In my book there is a raft of issues arising from this article, including the apparent inequalities vis-a-vis extradition treaties between the UK and the US, the possibility that the US is using anti-terrorist agreements for other purposes and the evident subservience of the UK government to the US authorities. These are interesting matters but beyond the scope of this post. My question specifically concerns the following issue.
No problem so far.
Well, OK.
Since there is no tax liability in the UK for internet gambling operators, thus their conduct is not illegal in the UK, why is there little prospect of success for these people when arguing against extradition?
(I have noted the subsequent comment in the article by the Matrix Chambers spokesman but I don’t understand the context.)
For a start Matrix specializes in that strange new 'uman Rites stuff
soon they’ll branch out into earthworm rights
However, I can see a very viable argument. VAT
Astonishingly USA vendors to EU citizens are charged with collecting and remitting VAT on their EU ‘shipped’ sales. The shareware industry is distinctly unimpressed.
Even Shrub would be smart enough to reason that EU vendors of gaming should collect and remit tax on gaming ‘sales’ to the USA.
What is slightly Kafka-esque is that it is like taxing an illegal activity (strike the ‘like’)
well they got Al Capone on tax
and his principle source of income was from hooch during prohibition.
Personally I don’t approve of internet gambling
or anything designed to hook vulnerable punters
but living under laws of multiple jurisdictions is a tricky proposition
I did not know that. It makes sense, however. Around here, states are increasingly leaning on out-of-state businesses to collect sales taxes for sales to that state’s residents.