Not looking good across the water

If you commission any of the top accountants to do any work for you the letter of engagement with pages of terms and conditions will define what the work can and cannot be used for. They commit to do a specific task and demand payment on that basis. It is the responsibility of the persom commissioning the work to ensure that its usuage is correctly defined. Poor showing by the IBA.
 
Tout Seul said:
If you commission any of the top accountants to do any work for you the letter of engagement with pages of terms and conditions will define what the work can and cannot be used for. They commit to do a specific task and demand payment on that basis. It is the responsibility of the persom commissioning the work to ensure that its usuage is correctly defined. Poor showing by the IBA.
Click to expand...

Why did it take 8 days for KPMG to come back with this statement?? Were they too busy laughing at the PWC debacle or we prodded in this direction by a certain mafia often referred to on these pages?? ;)
 
Not sure how long it took but first they would have asked IBA to issue a statement. IBA would consult their lawyers, respond , KPMG would consult their lawyers and respond demanding that IBA issue a retraction probably by end of working week. KPMG would then issue statement on the Monday morning in case it was buried.
 
Tout Seul said:
Not sure how long it took but first they would have asked IBA to issue a statement. IBA would consult their lawyers, respond , KPMG would consult their lawyers and respond demanding that IBA issue a retraction probably by end of working week. KPMG would then issue statement on the Monday morning in case it was buried.
Click to expand...

I believe if KPMG had acted immediately this story would have died at birth - racing didn't need this grabbing the headlines - nul points to KPMG!
 
OK. Act immediately. Thus risk, being sued, pi$$ing off client, frightening other clients. Seems reasonable if you don't want your business to survive.

Sensible first action is to try to persuade client that they, the client has cocked up. If no positive response check with lawyers. Hey its out there so no real need to panic.
 
Bookmaker Paddy Power has announced 1,440 new jobs as part of a major expansion in Ireland, the UK and Australia over the next three years.
The plans include an additional 500 jobs in Ireland in a move taking its workforce in the country to 2,200, while 810 additional posts will be created in the UK as the gaming firm steps up the growth of its retail estate.
The majority of the 500 new jobs in Ireland will be located at the company's Tallaght head office in west Dublin in areas such as e-commerce, technology, online marketing and risk management.
Click to expand...
 
Fairyhouse faces a bill of up to €500,000 for remedial work and track closure after damage caused from drainage work carried out on the inner track at the Co Meath venue last spring.The Winter Festival will go ahead the weekend after next as it is run on the outer track, but Fairyhouse have already lost their December 2nd meeting, with the card now scheduled to be run 24 hours earlier at Navan.
The problem came to light two weeks ago when a meeting was cancelled at the track after four races following complaints from senior jockeys about the safety of the track.
The Irish Turf Club have launched an investigation into the incident and also confirmed that a report into a recent similar incident at Wexford is almost complete.
According to this morning’s Racing Post, the problem is linked to a piece of machinery used on both courses to break up compaction underneath the top soil.
Speaking to the Racing Post, Irish Turf Club chief executive Denis Egan admitted his concern at two incidents coming so close together.
“In light of what’s happened we are going to take a more hands-on approach with the racecourses in relation to any work carried out, to make sure it is done to the highest standards,” said Egan.
“If there’s a machine causing problems we have to get to the bottom of it and have to make sure it is not used again.”
Fairyhouse acting manager, Peter Roe, confirmed that work had already commenced on repairing the damage to the inner track.
“We inspected the course and found four main areas of false ground. It was agreed the track was unfit for racing and will remain so until drainage works take place, when suitable ground conditions arise, which is unlikely to happen until spring 2011.”
Click to expand...
 
Wexford's problem was that they didn't think about how they were going to do the work and they just ploughed on so to speak. Big mistake. I believe Fairyhouse has a similar problem and it's going to be a very big problem to fix. Thank god it was the inside track.
 
€500,000 Christ- Rogue Traders eat your heart out. What a massive cock up- huge blow to the already struggling racing industry:mad:
 
Last edited:
How many meetings will they lose because of that? That lost revenue will have to be added to the cost of repairing the repairs. However, if their contractors have failed to comply with producing a satisfactory piece of work, surely the course can recover some, if not all, of the remedial costs from that company? I assume they employed fully-insured contractors, and some dodgy-looking blokes with a pony and trap, asking if they wanted a bit of tarmacking done?
 
From today's Sindo

Meanwhile, the conflict between the racing chiefs and bookmakers in relation to betting taxation continues to escalate.
Economist Colm McCarthy, who produced the An Bord Snip Nua report, has recommended doubling the one per cent off-course betting tax, as well as introducing legislation to compel all gambling companies operating in Ireland to be licensed and pay a two per cent levy.
Mr McCarthy was commissioned by the racing and breeding industries to prepare the 51-page report: "Financing The Irish Racing Industry" which was presented to the Department of Finance as a pre-Budget submission. Among the recommendations were:

  • The one per cent off-course betting levy should be restored to two per cent of the amount wagered.
  • Legislation requiring all betting and gambling companies operating in Ireland by telephone or internet to be licensed here.
  • Their turnover should be subject to the same two per cent levy as traditional bookmakers.
"Betting has the capacity to contribute more to sustaining the industry which provides most of its raw material. Horse racing, notwithstanding regular assertions to the contrary, remains the principal vehicle of choice for betting," Mr McCarthy said.
"Horse racing worldwide derives a major portion of its income from fees and levies from the betting industry, in particular the off-course betting industry," he added.
Denis Brosnan, chairman of semi-State Horse Racing Ireland, told the Sunday Independent that eight years ago the Irish betting industry generated €68m in duty for the State but that annual figure is now €36m.
"It means that the horse racing industry is now dependent on State funding drawn from the taxpayer and that is untenable. The betting tax should be increased to two per cent," he said.
But the Irish Bookmakers Association (IBA) says a two per cent betting tax would close a substantial number of betting shops and lead to job losses.
"At no point has the IBA endorsed the doubling of betting taxation on turnover. The IBA has proposed a new approach to taxation on betting which would combine a licensing system -- applied to all betting operators, be they in shops, over the telephone or online -- with taxation on profits, not turnover," it said.
Sharon Byrne, chair of the IBA said: "The IBA has always been of the view that the Exchequer can derive more taxation from betting but only if the right approach to betting taxation is adopted and all platforms are captured in the tax net, not just betting shops as has been the case to date."
Click to expand...
 
The IBA ought to be very happy with that outcome. No increase in levy for them, but their competitors will now have to start paying it as well. Betfair in particular will be spitting feathers at having to pay a duty based on turnover rather than profit.

Presumably the intention is to impose the levy on Betfair and all other operators based abroad but taking bets from punters in Ireland, and presumably the Irish authorities are confident that a way has been found to make these operators pay up.

I would imagine that other boomakers will follow the lead of the Irish based bookmakers and choose to absorb this levy in their own overheads rather than pass it on to their customers, in which case there will be little or no avoidance problems from them. But what will Betfair do?

All in all, this is not a bad outcome for Irish racing if it works.
 
I'd imagine Betfair's business plan will have to be re-thought Grey given that they've just recently announced that they're moving to Dublin - there will surely be some sort of tax implications from that?
 
Last edited:
Grey how does it work for operators based in Ireland and taking bets in Ireland?

Do they pay a similar tax on turnover rather than profits or is that profit related?
 
I must admit to being confused regarding the implications of the proposed betting tax changes.

"A levy on betting exchange activity to equal the current levy imposed on betting shops "

Is it the Minister's intention to have this levy apply to each and all bets struck (Back and Lay), or only to profit accruing from a total of bets struck in a particular market?
If it is to apply to all stakes, then I don't imagine Betfair/Betdaq will be amenable to absorbing the cost. (Instances of some punters trading a position having dozens of bets in a single market, etc).
 
icebreaker said:
I must admit to being confused regarding the implications of the proposed betting tax changes.

"A levy on betting exchange activity to equal the current levy imposed on betting shops "

Is it the Minister's intention to have this levy apply to each and all bets struck (Back and Lay), or only to profit accruing from a total of bets struck in a particular market?
If it is to apply to all stakes, then I don't imagine Betfair/Betdaq will be amenable to absorbing the cost. (Instances of some punters trading a position having dozens of bets in a single market, etc).
Click to expand...

We need to see the Finance Bill to get alot of the nitty gritty info - I noticed that point you have highlighted as well.
 
I haven't seen the details but surely there is no way on earth that he will introduce a turnover tax for exchanges.
 
Back
Top