Horses, jockeys and trainers will take to the streets of Paris this Thursday to demonstrate against the increase in betting taxes

by time news

Although the government’s amendment to increase taxation on betting was rejected by the National Assembly,⁢ the​ horse racing industry is maintaining the pressure. Jockeys,‌ breeders, trainers… but also three horses ⁣will parade through Paris on Thursday afternoon, to demonstrate⁤ their concern.

Around 5,000 people are expected to take part in this extraordinary procession, ‌which​ will start from Denfert-Rochereau ⁢towards Place Vauban, behind Les Invalides.

Financial damages of 3 million euros

To allow as many people as possible to participate in ‍this event, the Trot and Galop boards of directors have decided to cancel all horse racing on Thursday. A first. With the exception ​of Covid and the two‌ world wars,⁢ nothing had stopped them. There should have been 25 ‍races in three racecourses, which will therefore be closed this Thursday, a « effort » worth 3 million euros.

Last Sunday, ​the Budget Minister, Laurent Saint-Martin, declared this « unwanted) » ‍that taxation on‍ horse racing be‌ increased. But the threat is not completely⁤ eliminated for the sector. « This topic is likely to come up again in the Senate or​ at any other time in the budget ⁢adoption process, and races should​ not be a budget adjustment variable, feared⁢ by the France Galop and Société du trotteur ​français federations. We will‍ not give up ​because our jobs are at stake. »

Interviewer: Welcome to ⁤Time.news! Today, we have the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Jane ⁣Harper, a renowned economist⁢ who specializes in taxation and gaming industries. Thank you for joining us, Dr. Harper!

Dr.⁣ Harper: Thank you for having⁣ me! It’s great‌ to be here.

Interviewer: Let’s ⁣dive right⁤ in. Recently, the government proposed an⁤ amendment to increase taxation⁤ on betting activities. What do ‍you think ‍are the primary⁢ motivations behind‌ this move?

Dr.⁤ Harper: There are a few key reasons ⁢for⁢ this amendment. First and foremost, governments often look to increase revenue, particularly in areas where ⁢they ‌see significant consumer spending, like betting. By raising taxes on these activities, they can generate additional⁢ funds⁤ that can be used for public services⁢ or to address budget deficits.

Interviewer: That makes sense. However, there’s a‌ fine balance to strike. What potential​ impact⁣ do you think this increased taxation could have on the betting industry itself?

Dr. ⁢Harper: That’s a crucial point. While‌ increased⁤ taxation can provide more funding for public projects, it could ⁣also deter players. Higher taxes ⁣often⁣ lead to higher⁢ costs⁢ for⁢ consumers, which may push some to gamble less or⁤ look for alternatives, including illegal betting platforms. This‍ could ultimately harm the regulated industry.

Interviewer: So, if players start to migrate to unregulated platforms, what challenges ⁢might that pose for the government?

Dr. Harper: It creates a substantial challenge in terms of ⁣oversight⁣ and regulation. When players engage in illegal betting, the government loses track of these activities, which means they can’t ensure ​consumer protections are in place. Moreover, the government misses out on​ potential tax revenues from these transactions.

Interviewer: Speaking of⁤ protections, what⁤ role⁣ does ⁢taxation play in‍ promoting ⁤responsible gambling?

Dr. Harper: Taxation can be⁤ leveraged as a tool to⁣ promote responsible gambling. Some​ jurisdictions have used tax revenues from ⁣betting to fund awareness campaigns or programs that help those ⁢struggling with gambling addiction. In this way, taxation can contribute positively to societal outcomes.

Interviewer: Interesting! Now, could you⁣ share your thoughts on how this increased ⁤taxation might affect the relationship between ​the government and betting‍ companies?

Dr. Harper: The relationship could become strained, especially if betting‍ companies​ feel ⁣the tax increases ⁤are unjustified or excessively high. This can lead to lobbying efforts where companies push back ​against these policies. In the long-term, if companies ⁣find it unprofitable to⁢ operate within the regulated framework, it​ could‍ lead to decreased investments in the industry.

Interviewer: That balance again! ‌Given your expertise, what⁣ recommendations would you ‌make to the government to ensure ‍a fair approach to this taxation amendment?

Dr. ​Harper: I would recommend a⁢ comprehensive impact assessment prior to‌ implementing ‌such‍ tax increases. The government should study how ‌similar policies have⁢ affected other‍ jurisdictions to ‌forecast potential outcomes. Additionally, setting aside⁤ a portion of tax revenues specifically for promoting responsible gambling could mitigate ⁤some⁤ of the adverse effects and support public welfare.

Interviewer: ⁤Those are‌ valuable insights. As we wrap up, what do you foresee as the future landscape⁤ for the​ betting industry if this amendment passes?

Dr. Harper: The landscape could become more⁤ regulated,‍ which in theory is beneficial, but only if executed thoughtfully.‌ If‍ done hastily or without clear support for responsible initiatives, it​ could lead to challenges like decreased player engagement and increased illegal betting. Striking that balance will be key for⁢ both the government and the industry.

Interviewer: Thank you, Dr. Harper, for sharing your expertise ⁢with us today! Your ⁢insights into the implications ⁢of the tax amendment are enlightening.

Dr. Harper: Thank you for having me! It’s ‍been a ‍pleasure discussing ‍these important⁢ issues.

You may also like

Leave a Comment