Bill To Regulate Online Casino Gambling Introduced
Minister of Internal Affairs
Minister of Internal Affairs Brooke van Velden has today introduced the Online Casino Gambling Bill to the House of Representatives.
'The Online Casino Gambling Bill will introduce a regulatory system for online gambling in New Zealand, which will prioritise harm minimisation, consumer protection, and tax collection,' says Ms van Velden.
Cabinet has previously agreed to introduce new legislation to regulate the online casino gambling market, which is currently unregulated in New Zealand. Key features of the Bill include:
Up to 15 licences for online casino gambling operators will be auctioned
Companies applying for a licence will need to provide detailed information to the regulator, including on their business plans for New Zealand
Licensed operators will be allowed to advertise, with restrictions
Unlicensed operators will be prohibited and fines up to $5 million may be applicable for breaking the law
Detailed regulations about advertising and harm minimisation standards are currently being developed and will set out the specific requirements that operators must abide by.
'The Bill will proceed to select committee later this year and New Zealanders will have the ability to have their say through the select committee process.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Why you need a Will now more than ever
This article was prepared by Holland Beckett and is being published by the New Zealand Herald as advertorial. In today's evolving financial and legal landscape, having a valid Will in place has never been more critical for New Zealanders. The absence of a Will can lead to unnecessary delays, stress, and cost for families. One of the most overlooked reasons to have a Will is KiwiSaver. Many people assume their KiwiSaver balance will automatically pass to their partner or next of kin on death, but that's not how it works. KiwiSaver funds are held solely in the name of the individual and do not pass by survivorship (think, property held as joint tenants). Instead, they must be dealt with as part of the person's estate, and if there is no Will, this creates delays and uncertainty in accessing those funds. With the recent Government budget injecting more incentives and support into KiwiSaver, balances are likely to grow significantly over time. Another relevant factor is the probate threshold. Currently, assets over $15,000 will require a grant from the Court. This threshold is due to increase to $40,000 in the near future, to better reflect current asset values. In real terms, the threshold is easily exceeded - especially when you consider KiwiSaver. Without a Will, for which the court can grant 'probate', family members must apply for 'letters of administration' which can be slower and more complex, particularly when family dynamics are tense. At the same time, more New Zealanders are choosing to own property as tenants in common rather than joint tenants – especially in blended families or where people wish to protect their children's inheritance from a new partner. This structure allows each party to leave their share of the property to whomever they choose, provided they have a Will to specify that. In this situation, a Will should complement any Contracting Out Agreement (or 'Pre Nup'). Many family trusts are now being wound up or simplified because of changes in trust law, compliance costs, ageing/migrating settlors and international beneficiaries (giving rise to tax implications). As assets come out of a trust and revert to personal ownership, they become part of a person's estate and must be carefully dealt with by their Will. Overseas properties, investments and digital assets can be challenging to deal with if someone passes without a Will (or Wills) to reflect what should happen to assets in other countries. Having a Will is no longer just about passing on the family home – it's about ensuring some thought is given to the increasing complex assets and arrangements of the modern estate. With the right guidance, a complicated situation can have a clear and manageable solution. The key is to decide what you want to achieve, and get a Will drafted to reflect that.
Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
What Does The US Remittance Tax Mean For The Pacific?
The United States is set to implement a tax on remittances paid by migrants to their communities overseas. The tax is a component of the " One Big Beautiful Bill", a cornerstone fiscal measure under President Donald Trump. When the spending bill passed through the House of Representatives, the tax was set at 5 percent. The US Senate reduced it down to 3.5 percent, and now again to 1 percent. The bill has undergone numerous amendments in the Senate before it goes back to the House for final negotiations and then to the White House. However, even if the final tax level falls on the lower end, Pacific development experts say that both direct and indirect impacts pose a significant threat to the region. What is the remittance tax? Deep within the pages of congressional reports on the "One Big Beautiful Bill" lies a section titled "Removing Taxpayer Benefits for Illegal Immigrants". The tax takes aim at outward flows of income generated by illegal immigrants within the US economy, one of several measures designed to disadvantage illegal immigrants financially. Remittance transfer providers, such as US banks, credit unions, or licensed brokers and dealers, would collect the tax at the point of transfer before the remittance is sent abroad, increasing the cost of sending remittances. The tax applies to all US citizens and nationals sending money overseas, though it had originally been aimed only at illegal immigrants before a Senate redraft on 30 June. With the US responsible for the largest global share of remittances, particularly to Latin America and the Caribbean, critics argue it could cause serious damage in the developing world. In May, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum denounced the tax as "a measure that is unacceptable". It is also proven controversial in right-leaning circles, particularly among libertarians, prompting draft after redraft of the policy. The American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank, called the tax "poorly designed". "Although the Senate bill's narrowing of the tax would greatly diminish these problems, it would not eliminate them. That outcome can be attained by rejecting the remittances tax in its entirety." Impact on the Pacific The US Migration Policy Institute estimates that, as of 2023 there are 166,389 immigrants currently in the US who were born in Oceania (other than Australia and New Zealand). The Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG), an organisation of civil society groups throughout the region, said the tax will have "profound implications" on Pacific livelihoods. PANG deputy coordinator Adam Wolfenden told RNZ Pacific that, while relatively less remittance cash finds its way into the Pacific, these are nations who rely on it. "For a country like Samoa, which gets 20 percent of its remittance money from the US, we'll see that cut. For a country like Tonga, for who the US is its biggest source of remittances at just over 35 percent, this will see a cut." "Studies have shown that any increase in the cost of sending money home has a larger impact." According to the World Bank, sending remittances currently costs an average of 6.62 percent of the amount sent, thanks to things like provider fees. Wolfenden pointed to a study by the Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research, which found that demonstrates that one percentage point increase in remittance costs would correlate with a 1.6 percent decline in the amount that reaches it's final destination. A potential 3.5 percent tax would reduce remittance flows by 5.6 percent, PANG said. "The fear is that, for those who receive remittances in those domestic economies, particularly that rely on remittances to fund a lot of consumption, the tax will ultimately lead to some kind of decrease in economic growth. Amid other US actions in the Pacific, such as massive cuts to aid, tariffs and increased militarisation, Wolfenden believes the US simply is not considering the Pacific in the decision making. "I think they are promoting their interests above all else. And I think that is a short-sighted view towards what a relationship with the Pacific means." The Australian National University's Development Policy Centre deputy director Dr Ryan Edwards called the tax "terrible". "Remittances can get sent in many ways. There's the cash ones which will be targeted through formal channels, and informal channels, where people often just carry it back in their suitcases and declare it or find other ways," he said. "This will push everything to the informal channel market, which many countries have tried for a long time to move people away from for security reasons." Edwards told RNZ Pacific that he is concerned about the precedent the policy will set, and what kind of signal it would send to governments with significant aid contributions. "We have seen the current US administration testing the waters with international trade, aid, and other things. [These things] tend to benefit both sides in ways that we often do not pick up at a first glance. "It is a slippery slope in terms of setting an example, and the US has historically had a role as a global example not so much anymore."
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
Ferry Privatisation Would Be A Disaster
The Maritime Union of New Zealand (MUNZ) says suggestions of privatisation of the new Cook Strait Interislander ferries would be a dangerous step backwards. The proposals were contained in a cabinet paper presented to the Government earlier this year and obtained by media under the OIA. Maritime Union of New Zealand National Secretary Carl Findlay says past privatisation of strategic transport infrastructure had caused great harm to our national supply chain. He says the ideological push for privatization will be coming from the extreme right in the Government represented by the ACT Party. Mr Findlay says New Zealand's rail network, including the ferries, had been sold off to overseas corporates in the 1990s by a right wing National Government. "What followed was a textbook case of corporate raiding, where assets were stripped for short-term profit, maintenance was run into the ground, and workers paid with their lives due to shocking health and safety breaches.' 'The taxpayer was then forced to spend millions to buy back the asset and start the long process of fixing it up.' Mr Findlay says it is essential for a New Zealand owned, public ferry operator to be on the Cook Strait for economic security and supply chain resilience. He says the Cook Strait is our 'blue highway', an essential extension of State Highway 1 and the Main Trunk Line. 'We believe the Minister of Rail, Winston Peters, who has spoken at length about the failures of past privatisations, will not allow the Government to be swayed by ACT style agendas.' Mr Findlay says the ferry replacement process has already been a fiasco, with the decision of Finance Minister Nicola Willis to cancel the iRex project creating years of delays and a billion dollar cost to New Zealand. He says there are many other opportunities for private operators to enter into other coastal shipping services, and the Government should be supporting this goal. 'For the Cook Strait, our focus should be on investing in a modern, reliable, and publicly-owned ferry fleet that is fit for the 21st century and serves all New Zealanders.' The Maritime Union of New Zealand represents seafaring and catering crews on both Cook Strait ferry operators.
