We go to work and we are taxed on what we earn!

If we win on the lotto, the pokies, the nags and its tax free!

I don’t get it; there is a source of revenue that although it reduces the size of a win does not reduce the punters hard earned income.

A couple of side benefits of such a tax would be the identification of problem gamblers and money launderer’s.

Poker machine, casino and lotto revenue are already taxed by the government at the point of sale (ie. hotels, clubs, casinos etc). Taxing the 'winners' would be double dipping.

In fact, in Queensland the Golden Casket Lottery Corporation lottery was originally set up and owned by the government to pay for community projects (originally returned veterans of the Great War). It was sold in 2007 and is now owned by Tattersalls.

The problem that all gamblers have is that they are innumerate.

They cannot see that the only people who come out on the positive side of the ledger are a) the organizers - casinos, bookies, whatever and b) the government, who taxes the organizers' earnings.

In such a situation, the government could tax up to 100% of the individual punter's "winnings" at any point in time, and they still wouldn't notice. They would still lose overall, it would just be that their money would disappear faster.

It would be like taking candy from a baby, and even the government wouldn't stoop to that, would they.

Or... would they?

An afterthought. If you tax their winnings, would you also give a tax credit on their losses? I suspect not.

Correct, pericles.

The polkies, nags and all casino games are mathematically setup so that punters, long term, *MUST* lose .... ALL punters including "so called" professional punters. Remember, short term wins always turn into long term losses ..... that's the way it's set up. And all the idiot punters "believe" they can beat the system ... despite the mathematics.

The *ONLY* exception is lotto type entries. Why? Because the first prize is sooooooooooooo MASSIVE, any winner is virtually guaranteed to have won more than they invested over their entire lives in Lotto entries. But overall, when *ALL* the losing (meaning non 1st prize winners)lotto punters are taken into account, they *ALWAYS* lose long term on both a collective and individual basis .... that's why Lotto makes a profit on EVERY draw.

Punters who bet on the nags, casinos, nags and those types of things are simply the dumbest people alive. Mathematically, long term, they can NEVER win. But they are soooooooooo stupid that they think short term profit means they are "winners". Sure, they are winners at stupidity.

The problem with taxing gambling "so called" winnings, is that the overall losses then become tax deductible, so the government will actually lose money on that. Why? Because people ALWAYS lose money long term.

Bugsy – Most businesses pay tax. Using your logic taxing the wages of their employees would be double dipping? The good old days of the Golden Casket! I suppose the tax rate by default was most likely greater than 50%. The proceeds went to a good cause however.

Pericels – A tax on winnings from gambling is not as low as some current taxes (or the lack of taxes in some cases) and would be a lot fairer. Government does not give tax credits to individuals for many legitimate life expenses. One could imagine the uncontainable explosion of gambling if it issued a tax credited for gambling losses.

I notice no one has commented on the identification of problem gamblers and money launderer’s?

I used to profit from gambling. My father was a gambler & generous with it.

When ever he had a real win he would give mum & I some of it. Mum bought furniture, I saved up & bought a bike.

His gambling taught me it was a fools game, gamblers never win long term, as others have said. That does not mean professionals can't make money.

I knew a bloke with an almost perfect system. He bet only on one leading jockey. He bet enough on his every race to recoup any losses, & make his desired income. He needed a moderate bank to start, & had a quite large one when I knew him. His only worry was his jokey might be injured or disqualified for a period, after a bad run.

He had plenty of money, & paid no tax.

Producer, the 'winners' have already paid their tax, with the revenue generated from their bets. The tax is distributed. All you are proposing is that the payout from gambling be reduced by 50% (or whatever), which would actually reduce the incentive and probably reduce the revenue generated.

As for money laundering, that is bye the bye. The money generated is obviously tax-free, but after being pumped through various gambling establishments, gets taxed. But that's a separate issue.

percule/quote..<<..The problem that all gamblers have is that they are innumerate.>>

im not sure about that
how much is a winning bet worth?
a winning bet..is like cash..in the bank.
we know crims launder..their illgotten gain/buy bying 'winning' tickets.

slo yes there is a case/to clawback..based..on print/or dna evidence
any bet..cashed-in..after..a certain..'time'/past post time..pays a 25%..late fee/just to check-out..the paper work..[its not tested/till a formal complaint..is lodged.

we know what they do
we need tax them..at the point where its used
a simple state based treansaction tax/and our service charges could return to sustainable levels[but the plan=we are mortgauged/to the hilt..in state-debt..and do as the bankers tell our govt to do.

the debt=great leverage/on the former govt band war debt
the bankers looted the gold/silver from our coin[turned treury buildings into casino's[that too sell winning chips.or rather sell chips/to launder their 'ill gotten gains

its all matters of high treason
only hrh martial law..can restore these vile treasons.

Producer you are obviously too sensible to gamble but this is not a good idea. The government get plenty out of gambling already. Stop that and it will again go underground and the government will get less.
I agree with most of the posters here it certainly is a mug's game. Real problem is the same as drugs, people WANT to do it and that's the real problem.

Hasbeen – You said

<< He had plenty of money, & paid no tax>>

That in itself is reason enough to tax winnings

JBowyer – I disagree with your logic. Tax on winnings is practiced in other jurisdictions; we are the exception not the rule.

It would not be possible to have underground pokies of any scale nor would it be possible to launder money on an underground system.

A tax on winnings does not hurt a poor winner, a tax on the poor’s income and services does!

They will never tax wins at races etc its a tax loophole for the wealthy, just like the recent change to superannuation contributions by taking away the excess tax on large singular contributions they have given a large tax loophole for the wealthy, The wealthy I class as anyone who can deposit single contributions above $100.000 and up into the million dollar mark at a time !

Not convinced, Producer.

>>Tax on winnings is practiced in other jurisdictions; we are the exception not the rule.<<

The US includes winnings as earnings when a citizen reports their income for tax purposes. But you can also offset losses.

"Gambling income plus your job income (and any other income) equals your total income. Fortunately, you do not necessarily have to pay taxes on all your winnings. Instead, if you itemize, you can offset taxes owed on your winnings by reporting any losses you incurred as well."

http://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/2012/03/30/how-are-gambling-winnings-taxed/

The trick is, of course, that you can only offset your losses to the extent that you have winnings! Clever, eh?

The UK does not tax gambling in any form. They even refute that there is a thing called a professional gambler:

"But I do not think that you can find, in his case, any conception arising in which his individual operations can be said to be merged in the way that particular operations are merged in the conception of a trade."

And that's the taxman talking!

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/bimmanual/bim22017.htm

In fact I haven't yet found a jurisdiction that taxes gambling, as such. Do you have an example that supports your assertion that we are the odd man out in this?

Pericles – I’m afraid you will have to stay unconvinced. I read an article on line that was a simple country by country analysis, but for the life of me I have been unable to locate it again. There are plenty of gambling sites however. Notwithstanding there are many countries within the EU as well as the US that tax winnings?

This however has little to do with the point I was making in the first place. The point was, here is a source of revenue that in my opinion does no harm to a winner although it reduces the wind fall and would have some positive outcome when it comes to problem gamblers and money launderer’s.

The US includes winnings as earnings when a citizen reports their income for tax purposes. But you can also offset losses.
Pericles,
I think that's fair. What I think as highly unfair is that victims of crime in Australia aren't compensated, have to fork out for legal fees whilst the low life gets legal aid thrown at them paid for by the victims. I suppose if the Coalition wanted to put a stop to that Billy the Kid will block it.

Producer, your picture is too small. The total turnover of the share market including currency trades, and derivatives is $135 trillion pa.

Just a 0.1% turnover tax will raise an additional $135 billion in tax revenue. No need for more taxes and we can pay off the debt.

Arjay – Soap and Water, how dare you suggest such a large tax on the have’s.

Individual – All we have to do is remove the pile of money that sits between Law and Justice.

Producer....what a mean spirited thought.....

Global Miners operations in Australia return more profit on invested dollar than any of their other global pits.
Thet are not paying enough tax. Tax the Miners selectively, by resource type rather than sector wide with a straight percentage tax rather than the ridiculous industry profit tax that the Miners scared Gillard into.

Right now I would be taxing the CSG segment....it is cheaper to pump it and sail it to the Northern Hemisphere from Australia, than to ship it from the US across the Atlantic to Europe....they do not pay enough tax....