i suggest www.cibc.com they are the most gaming friendly.

Thanks for the clarification! By debit account I just meant the opposite of credit, that you can spend only within the limits of what is actually on your account right now and no more.

Wow, gruevlock, you just took a huge weight off my shoulders! For some reason, it never really struck me before, that I can eliminate Skrill from the cashout chain and go from PS to the bank directly. Thanks for the hint!

Thanks for all your answers guys! It's sad to hear that Skrill/Netteller options are no longer available, but what if you have a VIP Skrill Mastercard debit card ? Can you use it anyway to cashout small sums of money through ATMs (the limits are like 300$/daily for Bronze Skrill level) ? Or dead means really dead and you can't use anything Skrill-related any more?

I opened with CIBC. Been smooth sailing so far.

It even shows up on your bank account that it's pokerstars lol We've been traumatized by Black Friday and how it is now. But guess in Canada and other countries they just don't give a damn like it's suppost to be!!! NP with the help was i really stressed about it too... but seriously this Stars traffic nowadays is amazing wish i moved back earlier. Screw Merge and Bovada!!! what a joke!! lol

hi, can someone here please help me and give me a quick answer as to whether or not online poker winnings are actually taxable in canada? everyone seems to tell me something different and im really confused. -> say if i hypothetically have like mid sixfigures on an online poker account, would i be able to wire that money over and pay no taxes on it?

thanks!

No one can give you that quick answer you're looking for. If you really have mid six figures online, Id suggest starting with reading through this thread thoroughly. That's a good place to start at least.

Just like poker,
IT DEPENDS!

You can wire that ~$500,000 and it will be reported to FINTRAC. Since Canada has a self-reporting system, many winning players have chosen not to report their profits as taxable income. If the CRA decides to audit you and asks you to pay taxes, you may be able to challenge them in court and win. Good luck.

I'd adjust the odds of online players being pursued for tax up after today's takeover and the ability of CRA in being successful even more so. I still think it isn't a big concern but it is a bigger concern than before.

Henry, I don't understand your post. Can you please explain what you're referring to?

Okay, just saw the news about Amaya purchasing Pokerstars. But how does this affect the taxation situation in Canada?

If CRA is ever going to be successful they have to abandon the well you win at poker so you're a professional argument. The courts have made it very clear that if CRA wants to be successful they need to focus on the player's behaviour at the table and on the site. If they do this I strongly believe that they will be successful. One of the major obstacles to doing this is the trouble of getting the data they would need to analyze. Having to do that in a different jurisdiction might not be possible and even if it was possible would be a much bigger cost and hassle. I don't know what CRA's powers are when it comes to compelling businesses to assist them but I think it is safe to say it will be a lot easier to get information from a domestic company.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks.

I would be more worried about Canadians being banned from playing on pokerstars in the near future than the CRA scheming.

Can someone explain to me why there is so much speculation about Poker Stars leaving the Canadian market after it's sale in September?

Stars has been bought by a Canadian publicly traded company called Amaya and there seems to be a lot of people thinking it's good game Canada. PokerStars Steve even went out if his way in a post to mention that "nothing is changing at this current time, specifically referencing Canada. "This current time" is pretty vague and doesn't mean much when September rolls around.

Anyone?

In the past gaming operators have often chosen to not to conduct business in their home country if there is even the slightest question of legality.

I think Amaya overpaid and that they likely evaluated this on the hope of getting into the US market which I see as a low probability. I have no idea how this will play out if they fail to get into the States but it could create an opportunity for someone else to challenge for market leader in a few years.

I found this post in this thread. I think there's a few more from other posters discussing this topic

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...ement-1451606/

There is precedence with another operator that is owned by a company that conducts a lot of business in Canada closing its doors to Canadian customers. Boss Media owned by GTECH (who I used to work for).

I can give you the quick answer and I proved it in Federal Court - no, it is not taxable.

Is there a legal way around this? The PS representative assures us that nothing will change, but they haven't mentioned exactly how they are going to be able to offer poker in Canada without violating laws.

Not in any way that I think is likely to happen.

1) Separating the Canadian players into their own site like they do with some European countries and running that site rake free.

2) Moving the business to the other side of the river. Amaya is in Montreal but if they were to move a few minutes drive south they would be in the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake.

3) Makes deals with the various provincial gaming commissions for some kind of licencing.

http://ca.pokernews.com/news/2014/06...stars-4265.htm

Thoughts on this? The author seems optimistic, though I'm not sure it's warranted based on what we know.

I think the article ignores that size of the acquisition and how that impacts both appetite for risk and risk itself.

It also equates the facilitating of gambling with actually running a gambling operation and while both are covered by the CC I don't think they are viewed the same way.

I read the article a couple of days ago but if I remember correctly it doesn't even touch on Amaya's supposed plan to add a casino and sportsbook. I guess they could just not offer those additions to Canadians but adding a casino and sportsbook increases the odds they pull out of Canada by a lot.

Seems (3) could potentially happen.


http://quebec.huffingtonpost.ca/2014...n_5513092.html

Google translate to English for those who need

Fierce competition from illegal online poker sites and the need to increase its profits, forcing Loto-Québec to explore new avenues. The corporation now plans to offer a license to sites like Poker Stars, in return for lucrative income.

"In respect of the Canadian Criminal Code, we are now looking to see if there would be no alternative for us," says the spokesperson for Loto-Quebec, Marie-Claude Rivet.

Loto-Quebec is trying to increase its revenues, while only pay dividends required by the Quebec government. In 2013, the corporation recorded profits down 10.5%. Dividends were also down $ 139 million to $ 1.055 billion.

One such alternative would be a "contractual agreement" with the main sites of illegal poker adds Marie-Claude Rivet. A bit like the lottery in convenience stores, Loto-Québec sign trade agreements with illegal websites. These now be operating within the law and getting away with income. Profits, they would be paid to Loto-Québec.

For the moment, only Loto-Québec may legally operate a poker site online in Quebec. But significant market shares beyond him.

"It is very difficult for Loto-Québec manage to funnel offer online gambling in a significant proportion," says Marie-Claude Rivet.

Loto-Québec accounts for only 10% to 12% of the games online casino in Quebec, including poker and other gambling. Impossible to know the market share of Loto-Québec for poker only. The corporation offers games online since 2010.

Montreal-based Amaya Gaming Group, which bought Poker Stars and Full Tilt Poker last week to $ 4.9 billion, could be the first company to receive such a license.

The company is already a supplier of Loto-Québec for devices in casinos. However, Marie-Claude Rivet says that talks with Amaya are still in their "infancy". "It is not very advanced by the time we speak," she said.