.
TheDarkElf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 02:50 PM   #63
muckthatsht
adept
 
muckthatsht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tempe
Posts: 822
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

I think he is talking about how Amazon does not have to put up a $30 mill fee to do commerce yet for online poker they must. Not positive though that both businesses are viewed even remotely the same and said fee makes that obvious. The $30 mill is only upfront money for the 10% tax revenue not a fee on top of that revenue.
muckthatsht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 02:53 PM   #64
Do it Right
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,890
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by pianospike View Post
Currently I play on a site where the cash games are raked at 5% up to a maximum of $3. That is generally the rake schedule for cash games, though the micros are raked a bit more at 6.67%. I'm not following how that very simple rake structure (to me, anyway) is more complex than a rake per hand structure, where you likely need a different per hand charge for every level or every two levels. $.02/$.05 would be raked at x per hand, $.05/$.10 would be raked as 2x per hand, and so on. I understand that you may not see a different per-hand charge at every level, but to be fair you should have that.

I also don't get how a fixed charge per hand is, by far, superior to percentages. Putting aside the fact that you would need to know the percentages charged versus the charges per hand to attempt to validate that statement, as a player, I don't think it is beneficial to have a $5 pot raked the same as a $60 pot. It's necessary live because percentages are hard to calculate on the fly.

Maybe this isn't a big deal. But every time I play live and I'm staring at a $10 or $15 pot on the flop and thinking about whether to cbet air, I think why bother when I'm only going to keep 1/3 to 1/2 of the pot and lose the rest to rake.
You left out a critical part of that 5% to $3, understandably so. I have a site where I charge 4.5% rake - raked to the penny. Another site charges 5% rake collected at 5 cents per dollar. Which site has lower rake? About how much more will you save or lose per 100 hands? How much of a preference do you have for one site or the other, all other things being equal?

Since you're posting in these forums you are already going to be substantially more educated in the intricacies of this game than your average Joe, yet you couldn't even come close to answering the questions I posed. Actually nobody could, they were trick questions - the answers depend on a number of different variables, sometimes the rake will be higher - sometimes it will be lower, sometimes it will be the same. And we haven't even gotten into trying to apply all of that information to any sort of rewards programs the sites may offer. Have fun with that.

That obfuscation does not encourage competition, it actually discourages it. The vast majority of customers are left with absolutely no clue about how much they are paying in rake so why would a site lower their rake? And even if a customer did know he was paying a lot in rake, it's not exactly easy to see if a different site has lower rake especially once you add rewards systems into this whole mess.

Now instead of all that let's again say you play on a site that charges $2/hand. I open a site that charges $1.80/hand. Which site has lower rake? About how much more will you save or lose per 100 hands? How much of a preference do you have for one site or the other, all other things being equal? Suddenly, competition is born!
Do it Right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 03:07 PM   #65
TheDarkElf
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,667
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

^^^ Who is buried in Grant's Tomb?
TheDarkElf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 03:12 PM   #66
RedEyedTroll
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 562
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Do it Right View Post
Another site charges 5% rake collected at 5 cents per dollar.
Please clarify how this system works. Are you saying that, at every $1 increment, 5% is removed for rake? So, if a pot reaches $2.50, then $0.10 would be taken out ($2 times .05), not $0.125 (which would be 5% of entire pot)?
RedEyedTroll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 03:50 PM   #67
Do it Right
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,890
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedEyedTroll View Post
Please clarify how this system works. Are you saying that, at every $1 increment, 5% is removed for rake? So, if a pot reaches $2.50, then $0.10 would be taken out ($2 times .05), not $0.125 (which would be 5% of entire pot)?
You have it exactly right.
Do it Right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 06:12 PM   #68
spacegod
journeyman
 
spacegod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Lazytown
Posts: 371
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf View Post
Not sure what your point is.
Yes, you're missing the point. The point is that I can make anything illegal to raise revenue or protect in-state industry and call it whatever I want, presumably under the guise to protect the children or w/e bull**** they want to dream up.

"Recent studies show MMORPGs are extremely addictive and an adverse health risk for children and teens. To protect California children from these games, you must acquire a license to provide online interactive gaming services to CA residents."

Quote:
Originally Posted by tamiller866 View Post
Since they made it a crime to play on unlicensed sites, not just unlicensed out of State sites, the barrier to commerce could be viewed as regulatory rather than protectionist.

That argument would probably hold up against offshore competition, and presumably a player pool agreement would be reached before they need to defend that position v licensed outer State competition.
It seems really close to the out-of-state winery issue that went to the Supreme Court imo.
spacegod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 06:26 PM   #69
TheDarkElf
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,667
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by spacegod View Post
Yes, you're missing the point. The point is that I can make anything illegal to raise revenue or protect in-state industry and call it whatever I want, presumably under the guise to protect the children or w/e bull**** they want to dream up.

"Recent studies show MMORPGs are extremely addictive and an adverse health risk for children and teens. To protect California children from these games, you must acquire a license to provide online interactive gaming services to CA residents."

It seems really close to the out-of-state winery issue that went to the Supreme Court imo.
You think you can, but our government doesn't treat poker like MMORPGs. Historically gambling has only been permitted in certain jurisdictions, and only when some sort of regulatory body is there to oversee it. MMORPGs are seen as not being an issue to even consider to even being concerned with. Perhaps that is wrong. Maybe you should try to organize similar minded citizens and try to regulate or even criminalize the playing of MMORPGs.

I wish you luck with your endeavor.
TheDarkElf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 06:29 PM   #70
TheDarkElf
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,667
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Do it Right View Post
You have it exactly right.
God forbid there be a thread in PL where DoTheMath doesn't bring up the rake issue.
TheDarkElf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 06:31 PM   #71
dmyers1166
old hand
 
dmyers1166's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Our lab cali
Posts: 1,671
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

if unchanged, I think some of this law will be visiting a court room, unless 30 mill is just to high and no one want to serve CA players.
dmyers1166 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 06:55 PM   #72
Golfing_Stud
4L Fantasy Football Champion '14
 
Golfing_Stud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: I'm with her!
Posts: 4,999
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerXanadu View Post
If the bill passes, it will immediately be a misdemeanor to either play on an unlicensed site in CA or to offer play to CA players. But it won't be illegal under CA law to get your money off a non-CA site. There won't be a grace period where you can legally continue to play on non-CA sites until the CA sites are live.
Thanks I will be watching this thread closely then
Golfing_Stud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 07:02 PM   #73
TheDarkElf
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,667
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfing_Stud View Post
Thanks I will be watching this thread closely then
If you get pinched, just remember:
  • you have the right to remain silent;
  • never rat out your friends;
  • don't bend down to pick up the soap; and
  • if you set some games up while behind bars, you might want to let the guys on death row win (implied odds!).

Disclaimer: IANAL (although I have seen every episode of Law and Order), so this should not be misconstrued as professional legal advice.
TheDarkElf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 08:58 PM   #74
ernestpworrell
enthusiast
 
ernestpworrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 51
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Can anyone summarize any tax information provided in this bill? With regards to what the sites and individual players might need to pay, etc.

Thanks.
ernestpworrell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2012, 11:47 PM   #75
PokerXanadu
Commander X-2
 
PokerXanadu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,368
Re: California Senate leader co-sponsors Internet gambling bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by ernestpworrell View Post
Can anyone summarize any tax information provided in this bill? With regards to what the sites and individual players might need to pay, etc.

Thanks.
This bill doesn't impose new taxes on players. You will have to pay CA income taxes and federal income taxes on your winnings just as you are required do now.
PokerXanadu is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online