There is a pending bill in Nevada that, by its terms, would prohibit, criminalize P2P staking for brick & mortar poker tournaments, among other activities.

SENATE BILL NO. 40–COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
(ON BEHALF OF THE STATE GAMING CONTROL BOARD)
PREFILED DECEMBER 20, 2014

See, https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/...ls/SB/SB40.pdf

While the bill aims generally at sports-betting, its reach extends to poker tournament staking.

(It also adds coverage of "property played" to the prohibition, so seemingly no one can structure something around the bill and argue but the actual wagering was "just tournament chips" being played for .....)

Events like the One Drop may be dependent upon some sort of private staking to succeed. Others, like the Main Event may see a drop in participation if EVERY player had to put up his own stake. Chris Moneymaker, for example, was staked to his watershed win. Why choke off participation by a home-town hero who wants to come to Las Vegas with a dream of winning the Main Event and is backed by his friends ?

This coverage of staking of entrants to legal licensed poker multi-table events in Nevada is not something that is needed to address legitimate concerns about money laundering through sportsbooks, which FinCEN and the IRS explained last Fall to a crowded room of Nevada gaming industry folks.

The underlying overreach problem is that, even a fully disclosed, properly taxed staking structure would become prohibited if this bill passes as pre-filed.

How would anyone know if someone is staked?

What if I make staking agreements outside Nevada state lines?

How would you ever prove someone is staked?

When a tourny payout winner goes to collect his winnings at the cage and asks the casino to split up the W-2G's among other people, those who staked him.

So a completely asinine law is proposed that even prohibits players swapping a %. And you think that the most important point is how LEA would go about proving it?

btw people have to declare staking for tax reasons.

Of course they'll know. Because if you win you'll file taxes on it so unless the one person pays all the taxes or he collects the winnings subtract a percentage for taxes then pays out to his investors.

At a Federal level, the IRS would know of a financial transaction between the two players, but at the local Nevada level this would certainly be VERY hard to prove and therefore makes this a ridiculously poorly worded bill. It is clear that this bill was written to appease the recent request of the IRS and FinCEN (the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) to reform the casino industry's financial transaction procedures. Fines have already been levied against Venetian, Canter Gaming's sports books, and they are working on an investigation of Wynn - this bill is a side effect of those investigations. It is primarily aimed at sports wagering, but poker back, swapping, and staking will be a side effect unless the backer is licensed by the State of Nevada.

Casinos already file Cash Transactions Reports and Suspicious Activity Reports, but FinCEN asked casinos to also start reporting where their customer's money is coming from when large transactions are made. This bill appears to be Nevada Gaming's way to placate the requests of FinCEN without understanding the ramifications of their actions. In my opinion, this bill would destroy the WSOP where most pros and many amateurs sell action to friends, fmily, and investors.

The agreement location does not matter, if the wager takes place in Nevada then the law would apply.

WSOP/CAESARS no longer splits W-2G's, I always assumed it was due to a FinCEN request but I do not know for sure.

This bill MUST be stopped, it will destroy the poker economy. If successful, I predict similar laws will be introduced across the USA. The bill might be the single biggest threat to the poker industry we have seen to date, the word must get out! I hope the PPA takes a firm stance against this bill!

By way of background, here is the sports-betting impetus for this sort of bill.

http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/...f/01162015.pdf

In a Letter to the AGA, FinCEN explained its sportsbetting concerns, echoing a prior live presentation to the Nevada gaming industry.

The extension of SB40 to poker staking in licensed B&M tournaments goes a bit beyond that sports-betting focus.

Given the variance of investing in any given player result in a large MTT, tournament poker staking has to rank way down the list of money laundering techniques.

I know people are going to hate this, but some people will find it to be a positive thing that it is prohibited to swap and stake.

I recently played a tourney where three players at the final table had pieces of one another. That whole table would have played different if those players only had 100% of themselves. I am not accusing anyone of actual cheating they were very open about the whole thing but it clearly affected play in some spots. This was for just over 8k first prize with a $525 entry. If someone can't come up with $525 and have a 100% of themselves I personally don't have any problem with them being shut out of the tourney or more complicated tax situation if they do it under the table. Sure the field may be a bit smaller, again so what? If it is better for majority of the causal players that are the lifeblood of these types of events that should be the goal of regulation.

I get the "One drop thing" and maybe there should be a carveout for very high buy-in tourneys but it actually might be a better poker world for the casual player if this was prohibited. Sure if you a pro that can only continue to play at your current buyins with being staked you are going to cry bloody murder. But I am more interested in what is better for the casual guy and poker in general then the pro trying to lesson variance or get staked for his next event he's underrolled for.

Moneymaker was not staked, he won a satellite on Stars and was part of the reason online poker exploded.

this idea is awful...just as the rest of the country is becoming more liberal vegas now decides to tighten the reigns? also, will this affect the LVH supercontest? it sounds like it wants to rid of proxy betting

Your post is short sighted and lacking in understanding of how prevalent selling shares is in the WSOP Main Event. Imagine a field that is only 1/5th of its current size.... yes, selling shares is that common. Its not just pros, virtually every single amateur I come across in the main event sells shares of their action. This bill if enacted as law would be a gunshot into the head of Caesars, and could kill WSOP as we know it.

Every other career, field or industry allows you to sell shares of ownership or investment, isolating poker is ridiculous. The debate of staking WITHIN our industry should continue because that is a debate over whether or not staking/backing/shares should be disclosed - but EVERYONE should fight to stop this bill because it turns poker players who sell or buy shares into criminals with imprisonment in NY State prison for a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 6 years, or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both fine and imprisonment.

PS: We are dealing with a bill proposed by the Feds and the Nevada State Gaming authorities, they have no intention to provide a carveout for highroller events like One Drop, they are going after the high roller money.

Correct, this bill goes after proxy betting.

UPDATE: First news article about NV SB40 is available - http://www.pokerrealmoney.com/propos...hreatens-wsop/

Enough with the Chicken Little's the sky is falling.

This bill goes after illegal money laundering by using 3rd parties to place wagers. I.E. - Instead of Pablo "El Padrino" Escobar making a bet at the cage, he sends his money in with a "mule" to make the bet for him.

This bill is not about targeting the four plumbers in Arkansas who each stake their buddy $2K so he can represent them all in the WSOP, because he won their series of private poker tournaments.

I think nothing material changes from this bill as it relates to poker tournaments.

Oh and about splitting W-2G's, I heard there was a line out the door to the cage when Antonio won the One Drop with each backer getting a W-2G for their percentage. Casinos have no interest in splitting W-2G's for a 4-figure score, but if the amount is high enough, they will do it. Antonio only had 17.5% of himself, if he didn't get a split W-2G, he would have to come out of pocket for the taxes alone.

I seem to recall he sold at least one piece of himself to a friend after he won the satellite.

Wrong. The bill does not differentiate between who made the wager. It does not matter if the mule, Pablo "El Padrino" Escobar, or the four plumbers from Arkansas make the wager - as currently worded it would be equally illegal if this bill passes with the same maximum and minimum penalties applicable. It would be up to the discretion of the prosecutors and the judge to decide what penalty within this range would be applied. Regardless of the penalty, it's still a felony... does anyone with any common sense really think it should be a penalty to accept or provide backing in a tournament?

And he backed out at the last second bc he lost $

Wow this is harsh. This bill has to be stopped!

god america is scary, all for the tax pigs at the top, they will pass any law to collect.

Ok Chicken Little, just like how prostitution is technically illegal in Las Vegas but do you see LEO's knocking down doors trying to book every John who's in town for a convention?

TT even though we've never met I have deep respect for you and your long posting history on 2+2.

The best thing for long-term large numbers in big buy-in poker tournaments is to get legitimate online poker in the United States. I would say "legal" but everyone jumps on that. I can tell you my Congressman who caries a lot more weight than virtually everybody else around here on the issue has told me multiple times on multiple occasions that it's illegal to play online poker in the United States. No need to correct me I'm aware that there is legal online poker in the US for example in Nevada.

Is it bad for poker pros that it would become much more difficult to stake and swap shares in poker tournaments? You bet!

Is it bad for Caesar's that the fields would be smaller at the WSOP? Definitely.

But is it bad for the casual player that a smaller percentage of players would be staked and swapping shares with one another in your average poker tournament? I don't think so. I think it's actually healthy thing.

I know I've been using antidotal stories, but they make a point. In a tournament that I played in Las Vegas a couple of years ago at the Bellagio when they had the $1080 buy in on Fridays. (I have no idea what it is now as that tournament's changed quite a bit over the last couple of years.) Two players at the final table of the tournament had and an arrangement that they would split 50-50 in any money negotiated in a deal. Another player who I've played with on multiple trips who's not a fan of these two guys "outed" there deal to me. It was pretty obvious that they were trying to negotiate second and third place money for both of them that would be split evenly between them with eight players remaining at a final table. One was third in chips one was fifth? Is this arrangement between these players which was never disclosed to anybody at the final table healthy for poker? Until it was brought to my attention, I was completely unaware that these guys had that type of the deal. Guess who was leading the negotiations at the final table? Both of them, and appearing to act independent of one another.

I agree a disclosure helps but it does not clean up something distasteful things about poker tournaments. If it means that we plan smaller fields is that really that devastating?

An ideal world would have legal, legit online poker that players could put up small amounts of money to win big buyins and everyone plays for themselves.

I understand your argument about other careers allowing splitting up ownership, but poker like many other events including sports is very different. Do you think people would be comfortable with 6 tennis players splitting the prize money of a tennis tournaments to reduce variance on the tour regardless of where they finish? Sure they could hand money to one another under the table but to just come out and declare we want to reduce our variance so were just going to split our earnings equally amongst the six of us regardless who wins the tournament would not be applauded by everyone.

What ever happened to all of that **** in the Pledge of Alliance about liberty and justice for all?

I don't think the "Johns" are the prostitutes......

And good luck in court with the "I thought that law was for a big fish" argument, if you are ever unfortunate enough to need to use it.

You people need a civics lesson.

Yes, the bill is bad on its face. Although I do share the views that I don't see it being enforced, either at the state level or by the IRS/federally, such that even if passed, I don't see it mattering, but let's play along. Let's say it'll be enforced to the fullest extent and everything that could be bad about this will happen if passed.

We're NOWHERE NEAR THAT yet. Yes, any pro-poker political groups/committees/lobbyist firms should start making the relevant phone calls to the state assemblymen and state senators. Yes, well-connected poker players should contact anyone and everyone they know involved in Nevada State politics. Yes, if you are someone who is heavily involved in staking or being staked during WSOP, and live in Nevada, I suggest calling your local assemblyman and/or state senator (state senator obviously more important as the bill is in the senate, but it can't hurt to talk to your assemblyman as well if you've got nothing else to do). about this bill. And I highly suspect that WSOP will have something to say about this bill while it's being discussed in the state senate.

But we're nowhere near this bill being passed and taking effect. It's just in committee, and hasn't yet been discussed.

The Nevada Legislature is a funny beast. Since they only meet for a few months every other year, to try to actually get things done for the few months they actually are in session, they allow (encourage, and on some issues, require) any assemblyman, state senator, state agency, and any lobbyist/lobbying firm that meets certain conditions to presubmit a bill for consideration. There are a LOT of these bills.

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/...s/Prefiled.cfm

Most will not be passed. A few are downright ******ed, submitted as a favor by an assemblyman/senator as a favor to a friend or donor. Others are critical.

This bill - https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/...ls/SB/SB40.pdf is one of them. At some point during the legislative session, it will be discussed in the judiciary committee. I do not know if those meetings are open to the public, if they are, I suggest well-connected poker players / lobbyists / "important representatives" attend and make their voice heard. If it gets out of committee and goes to the senate floor for discussion, that's when it becomes important. But that's still a ways away.

Also, I think people need to realize that the bill is trying to address proxy services for sports betting and I believe that, for reasons that aren't relevant to this thread/poker, the NGC/other regulators and administrators of sports wagering consider to be a serious problem. Trying to stop the bill outright is not going to be easy, and possibly not even feasible at all. The best focus would be to get the senate to change the wording of the bill to make sure the focus is on sports wagering.

But yeah, we're nowhere near the panic button. All we've got is a bill submitted. For those who follow the US Congress, Ted Cruz (or some other tea party nutjob) submits retared bills almost daily. They go nowhere.