Brodie Posted July 31, 2019 Author Share Posted July 31, 2019 9 minutes ago, Nowornever said: Does that mean you will not keep banging on about it! Not sure we can take much more of this torture! Don’t bother reading and commenting then. You obviously can not take much then? A Forum is designed for people to express their opinions whether you agree with it or not! The fact remains that the decision to treat every punter as a possible money launderer is just blatantly stupid and the TAB is wanting to increase profit going forward? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 How do they manage money laundering through pokies? For example if you pop down to the nearest local that is close to a local gang presence you will see folk pumping thousands through the pokies. If a gang cleans 1 in 3 dollars through the pokies I'd imagine they would be happy. But where is the Pokie Pass? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, shodsie said: brodie........ talking too a few of the management in the weekend this is not what the "tab" wants they have no choice....... this is going too cause a lot of hassles at retail and on race days and its something they could do with out in testing times...... i understand not only does it effect cash bets or collects over $1000, if you bet with a voucher with a balance of over $1000 every time you use it even if you spend only $50, every time you scan it you will need too produce ID or the "verified card" the big race days on course and retail will be a nightmare.......... NAH! the nz tab is a disgrace! in one word `MONOPOLY` Tell me a business that doesnt understand or cant comprehend that 2% of its clients overall win (yes their figures and published by their racing pocket booklet) I cant believe they used to offer $1 million P6 at the jewels got $250 for a 10% when mr molly just lost to changeover head to head bets cancelled for harness, so chose it when they adapted to that 1_7 $1.85 8_14 $1.90, but 50 mill later on an algorithm they have chosen their monopoly to exploit their egos, FAILURE! Big fat cameron george ceo puddled away once he found out that gluttoning on hotdogs is not press gold. !i believe these decisions will be the final decline for racing in general! it will be replaced by pokies and virtual racing machines, so much better for NZ, meglomaniac cam george and vain kearney cant seem to influence` a win at the mo? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiplash smile Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 25 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: How do they manage money laundering through pokies? For example if you pop down to the nearest local that is close to a local gang presence you will see folk pumping thousands through the pokies. If a gang cleans 1 in 3 dollars through the pokies I'd imagine they would be happy. But where is the Pokie Pass? well ask brett tod and leauge co, . all convicted, ok but money laundering through the tab would be fucking heaven for the tab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 41 minutes ago, whiplash smile said: well ask brett tod and leauge co, . all convicted, ok but money laundering through the tab would be fucking heaven for the tab Totally agree Whiplash that the TAB needs laundering to increase their turnover and profit. I reiterate it is not to do with money laundering the reduced amount of 1k rather than the 10k. It is all about being able to control the punters otherwise why isn’t the AML act altered to the $1k???? Why not because the NZ TAB in their wisdom want it and no one will be able to convince bigger punters otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonkatime! Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 3 hours ago, Brodie said: Shodsie, thanks for that. That being the case that the TAB didn’t want to bring it in, why did they accept it when the AML/CFT Act says $10k? I have not got a problem with sorting out any money laundering but I can not see how the TAB could not get thru to DIA that someone betting $2 and collecting $1k off a trifecta is likely to be money laundering. What was the reasoning by the DIA that all punters that spent or collected $1k was wanting to launder money? A regular punter of large amounts and collects if known to the TAB and checked out, should not be having to identify theirselves to the TAB and Big Brother every time. The TAB over the past few years have gone to lengths to stop their customers who are somewhat successful from betting with the TAB! This policy just totally enables the TAB to know who every punter is that wants to bet a reasonable amount and limit them to pathetic amounts. I for one am not prepared to play this stupid game that has come in. I am not and never needed to be a money launderer, and as such will not accept being treated like one and have to identify myself everytime I get a collect! Having spoken to someone at the tab and as rusty has said the DIA originally wanted a much lower threshold. The $1000 was a compromise between the two. The DIA wanted a much lower limit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 I pity the first time punters oncourse who fluke a couple of good trifecta's by buying $6 Easy Bets! Surely it is HOW MUCH is bet not the size of the collect? I would also have thought that there were far less riskier and easier way to launder cash than through the TAB e.g. Pokies. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: I pity the first time punters oncourse who fluke a couple of good trifecta's by buying $6 Easy Bets! Surely it is HOW MUCH is bet not the size of the collect? I would also have thought that there were far less riskier and easier way to launder cash than through the TAB e.g. Pokies. Totally correct Chief! It is another badly thought out policy from the TAB. It is hard to understand how the people that make these stupid decisions and policies ever get to be in these positions to be able to make these stupid decisions. It will come back to bite them on the butt! Edited August 1, 2019 by Brodie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowornever Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 hour ago, Brodie said: It is another badly thought out policy from the TAB. Not sure if you have been reading all the comments from this thread. This is not a TAB policy. The TAB are not implementing this on their own bat. They are being forced to do this by the Government. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 37 minutes ago, Nowornever said: Not sure if you have been reading all the comments from this thread. This is not a TAB policy. The TAB are not implementing this on their own bat. They are being forced to do this by the Government. Bollocks. The TAB hierarchy who are paid big money can surely point out the error of their ways to the Dept. of Internal Affairs If they insist that it is their idea to not fun with the AML act which clearly states the figure of 10k!!!!!!!! Why does the DIA believe that it should be on pathetic amounts of $1k for the TAB, do they think that there is plenty being laundered thru the TAB agencies???? If people are putting money thru TAB accounts as laundering then it is so easy to trace, so it is only agencies and oncourse that it will involve. We are not that stupid to believe that the DIA suggested the TAB adopt $1k and involve every single transaction over $1k even if it is from someone that has been lucky enough to get a trifecta!! Look, going around in circles and we are all entitled to believe what we like, but if punters believe that people are money laundering thru the TAB from spending $2 and should have to prove who they are, then they are delusional!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 hour ago, Nowornever said: Not sure if you have been reading all the comments from this thread. This is not a TAB policy. The TAB are not implementing this on their own bat. They are being forced to do this by the Government. Can you point us in the direction of where the DIA has notified this policy and where it is legislated? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Counter Punch Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Probably in here: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0035/latest/DLM7161207.html somewhere. Have fun reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shodsie Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 i would presume the TAB have been easy targets for the DIA a lot easier too take on mum and dad punters than big public/privately owned casinos etc......... this is going to be nothing but a pain in the arse for the tab they may get a bit more info but they can basically get the same info now without jamming up retail betting and causing a lot of frustration on big race days etc its no good for anybody apart from a few government bureaucrats who can now justify there and big tax payer funded salaries........ i say drain the swamp ? 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 Even the pub TABs are going to have to get the iDs as well, and during busy times it will be a pain in the butt for staff who work pouring drinks and the TAB! Ridiculous decision, they deserve to get reduced turnover! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 6 minutes ago, Brodie said: Even the pub TABs are going to have to get the iDs as well of course they will has this just dawned upon you lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 minute ago, Rangatira said: of course they will has this just dawned upon you lol That is what I said Ranga, dah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 hour ago, Counter Punch said: Probably in here: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0035/latest/DLM7161207.html somewhere. Have fun reading. Still $10k CP as at 3/7/19 unless someone can find it has been amended. TAB initiative and blaming on MOJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 8 hours ago, Brodie said: The fact remains that the decision to treat every punter as a possible money launderer is just blatantly stupid and the TAB is wanting to increase profit going forward? as usual you resort to telling lies 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowornever Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 35 minutes ago, Brodie said: Still $10k CP as at 3/7/19 unless someone can find it has been amended. TAB initiative and blaming on MOJ Who does what? The agencies who supervise the AML/CFT regime and the businesses (known as reporting entities under the Act) they monitor are: The Reserve Bank of New Zealand supervises banks, life insurers, and non-bank deposit takers. (See also: Financial market infrastructure oversight) The Financial Markets Authority supervises issuers of securities, licensed supervisors, fund managers, brokers and custodians, financial advisers, derivatives issuers, DIMS providers and peer to peer lending and equity crowd funding service providers. The Department of Internal Affairs supervises casinos, non-deposit taking lenders, money changers, money remitters, payroll remitters, debt collectors, factors, financial leasors, safe deposit box vaults, non-bank credit card providers, stored value card providers and cash transporters, and any other reporting entities not supervised by the Reserve Bank or the Financial Markets Authority. The Ministry of Justice is responsible for drafting and administering the AML/CFT Act and regulations. The Financial Markets Authority took over the AML/CFT functions of its predecessor, the Securities Commission of New Zealand, on 1 May 2011. The New Zealand Police Financial Intelligence Unit collates and analyses information relating to suspicious transactional activity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 24 minutes ago, Nowornever said: Who does what? The agencies who supervise the AML/CFT regime and the businesses (known as reporting entities under the Act) they monitor are: The Reserve Bank of New Zealand supervises banks, life insurers, and non-bank deposit takers. (See also: Financial market infrastructure oversight) The Financial Markets Authority supervises issuers of securities, licensed supervisors, fund managers, brokers and custodians, financial advisers, derivatives issuers, DIMS providers and peer to peer lending and equity crowd funding service providers. The Department of Internal Affairs supervises casinos, non-deposit taking lenders, money changers, money remitters, payroll remitters, debt collectors, factors, financial leasors, safe deposit box vaults, non-bank credit card providers, stored value card providers and cash transporters, and any other reporting entities not supervised by the Reserve Bank or the Financial Markets Authority. The Ministry of Justice is responsible for drafting and administering the AML/CFT Act and regulations. The Financial Markets Authority took over the AML/CFT functions of its predecessor, the Securities Commission of New Zealand, on 1 May 2011. The New Zealand Police Financial Intelligence Unit collates and analyses information relating to suspicious transactional activity. And your point is????? Where does it say that they want the TAB to get identification from everyone who bets or collects $1k rather than the $10k??????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 51 minutes ago, Rangatira said: as usual you resort to telling lies Where is the lie Ranga?? Every punter is being treated as a launderer by requiring anyone that collects $1k as a possible launderer even if they bet $2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 12 minutes ago, Brodie said: Where is the lie Ranga?? Every punter is being treated as a launderer by requiring anyone that collects $1k as a possible launderer even if they bet $2 So you laundered $2 whole dollars and won a $1000! It happens. Surely the focus should be on what was bet not the return! I'm starting to think that both the TAB and the DIA don't understand wagering. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 10 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: So you laundered $2 whole dollars and won a $1000! It happens. Surely the focus should be on what was bet not the return! I'm starting to think that both the TAB and the DIA don't understand wagering. Hit the nail on the head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted August 1, 2019 Author Share Posted August 1, 2019 13 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: So you laundered $2 whole dollars and won a $1000! It happens. Surely the focus should be on what was bet not the return! I'm starting to think that both the TAB and the DIA don't understand wagering. Chief, you are correct but as I keep saying the NZ TAB is behind the $1k limit not the DIA! The $1k enables the TAB to know so much more about who is winning and so they can restrict them, and gives them total control that is what it is about. Anyway I have more than said my bit about this topic. It was not me that picked up about the 1k that the TAB has adopted rather than the AML Act saying that it should be $10k. I will leave it now to everyone else to bet and be restricted and let’s see if everyone is happy about it. I am over the BS from the NZ TAB!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Just now, Brodie said: Chief, you are correct but as I keep saying the NZ TAB is behind the $1k limit not the DIA! The $1k enables the TAB to know so much more about who is winning and so they can restrict them, and gives them total control that is what it is about. Anyway I have more than said my bit about this topic. It was not me that picked up about the 1k that the TAB has adopted rather than the AML Act saying that it should be $10k. I will leave it now to everyone else to bet and be restricted and let’s see if everyone is happy about it. I am over the BS from the NZ TAB!!!!!!!! I get what you are saying. If you are a consistent winner through your online account they will restrict you. However up until now you could get around that by betting down at the local or oncourse. 1 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.