Sure they do. US import duties:
What has changed to make this irrelevant?
Great for marketing. I’d have never known that the lottery existed much less had a big drawing recently were it not for the publishing of the past winners names. Way more effective than word of mouth. I barely heard anyone mention the lotto lately outside of that list.
Canada has a VAT but taxes neither the ticket nor winnings. There is no real barrier to a jurisdiction setting whatever rules it wants.
What does this mean? That the tax is a few cents on a $1 ticket and you get the full pot of $100 million if you win? Like that?
The worry about blackmail and kidnappings are probably overblown, but I don’t see why it prevents the lottery from giving you the money and not announcing it like they typically do. With deadbeats, if they work and get a check, its not anonymous but its also not announced. Shouldn’t lottery winners be able to do the same and claim their winnings without their names being in the paper? If there’s a divorce or something, they’d have to report, by law, an income from the lottery like an income from a job
Are you under the impression that most lotteries are private businesses?
That would be relevant if your experience approximated the majority of the population but it doesn’t. They aren’t marketing to people who don’t ever play the lottery. They are marketing to people who are inclined to play the lottery or who might buy extra tickets.
I don’t notice commercials for children’s toys or liquor, for example, and don’t know what the hottest ones are or even what’s available. Does that mean that their marketing is bad?
Allowing people to claim winnings anonymously does not mean the government giving assistance in staying anonymous. It has nothing to do with freedom of the press. It would just mean the press couldn’t expect to have the information handed to them on a silver platter.
Why should the press receive government assistance in invading people’s privacy?
No, I was being sarcastic. Dead people flipping knew about the powerball. It got 24/7 coverage at least out here and through the news aggregators I read. The lotto isn’t like who is the mayor of Fife Alabama; the lotto creates it’s own marketing far more effectively than all their ads. Now, this probably wasn’t always true but now it certainly appears to be. A billion dollar giveaway tends to get noticed; the name of the guy who won it last May, not so much.
I’d be in favour of delayed announcement. Give the winner two weeks to sort out their situation make sure they’re in a secure environment and have had some financial advice first. Then do the photo op with the giant cheque.
But laws that they must have the option to be anonymous, nope. If you don’t like the chance of having your name published, don’t play.
yes, exactly that, if the ticket is £1 then a few pennies of that is a tax/duty.
If the jackpot for that week is £66 million and you win it then you get the full £66 million. You are not liable for any further tax.
The lottery doesn’t need “marketing” it doesn’t need good PR. No one in the history of the world has ever said: “Well, I would buy a ticket, but the whole thing is a set up and they’re just going to give the winnings to their uncle Joe”
People who buy tickets, don’t think like that. They’re are just doing it for the excitement of it all.
And as far as fraud goes, I don’t see any reason why you can’t have anonymity AND checks and balances in place that prevent fraud.
This whole idea that people should have to reveal their identity for the mere sake of public image is just silly to me.
I obviously missed your sarcasm and I apologize for that. Nevertheless, you are not the target of their marketing. Regular lottery players read about the winners and know about them. When a local person wins or it’s bought at a local store, it’s a big deal in the community and it drives sales. There are savvy marketing people behind the games and they very much know what they are doing.