I find it hard to believe that Betfairs legal representatives went for the discrimination angle.

I also cant believe the Betfair managers allowed that angle to be played

That's plain crazy & totally without foundation.

It just wasted every ones time not to mention the massive expense in legal fees.
I would want my money back if that's the best legal advise available.


One - You have to prove it, which means they have to give evidence of being singled out from the others which would not be so, seeing that its a broad based tax.

I feel they could of taken an angle similar to a co-op operational business.
Run by the members, for the members.
This is what makes it distinctively different to a point where a Turnover Tax on the Betfair model of operation would render it untenable.

To enforce a turnover tax on a business that does not profit from turnover would then maybe argued that their position should be looked at differently & therefore taxed differently.

They could have argued more successfully by stating that their business model is totally different to TABS & Bookmakers.

Betfair's turn over is based on lots of five percents, after the outcome, not prior to outcome ,therefore Tax should be based on 1.5% of 5%.
e.g. 5% = $100,000 income x 1.5% = $1500 Tax to be paid.

Because the business structure is based on the ebb & flow of Back & Lay transactions, unlike Bookmakers where their profit percentage is built into the price being sold.


Does the Tax wish to be applied to the Lay bet turn over or does one Tax the Back bet turn over only or do they wish to Tax both Back & Lay which would then make it a form of double taxation if a punter where to Back & Lay the same runner.

I don't believe the learned parties where totally abreast of how an exchange actually works when it comes to Back & Lay betting.

Why is all the thinking left up to me around here.

__________________
Cheers.