BETTING IN BRITAIN

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 224, 9 June 1923, Page 7

BETTING IN BRITAIN

VISIT TO DERBY CAUSES ASTONISHMENT THE HOUSE OF COMMONS SELECT COMMITTEE “NO IDEA OF SCALE OF OPERATIONS” After a visit to the Derby members of the House of Coma mons Select Committee on betting, expressed astonishment at the extraordinary amount of betting and confessed that previously they had no idea of the scale of tho operations. By telegraph.—press Association. —Copyright. London, June 7. Complete astonishment at the extraordinary amount of betting was the predominant impression of members of the House of Commons Select'Committee on Betting, after a visit to the Derby, where they were the guests of the Jockey Club. They confessed that previously they had no idea of the scale of the operations, and expressed regret that it was impossible to devise a scheme by which the amount of money that changed hands at the course could bo calculated. > More than one member is convinced that on a big day like the Derby it would be impossible to collect a tax on the course. That means that a scheme would have to be devised to collect the tax through other channels. Tho members conscientiously investigated all aspects of the betting; they crossQuestioned the bookmakers, and interviewed the winning jockey. Apparently the majority of the members did not attempt to gain a firsthand knowledge, though one confessed that he “left a tenner behind.”— “Tho Times.”

SIR HORACE HAMILTON’S . SCHEME WHAT A TAX WOULD YIELD £10,000,000 A YEAR London, June 7. The Betting Tax Committee took the evidence of Sir Horace Hamilton in elaboration of his scheme for the issue of a bookmaker’s licence of £lO a year, a betting office license of £2O, and the sale of books of betting tickets by the State to bookmakers. He said the Board of Customs, of which he is president, suggested, that, say, 10 per cent, should be levied on all moneys staked with the bookmakers in addition to the issuing of bookmakers’ and lotting office licenses. .The board did not propose the installation of Government totalisators. Private totalisators would be treated. as betting offices, while street betting would remain illegal. Means could be provided by which, within limitations, cash betting off the course would be recognised, controlled, and taxed.

Th© witness believed the present volume of betting totalled over £100,000.0(X) annually, or 455. per head of population. Sir Horace added that he estimated the total investments on file course for the 1920 Derby at £l.000.000. The totals for the Grand National. Manchester Cup. and Kemnton Park, had several times approached £750.000. Ten per cent, on the total betting investments would yield £10.000.000 a year. Replying to the chairman, Sir Horace Hamilton said a large staff would not be necessary to collect tho license fees and stamp duties. He thought the bookmakers would pass the tax on bv shortening the odds, which would affect everybody alike. The bookmakers would not object to a 10 per cent, tax on all money staked.

Mr. Rentoul. M.P.riHave you ever considered the possibility of taxing the betting news in the newspapers? < Sir Horace Hamilton : No. Mr. Rentoul: Would tho tax be remitted on scratched horses? Sir Horace Hamilton: The board feels that the intention is the same whether the horse is scratched or not. Sir Horace Hamilton thought that the cost of collection would not exceed IJ-,. per cent'. B eplying to a question as to whether he suggested the repeal of the law so as to make bets recoverable in the Law Courts, he said it was not for them to consider that. He declared that credit betting was not illegal, but it was not enforceable in the Courts.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.