‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ potentially very bad for poker (players) in the US + STAY ON TOPIC!!
This makes Black Friday look like a children’s birthday party.
There’s no chance this passes right? It would
lol worrying about the gambling implications of this bill is like being on the Titanic and worrying about how the seawater might damage the couch cushions.
I have a lot of trouble feeling sorry for gamblers who voted for Trump. Sure, you can vote for a candidate on the theory that he mostly plans to do bad things to people who are unlike you. But it doesn't always work out that way. Playing with dynamite is super fun right up until the moment it isn't.
lol worrying about the gambling implications of this bill is like being on the Titanic and worrying about how the seawater might damage the couch cushions.
People are talking about the implications for gambling because that's the nominal purpose of the thread. They aren't claiming the gambling amendment is the only problem or the main problem.
Also, the time to worry about things like this bill was in November. After Trump won and the Republicans got control of both houses, something very close to this reconciliation bill was inevitable.
Fyi, it was a Democrat who shoved this into the bill at the last second with intentions to sabotage Republicans...and yes I have definitive sources. It was a demonrat Senate Parliamentarian (a lawyer), Elizabeth MacDonough invoking the Byrd rule. She was appointed by Harry Reid. Congress asked for 99% in deductions and she only agreed to 90%. She hates Trump fwiw. And just play
We don’t know her affiliation. Her post is subject to strict neutrality. Plus she actually doesn’t have final say. It is the President of Senate who actually has final say. Though it would be incredibly rare to overturn her.
Plus she has been praised and pillared by both parties after ruling for and against both. She clerked for a Judge nominated by Reagan (though he is probably more liberal than Reagan hoped).
Byrd rule is pretty constraining on the reconciliation process.
We don’t know her affiliation. Her post is subject to strict neutrality. Plus she actually doesn’t have final say. It is the President of Senate who actually has final say. Though it would be incredibly rare to overturn her. Plus she has been praised and pillared by both parties after ruling for and against both. She clerked for a Judge nominated by Reagan (though h
BGnight doesn't know wtf he is talking about. The Senate Parliamentarian doesn't cause anything to be affirmatively included in a reconciliation bill.
I have a lot of trouble feeling sorry for average Americans who voted for Trump. Sure, you can vote for a candidate on the theory that he mostly plans to do bad things to people who are unlike you. But it doesn't always work out that way. Playing with dynamite is super fun right up until the moment it isn't.
fyp
When will the part of the bill effecting the gambling tax go into effect?
So what are the chances she can pull this off?
0
What do mean? Uhh, that's what it was. It was literally an activist lawyer trying to sabotage the bill. She amended the Tax cuts and job act set to expire this year. It was brilliant on her part. She is a lawyer. But she did it. It's political warfare.
She doesn’t do anything. She makes a ruling but President of Senate actually implements (or can ignore)such decisions. She can be overruled but it is considered a nuclear option and VERY rare.
She literally cannot amend ANYTHING as she is not a member of the Senate. TCJA was ALWAYS written to expire in 10 years. That is standard how these kinds of provision get scored by CBO.
Fyi, it was a Democrat who shoved this into the bill at the last second with intentions to sabotage Republicans...and yes I have definitive sources. It was a demonrat Senate Parliamentarian (a lawyer), Elizabeth MacDonough invoking the Byrd rule. She was appointed by Harry Reid. Congress asked for 99% in deductions and she only agreed to 90%. She hates Trump fwiw. And just play
The number of misconceptions you’d have to have to come to the conclusion that’s how any of this works is astounding.
Parliamentarians (among other things) provide rulings on legislation that conflict with legislative statutes.
They technically can’t even remove conflicting statutes from a bill themselves, only rule it can’t be included. They certainly can’t unilaterally insert language into a bill.
Furthermore, all business of the Senate is public, and the vast majority has been streaming live on CSPAN. It would be the political story of the century if your version of events took place, not something getting spread on a poker form.
Happy to ship you a copy of Robert’s Rules, but a simple google would show whoever fed you that version of events was lying to your face.
it's all worth it as long as our kids can get jobs in the fields before school and pick some strawberries
its alright guys tournaments are lame anyway just play cash games!
She flagged the extension and said NO to the extension of current tax rules regarding gambling. The tried to negotiate and asked for 99% and she again said NO and only agreed with 90%. So apparently she held the power to do this. A change was introduced to the TCJA that temp removed the limitations that losses could not exceed 2% of AGI set to expire at end of 2025. It's over m
She literally has no power at all beyond what deference the Pres of Sen allows.
If he ignores her ruling, someone can call a point of order. This then gets voted on by entire senate. And the results of this senate vote establishes a new precedent. So literally Senate Repubs could override her by a simple party line vote. The price of that is so can Dems next time they don’t like a ruling. These kinds of tit for tat would make senate even less manageable.
You can’t even show she hates Trump. The last time she was ignored was when Reid invoked the nuclear option to change the rules on filibustering judges.
She has ruled against Dems as much as Repubs.
It really is about the last actual non partisan role in govt.
in theory this means all us based tournament grinders should need to retire right? The interesting part to me is I don't think this will kill live tournaments.
Infact someone like me who lives in canada can now travel to the united states and play in mtt's with only American fish since all the pros switched to cash or retired.
Pretty funny plz vote the guy who wants to annex us more
No idea, but obviously she has power to decide what can stay or not due to Byrd rule. Congress was negotiating with her and she had the power to keep it at 90% according to what I read. I'm sure there'll be better sources tomorrow. I'm guessing since the current gamblings laws were set to expire and go to 90% instead of 100% she shot down the extension. She didn't actually amen
If TCJA expired, and that is where current rules were set, things go back to pre 2018. There was no 90% limit on loss deductions. So that is not what happened.
I am not saying she did not tell them, without formal ruling, what was her introduction. The Senate Byrd rules are HIGHLY detailed and confusing. I don’t see how ext3nding just as is would have violated but I am not a parlimentarian. It is very complex and confusing.
But she cannot do anything. The VP presides over the senate and has the real say. If her interpretation was way out of wack and not supported by Byrd rule, I don’t think this administration would be afraid to ignore her.
yep Europeans can come play poker tournaments in America tax free. you guys have really made alot of peoples day taking all the winning regs out of the field. poker won't really die. unbeatable raked poker runs all over the world including where I live. fish don't care only pros
i thought in practice everyone reasonable who plays in usa just plays cash games then change chips like below 10k at time at cages
with online pokers use crypto swap it then somewhere
so what exactly gets affected and for who is some live tournaments where you are forced pay taxes
Well you are conflating multiple laws. The $10K transaction limit has nothing to do with taxes.
While nothing ever gets reported tax wise on live poker play, ignoring BBJP and similar, that doesn’t mean taxes on cash winnings are not taxable. And there are people who pay taxes for live cash play. You can be caught for not paying such taxes.
BTW using legit crypto services won’t avoid CTRs. FinCEN ruled on this years ago. But again, that $10K limit has nothing to do with taxes. You also might want to reconsider how anonymous and hidden crypto is. You can be identified. Your transactions tracked. And monies reclaimed. If you don’t believe that look into the ransomwear case involving Colonial Pipeline in 2021. (And govt capabilities today are far more advanced.)
