SCOTUS just overturned the ban on sports betting 7-2

[Obliviax]

the time of change in sports is upon us!

Brian Windhorst‏Verified account@WindhorstESPN 4m4 minutes ago
The Supreme Court has just ruled 7-2 to overturn the federal ban on sports gambling. It's a historic day in American sport.

 

[PSU Soupy]

I placed a bet on over at 6.5 Judges.......Winner!!

 

[ThePennsyOracle]

Now Miles Kauffman/21 Guns can become a billionaire. Never seen anyone who can prognosticate like that man.....or whatever he is.

 

[interrobang]

 

[Ceasar]

the time of change in sports is upon us!

Brian Windhorst‏Verified account@WindhorstESPN 4m4 minutes ago
The Supreme Court has just ruled 7-2 to overturn the federal ban on sports gambling. It's a historic day in American sport.

States are still free to regulate or ban sports gambling. This decision impacts only federal regulation.

 

[4rosco]

States are still free to regulate or ban sports gambling. This decision impacts only federal regulation.

And it looks like many states will be looking to legalize sports betting.

One research firm estimated before the ruling that if the Supreme Court were to strike down the law, 32 states would likely offer sports betting within five years.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/14/supreme-court-strikes-down-sports-gambling-law.html

 

[Obliviax]

And it looks like many states will be looking to legalize sports betting.

One research firm estimated before the ruling that if the Supreme Court were to strike down the law, 32 states would likely offer sports betting within five years.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/14/supreme-court-strikes-down-sports-gambling-law.html

I'll bet its faster than that...as states look to increase tax income. Wouldn't be surprised to see states get together and come up with some standards. Regardless, gambling on sports is going big time. The only reason why I am for it is because the NCAA was against it.

 

[BobPSU92]

So we are free to develop a gambling problem and shatter our lives and those of our loved ones?

Cut the crap and just watch the games. ACTION.

 

[Nitt1300]

So now what people already do will be legal- and taxable

But pot is still criminal- go figure

 

[kts136]

So now what people already do will be legal- and taxable

But pot is still criminal- go figure

That's well on its way too.

 

[interrobang]

Plus states can already decriminalize pot.

 

[Nitt1300]

That's well on its way too.

not with this SCOTUS it isn't

 

[kts136]

not with this SCOTUS it isn't

Maybe, maybe not, but have you looked around and seen all the states legalizing it in some form or another? If you're not blind, you can see the wheels are turning.

Things don't exactly happen overnight especially with the way our Gov works. So, yes, it is moving in that direction sooner or later.

 

[Art]

Does this mean that Pete Rose is now eligible for election to the Baseball Hall of Fame?

 

[kts136]

Does this mean that Pete Rose is now eligible for election to the Baseball Hall of Fame?

I'd guess we'll be seeing quite a bit of Pete Rose talk over the next few days/weeks regarding this, occasionally(frequently) interrupted for the require FanDuel/Draft Kings commercials, of course.

I'm curious to see how this impacts Vegas as a vacation destination as well. I'm sure people will still go for the setting, fun and general debauchery, but I'd imagine losing their gambling monopoly can't exactly help things.

 

[ThePennsyOracle]

Does this mean that Pete Rose is now eligible for election to the Baseball Hall of Fame?

Yes, and Manfred is going to be replaced by Rose.

Art Schlichter is also going to be named as the NFL's new Troy Vincent.

 

[wbcincy]

I'd guess we'll be seeing quite a bit of Pete Rose talk over the next few days/weeks regarding this, occasionally(frequently) interrupted for the require FanDuel/Draft Kings commercials, of course.

I'm curious to see how this impacts Vegas as a vacation destination as well. I'm sure people will still go for the setting, fun and general debauchery, but I'd imagine losing their gambling monopoly can't exactly help things.

I'm certain Art was joking, as it'll be quite absurd if there's any actual Pete Rose discussions as a result of this. Pete wasn't banned because it was illegal.

 

[Nitt1300]

I'd guess we'll be seeing quite a bit of Pete Rose talk over the next few days/weeks regarding this, occasionally(frequently) interrupted for the require FanDuel/Draft Kings commercials, of course.

I'm curious to see how this impacts Vegas as a vacation destination as well. I'm sure people will still go for the setting, fun and general debauchery, but I'd imagine losing their gambling monopoly can't exactly help things.

you can bet that Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun will be in on the action immediately

 

[Lionguy32]

I'd guess we'll be seeing quite a bit of Pete Rose talk over the next few days/weeks regarding this, occasionally(frequently) interrupted for the require FanDuel/Draft Kings commercials, of course.

I'm curious to see how this impacts Vegas as a vacation destination as well. I'm sure people will still go for the setting, fun and general debauchery, but I'd imagine losing their gambling monopoly can't exactly help things.

I don't think this hurts Vegas nearly as much as it helps Atlantic City.

 

[Obliviax]

Maybe, maybe not, but have you looked around and seen all the states legalizing it in some form or another? If you're not blind, you can see the wheels are turning.

Things don't exactly happen overnight especially with the way our Gov works. So, yes, it is moving in that direction sooner or later.

yeah...and it is not quite that simple. Do we "legalize" or just "de-criminalize?" How is access gained? Grown? Distributed? Taxed? Controlled?

Personally, I am not a big fan of people getting high and driving a car, forklift, driving a school bus, drill press or running a fracking drill. But I do recognize the health benefits. I recognize the "entertainment value" but not sure we want to condone something like this over exercise or activities that are helpful, not harmful. I feel the same way about gambling. There are lots of people that have done a lot of damage with their gambling habits. Loosening control doesn't seem to be for the common good.

I really don't feel strongly either way....but this isn't a "great thing". There are and will be consequences. Do the benefits outweigh the consequences? That is the real question.

 

[kts136]

I'm certain Art was joking, as it'll be quite absurd if there's any actual Pete Rose discussions as a result of this. Pete wasn't banned because it was illegal.

I'm not advocating Rose getting in because it's suddenly legal, just guessing that people/media will surely start bringing it up again.

 

[LionDeNittany]

So now what people already do will be legal- and taxable

But pot is still criminal- go figure

So is public nudity. Go figure.

LdN

 

[4rosco]

I'll bet its faster than that...as states look to increase tax income. Wouldn't be surprised to see states get together and come up with some standards. Regardless, gambling on sports is going big time. The only reason why I am for it is because the NCAA was against it.

I agree that many states will approve it rather quickly to generate tax revenue from it.
Make it legal and tax the winnings. I wonder if many gamblers will still keep their off shore accounts to avoid the taxes.

 

[NittPicker]

I don't think this hurts Vegas nearly as much as it helps Atlantic City.

I too doubt it'll have much impact on Vegas' bottom line. Very few people from the east coast make special trips to Las Vegas to place sports bets. The people it'll hurt the most are the illegal bookies. Sucks to be them.

 

[Art]

I'm not advocating Rose getting in because it's suddenly legal, just guessing that people/media will surely start bringing it up again.

Only those with less than half a brain, which, I guess, means there will be some.

 

[ThePennsyOracle]

yeah...and it is not quite that simple. Do we "legalize" or just "de-criminalize?" How is access gained? Grown? Distributed? Taxed? Controlled?

Personally, I am not a big fan of people getting high and driving a car, forklift, driving a school bus, drill press or running a fracking drill. But I do recognize the health benefits. I recognize the "entertainment value" but not sure we want to condone something like this over exercise or activities that are helpful, not harmful. I feel the same way about gambling. There are lots of people that have done a lot of damage with their gambling habits. Loosening control doesn't seem to be for the common good.

I really don't feel strongly either way....but this isn't a "great thing". There are and will be consequences. Do the benefits outweigh the consequences? That is the real question.

No one is a fan of people getting drunk and doing those things either. Yet alcohol is legal, and DWI statutes can easily include/be interpreted as applying to Mary Jane.

 

[Nitt1300]

I don't think this hurts Vegas nearly as much as it helps Atlantic City.

I'm not sure anything short of a 500 foot tsunami can help Atlantic City

 

[Obliviax]

No one is a fan of people getting drunk and doing those things either. Yet alcohol is legal, and DWI statutes can easily include/be interpreted as applying to Mary Jane.

Agree...but my mom used to ask if I was going to jump off of a cliff if my friends did.

Booze started and got a foothold a long time ago...no way to end that. Not sure we want to add to legalizing things that "F--k people up". What is next? Also, it is a lot harder to ID someone on weed than booze.

But whatever....not a big deal either way.

 

[NittPicker]

No one is a fan of people getting drunk and doing those things either. Yet alcohol is legal, and DWI statutes can easily include/be interpreted as applying to Mary Jane.

DUI laws already include controlled substances. It's strange for anyone to claim legal weed will result in a deluge people driving under the influence of THC. People already do it and are arrested for doing so. But I digress. The OP was about sports betting.

 

[interrobang]

Do you tax the winnings or tax the bet itself? Or both?

 

[kts136]

I too doubt it'll have much impact on Vegas' bottom line. Very few people from the east coast make special trips to Las Vegas to place sports bets. The people it'll hurt the most are the illegal bookies. Sucks to be them.

On a normal day to day basis, I'd have to agree, but as someone who has gone to Vegas for March Madness for quite a few years running, I think it might leave a mark during major events such as that. The amount of people I see and talk to there who come from all over is just insane. Guess we'll find out though.

 

[kts136]

Do you tax the winnings or tax the bet itself? Or both?

Currently, winnings are taxed as income.

 

[interrobang]

Currently, winnings are taxed as income.

RIght, but as far as how states will look to create revenue. Plus isn't there minimum amount of income that has to be reached before it's taxable at the federal level?

 

[Kmase21]

This is just pro sports, not NCAA. Correct?

 

[Obliviax]

This is just pro sports, not NCAA. Correct?

I believe it includes college.

Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court cleared the way on Monday for states to legalize sports betting, striking down a 1992 federal law that had prohibited most states from authorizing sports betting.

The 6-3 ruling is a victory for New Jersey and other states who have considered allowing sports gambling as a way to encourage tourism and tax revenue. The NCAA, NFL and NBA had backed the federal prohibition.

The court said the federal law violated constitutional principles limiting the federal government from controlling state policy, unconstitutionally forcing states to prohibit sports betting under their own laws.....

The controversy started in 2011, when New Jersey voters approved a measure to legalize sports betting to help the casino industries in a faltering economy. But the state law was immediately challenged by professional sports leagues and the NCAA, which pointed to a federal law passed in 1992 that bans state sports betting with some exceptions.​

 

[interrobang]

The original ban was on all sports not named jai alai, dog racing or horse racing.

So this would include NCAA.

 

[Nitt1300]

I bet Michigan still sucks

 

[Art]

RIght, but as far as how states will look to create revenue. Plus isn't there minimum amount of income that has to be reached before it's taxable at the federal level?

No. There are minimum winning levels before the payer has to report on a Form W2-G and withhold tax. These vary depending on how the money is won. Gambling winnings are taxed irrespective of amount.

 

[Sproul]

This is just pro sports, not NCAA. Correct?

I thought it was all sports. NCAA was definitely against it, so I think it affects them.

 

[kts136]

RIght, but as far as how states will look to create revenue. Plus isn't there minimum amount of income that has to be reached before it's taxable at the federal level?

Technically speaking, you're supposed to report all gambling winnings both federally and state, but that obviously doesn't happen. If you win over a certain minimum amount(depending on the game) the casino/gambling house is supposed to issue a W2-G, essentially forcing you to claim that specific amount of winnings on your taxes.

I'd venture to guess that States assume revenues would increase due to many bets being taken off the black market into more legitimate areas, leading to more reported income winnings.