Again, like judge and others have said in other posts, no one is at risk individually. This has to do with funding accounts. I withdrew a good portion of my money at poker and books. This is my decision and I stick with it, but I am still active at all and have some funds there. Enough to use, and if I need to reload, I have no problem doing so if I still can, but I see no reason not to get big chunks out now.
This article seems to think the legislation isn't that bad. I also said earlier, that I think neteller is the key. Also, we still have 270 days with banking institutions, but if party closes accounts than there is little we can do about that. I think the best strategy is to play cautiously.
The key again is what the legislative bodies write into the bill.
ST. LOUIS (Dow Jones/AP) ? The Internet gambling legislation passed late last week by the U.S. Congress, which led to a major sell-off of Britain-based online gambling stocks Monday, remains a concern to the U.S. banking industry but isn?t as burdensome as feared.
?We got some language in the bill that looks like it protects the financial services industry,? said Steve Verdier, director of congressional relations for the Independent Community Bankers of America, which represents almost 5,000 banks in the United States. ?It could have been a lot worse.?
The legislation is designed to prohibit U.S. banks and credit card companies from processing payments for illegal online gambling. Financial services companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had expressed concerns about the compliance burdens that would be imposed, such as tracking and blocking potentially millions of transactions.
Under the legislation as passed, ?If you are acting as a normal bank, and you?re not in some sort of conspiracy with a betting house, then you are not going to be held liable,? Verdier said.
In addition, the legislation will be guided and enforced by regulations written by the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury Department.
?If they find that the banks just don?t have the technology to track and block these transactions, then we don?t have to,? Verdier said. ?The Fed and Treasury are not supposed to ask us to do the impossible.?
Still, Verdier said, ?we will have to see how those regulations get written.?
The legislation, attached to an unrelated port security bill, was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives Friday and by the U.S. Senate early Saturday. It is expected to be signed into law by President Bush.
Shares in Britain-based betting companies, such as PartyGaming PLC, 888 Holdings PLC and Sportingbet PLC, plunged Monday. The companies said they would suspend business from the United States if the legislation is enacted.
The U.S. Justice Department has been bringing fraud charges against online gambling companies and their executives.
For example, BetOnSports PLC and its former chief executive, David Carruthers, were indicted in June in federal court in St. Louis, and the company closed its U.S. operations Aug. 12.
AP-CS-10-02-06 1428EDT ?
This article seems to think the legislation isn't that bad. I also said earlier, that I think neteller is the key. Also, we still have 270 days with banking institutions, but if party closes accounts than there is little we can do about that. I think the best strategy is to play cautiously.
The key again is what the legislative bodies write into the bill.
ST. LOUIS (Dow Jones/AP) ? The Internet gambling legislation passed late last week by the U.S. Congress, which led to a major sell-off of Britain-based online gambling stocks Monday, remains a concern to the U.S. banking industry but isn?t as burdensome as feared.
?We got some language in the bill that looks like it protects the financial services industry,? said Steve Verdier, director of congressional relations for the Independent Community Bankers of America, which represents almost 5,000 banks in the United States. ?It could have been a lot worse.?
The legislation is designed to prohibit U.S. banks and credit card companies from processing payments for illegal online gambling. Financial services companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had expressed concerns about the compliance burdens that would be imposed, such as tracking and blocking potentially millions of transactions.
Under the legislation as passed, ?If you are acting as a normal bank, and you?re not in some sort of conspiracy with a betting house, then you are not going to be held liable,? Verdier said.
In addition, the legislation will be guided and enforced by regulations written by the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury Department.
?If they find that the banks just don?t have the technology to track and block these transactions, then we don?t have to,? Verdier said. ?The Fed and Treasury are not supposed to ask us to do the impossible.?
Still, Verdier said, ?we will have to see how those regulations get written.?
The legislation, attached to an unrelated port security bill, was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives Friday and by the U.S. Senate early Saturday. It is expected to be signed into law by President Bush.
Shares in Britain-based betting companies, such as PartyGaming PLC, 888 Holdings PLC and Sportingbet PLC, plunged Monday. The companies said they would suspend business from the United States if the legislation is enacted.
The U.S. Justice Department has been bringing fraud charges against online gambling companies and their executives.
For example, BetOnSports PLC and its former chief executive, David Carruthers, were indicted in June in federal court in St. Louis, and the company closed its U.S. operations Aug. 12.
AP-CS-10-02-06 1428EDT ?
