The Wire act criminalizes being in the business of betting. This has generally been defined (even by Congress way back when) as the bookie and not the individual bettor. This seems clear.
My question is, to be defined as being in the business, would someone have to have a chance of profiting.
Specifically, if someone ran a matchbook like site with no vig where all bettors bets simply had to match someone elses and the owner of the site held balance in a bank account with no interest such that there was no chance or intend to profit, would the owner be violating the wire act?
As a second option if someone ran a matchbook like site with no vig where all bettors bets simply had to match someone elses and the owner was a non profit organization continuously and immediately donating all interest on balances held to a federally approved charity such that he could never profit would the owner be violating the wire act?
The reason I ponder this is it is becoming more and more difficult for established players or professionals to get down 4 or 5 figure bets. Pinnacle has brought credit down as it is having trouble moving money, Matchbook has really outlawed the U.S., almost no offshores take wires anymore, fullboat is closed for a few weeks, etc... At some point it would seem if people want to keep making a living gambling they might have to set up their own vig free exchange.
Just pondering thoughts as this industry continues to contract.
IO,
There was a book out of Vegas called Wagerfree that claimed to fit the concept you are talking about. It happened to be an outright scam where players stood no chance of being paid. However, the guy was arrested by local Vegas officials for operating a gaming company without a license and not by feds for running an outright scam on US soil (if I am remembering correctly). All the details should be on that page.
If you're going to do this in the US it's PASPA (The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992) that makes sports betting illegal, period, profit or no profit, unless you are physically located in one of 4 states grandfathered in (Nevada, Delaware, Oregon, Montana).
If you're outside the US, I'm assuming the same restrictions on sending and receiving money to this mythical website as any offshore site would apply because of PASPA.
What is your legal question exactly, because that makes no sense, where will the law worry you? IRS is the only I ever worry about when it comes to gambling that I get my correct return , either pay them or get refund, whichever may be the case. Simply put I have received credit for offshore losses due to the fact that all I needed to show was the correct matching amount of losses as filed in my return, providing the website was a genuine business and loss credit was cleared as genuine, so what exact legal question in relation to gambling. 911 changed money movement for the whole world so is it to transfer money is your real question? and if so go look up some of the security acts and see that moving money is more the problem, not gambling.
Don't think the idea will fly. First of all, the "spirit" of law is to forbid money transfer across state line for the purpose of gambling. Second, government can argue the players who make offers are in fact bookies. There you go.
SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks
Hypothetical legal questin / discussion
Reply With Quote
