From all the discussion above, hopefully once the gaming interests pushing for iPoker clear the first hurdle of getting laws passed, they'll start lobbying (or assist any efforts in such) individual "bad tax" States on the tax issue as well. It's very much in their long-term $$ interest to do so.

If Harry or Suzy plays and loses at the local casino, they don't report it, and there's no tracking/record of it. No hidden tax charge to prevent them from coming back and losing to the casino time and again.

In iGaming, the feds are going to have a good record - maybe even an exact record of every win/loss. Harry and Suzy, if they live in a "bad tax" State will get walloped on their taxes, and may stop gambling once that happens.

If it's changed State-by-State, and for all forms of gambling, sounds like there wouldn't be that much opposition. Especially since the States will be getting revenue under iPoker and the one year tax windfall (from unknowing Harry & Suzy) probably <<< the long-term revenue stream from iPoker.

Gramps:

I think you are right that the reason these state statutes survive is because so few people are reporting their gambling income anyway. To the extent legal poker creates a form of gambling that is carefully tracked with reported winnings, states will have an incentive to tax it rationally.

In my opinion, it will be like in France, they begin to legalize online poker and one or two years later, they pay taxes to poker players.

No, not really. Groups opposed to deductions tend to be those opposed to gambling. They see this as subsidizing of gambling.

Here's an article on a 1997 attempt to eliminate the federal gambling loss deduction: http://articles.sfgate.com/1997-07-1...-horse-council

From the legislation:

Pro-gaming interests tend to support the tax deduction. We saw this in Ohio, where they won the change referenced earlier ITT.

This