Trojan Posted Thursday at 08:42 PM Share Posted Thursday at 08:42 PM Racing bill under scrutiny: TAB NZ could become sole online betting operator - The Front Page www.nzherald.co.nz “In the privatised system, money would not be recycled through national sporting organisations and would instead go to places like Gibraltar and Malta. “However, some argue that such monopoly limits choice for consumers and can lead to inefficiencies in the markets. A lot of my reporting has been based on this issue. Some of the submissions on the bill argue that extending the monopoly online would lead to less favourable odds because of a lack of competition. “The Commerce Commission is currently trying to increase competition in the banking and grocery sectors and they [opponents] say this is them doing the opposite and that would lead to less favourable odds or wagers for New Zealand punters,” he said. The TAB estimates Kiwis lose $185 million a year to offshore operators, with the changes expected to retain this money. While changes to the bill are being scrutinised at the select committee stage, TAB NZ’s operator, Entain, faces allegations of not doing enough to combat money laundering and corruption in Australia. It’s the first time Australia’s financial crimes regulator (AUSTRAC) has brought civil penalty proceedings against a business operating in the online betting sector. It’s suing under the same Australian laws that saw Crown pay $450m in penalties over two years in 2023 for breaching money laundering laws. Last year, Adelaide’s SkyCity was fined $63m for links to organised crime, loan sharking, and human trafficking. The proceedings allege that Entain “did not develop and maintain a compliant anti-money laundering program and failed to identify and assess the risks it faced”, by its board and senior management not having oversight of its AML/CTF programme, operating a 24/7 business via its website and app. Thompson told The Front Page it also alleges Entain has not conducted appropriate checks on higher-risk customers. “Racing Minister Winston Peters' spokesperson told me it wouldn’t be appropriate to comment on legal action, but that the minister has been briefed on the matter. “He said TAB NZ’s board has sought assurances from Entain regarding the action, and have advised that Entain has engaged and cooperated fully with AUSTRAC,” he said. In the UK, mystery surrounds why accounting firm KPMG is under investigation by the sector’s regulator over its audit of Entain’s 2022 accounts. It comes after Entain in 2023 settled for bribery offences at the group’s former Turkish unit, which it had sold in 2017. It was after an investigation looked into allegations that Entain failed to have adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery. Thompson said an interesting part of the submissions on the amendments to the bill is that Peters and TAB NZ contend it’ll reduce gambling harm. “In the submissions against the bill, there are some people who argue that it could potentially increase gambling harm because if the odds are worse than they are no, troubled gamblers who aren’t necessarily paying that much attention to the odds and are just trying to scratch an itch would theoretically lose their money faster than they would if the odds are better,” he said. Others have expressed concern that the monopoly would push Kiwis onto the black market. “That is clearly a risk and the minister has acknowledged that will likely happen, that very committed sports bettors will find a way around the law using things like cryptocurrencies, etc,” he said. “For the main credible ones, Betway, Bet365, and Sportsbet, it’s unlikely that will be possible to bet with them using a VPN because you still need to verify your age and your address, and given if you give them a New Zealand address they will be legally obliged not to let you bet with them.” Listen to the full episode for more on the state The Front Page is a daily news podcast from the New Zealand Herald, available to listen to every weekday from 5am. The podcast is presented by Chelsea Daniels, an Auckland-based journalist with a background in world news and crime/justice reporting who joined NZME in 2016. You can follow the podcast at iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Centaur Posted Friday at 01:08 AM Share Posted Friday at 01:08 AM Money laundering is a problem only with casinos. Trying to brush horse racing with that accusation is false and without reason. There are enough controls or fall backs in racing so putting more controls will be a turnoff. AS always our administrators will be gutless and not speak out. I'm not a fan of any bookmaking outfit as I don't think racing needs them. But this article seems a crude way to try and smear racing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted Friday at 01:35 AM Share Posted Friday at 01:35 AM 23 minutes ago, The Centaur said: I'm not a fan of any bookmaking outfit as I don't think racing needs them. But this article seems a crude way to try and smear racing. I'm not really clear how this article is doing that. It seems to me to be considering the arguments for and against the monopoly bill as put forward in the submissions. I don't see it smearing racing in any way. Did you listen to the full interview? https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1049-the-front-page-30038501/?pname=nzh_web&sc=podcast_show Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Centaur Posted Friday at 02:20 AM Share Posted Friday at 02:20 AM 39 minutes ago, curious said: I'm not really clear how this article is doing that. It seems to me to be considering the arguments for and against the monopoly bill as put forward in the submissions. I don't see it smearing racing in any way. Did you listen to the full interview? https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1049-the-front-page-30038501/?pname=nzh_web&sc=podcast_show No didn't listen. Initial reaction to the article is the alleged linkage of racing to money laundering. Quite frankley all the controls TAB try to put on customers is not necessary as long as there is linkage of phone to punter. All the checks are already there so the so called "compliance" is a double up of costs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted Friday at 02:36 AM Share Posted Friday at 02:36 AM (edited) Isn't the issue about that, that there is no phone linkage with internet betting and more-so, no easily traceable linkage with overseas operators, hence Peters' and Entain's argument pro the online monopoly legislation? Obviously, the Commerce Commission among others disagree that is a sufficient argument. Edited Friday at 02:37 AM by curious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.