- The draft “Policy Framework for the Regulation of Internet Gaming” from the NCLGS is an attempt to produce a regulation template for states considering the introduction of gambling legislation.
- The document falls short of prescriptive guidelines on tax, player fund protection, and other issues.
The draft “Policy Framework for the Regulation of Internet Gaming” from the National Council of Legislators From Gaming States (NCLGS) is an attempt to produce a regulation template for states considering the introduction of gambling legislation.
The document—announced six months ago—is now out for comment from members.
All US states are considered to be members, but only eleven contribute financially to the NCLGS.
Comments will be received at the NCLGS Summer Meeting, on June 6 to June 8 in San Diego.
A State Guide
The NCLGS has as its mission to advocate “a state’s right to choose what gaming is implemented within its boundaries.”
“NCLGS believes that the Framework should serve as a guide for states considering enacting Internet gaming legislation and perhaps multi-jurisdictional initiatives—and in order to be of the greatest help to states, it should evolve in response to emerging issues,” said Florida Congressman and President of NCLGS, James Waldman, on announcing the draft document.
Given the mission, the concept of a national framework sits uneasily and the text provides enormous latitude for different political perspectives.
Guidelines Only
There is very little that is prescriptive; rather, a series of headings guide policymakers towards making decisions on relevant topics.
For example, player fund protection is mostly included as an afterthought; there is no mention under the section dealing with “Player Protections.” Instead, it is relegated to the final sub-clause under the “Payment Processing” section.
“Legislation should consider how best to protect player funds, such as requiring account segregation or that withdrawals can only be made to the same source as the original deposit,” reads the guidelines.
The relevant section on tax rates also gives no specific directives; in fact, it concludes that there is “no recommendation on a suggested tax rate or method.”
The NCGLS document does not take strong positions on any area of gaming regulation. Nonetheless, the document’s weaknesses can be addressed in time. Should states actively try to coordinate gaming regulation so that less duplication is required and more consistency is produced, the online poker industry and players will benefit.
