Who should gaming revenue go to? (Poll can have multiple answers)

PA is now pulling in over a billion in tax revenue from gaming, topping both Indiana and Nevada. The tax rate is a whopping 55% (vs 8% in Nevada).

If gaming is legalized, then who should the money being going to? The state or corporations? As we all know, PA gaming is mostly locals with few hotel rooms and minimal dining and entertainment attractions. And until the last two weeks, no table games.

Sands corporation actually had higher operating income on it's Bethlehem PA slot club than the Venetian/Palazzo hotel and gaming and convention center. But that is to be seen as the effect of the depression, since both numbers are tiny compared to the Asian numbers.

The Singapore Model is to only permit two casinos in the entire city state. Population of Singapore is 4.8 million compared to Nevada 2.5 million and PA 12 million. One casino is more family oriented. The second casino is a knock them dead world class tourist attraction. Tax rate is 15% with discounts for junket players. Locals receive a mild discouragement from coming very often by a US $100 entrance fee. The emphasis is on increasing tourism to the country rather than building a gambling mecca.

I feel that Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and New York city may copy the Singapore model. In particular the part about discouraging the locals.

Philadelphia and Detroit are decidedly not copying the Singapore model. They are firmly aimed at locals.

=======================
Pennsylvania tops Nevada in gaming tax collections
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL ALLENTOWN, Pa.
Pennsylvania tops Nevada in gaming tax collections

Pennsylvania collected more in taxes from commercial casino gambling than any other state, including gambling heavyweight Nevada, a newspaper reported. Pennsylvania's tax revenue from commercial casinos approached $1.1 billion in the fiscal year that ended June 30, The Morning Call of Allentown reported Monday. Indiana was second with $878 million and Nevada third with $831 million. A comparison by the American Gaming Association also showed Pennsylvania ahead in the 2009 calendar year. Pennsylvania has just nine casinos operating, but its 55 percent tax rate on slot machine gambling more than makes up for it. By comparison, Nevada takes 8 percent from its 260 casinos. Grant Govertsen, co-founder of Las Vegas-based Union Gaming Group, analysts for the worldwide gaming industry, said, "A higher tax rate brings in more money, but that usually means fewer jobs and less capital investment."

So wait, is the 8% and 55% a special tax rate on gaming revenue? So casinos in Pennsylvania are taxed 55% by the state then 35% by the feds on their profits?

On Seattle: There was a discussion a few years back about legalizing gambling state-wide. There are "rumors" that a deal was made between Gregoire and the tribes to not legalize gambling and she coincidentally got hundreds of thousands in donations for her last election. Personally, I like to subscribe to this theory since she's a stupid bitch who has ruined the state and is now contemplating on throwing us an income tax on top of our traditional high sales/property taxes. I believe one gigantic casino around Seattle (probably to the south, closer to Seatac) would be good in the Singapore model... but charging an entry fee would piss a lot of people off. There are casinos within 40-50 minutes to the east, south, and north of the city so people would commute even if it was just $5.

Quote: pacomartin

PA is now pulling in over a billion in tax revenue from gaming, topping both Indiana and Nevada. The tax rate is a whopping 55% (vs 8% in Nevada).

PA is greedy taking 55% of slot revenue (I think the tables give 13%) I've said it here before but it is worth repeating that it is generally acceptedf that the Rosenthal/Spilotro skim at Argent (mainly Stardust) took 1/3. To prefer to be in business with the outfit vs the state says a lot.

Quote: AZDuffman

PA is greedy taking 55% of slot revenue (I think the tables give 13%/) I've said it here before but it is worth repeating that it is generally accepted that the Rosenthal/Spilotro skim at Argent (mainly Stardust) took 1/3. To prefer to be in business with the outfit vs the state says a lot.

It is surprising how often the government is greedier than organized crime.

Quote: pacomartin

PA is now pulling in over a billion in tax revenue from gaming, topping both Indiana and Nevada. The tax rate is a whopping 55% (vs 8% in Nevada)

Here in the Mid-Atlantic, Maryland wonders why only 2 slots casinos are under construction (Hollywood Perryville and Ocean Downs) more than 2 years after the government approved gambling. Perhaps the 67% tax rate has some thing to do with it!


-B

Quote: pacomartin

It is surprising how often the government is greedier than organized crime.

Not to defend them, but OC seems to better grasp the concept that 100% of nothing is nothing.

Quote: ahiromu

I believe one gigantic casino around Seattle (probably to the south, closer to Seatac) would be good in the Singapore model... but charging an entry fee would piss a lot of people off. There are casinos within 40-50 minutes to the east, south, and north of the city so people would commute even if it was just $5.

Just ask the Illinois casinos how the entry fee was when they instituted it in the Chicago area casinos during 2004-2005. A lot of people opted to drive across the city into Indiana just to gamble. The casinos mostly didn't mind, as they owned on both sides.

The Singapore model won't work here simply because we live in a capitalist society where people have options. We also believe strongly in free enterprise and if businesses succumb to high taxes which they in turn pass to the consumer, the consumer will most likely go with another option.