Thai cabinet approves draft law for casinos, with limits for local gamblers
By Panarat Thepgumpanat and Orathai Sriring
BANGKOK (Reuters) - Thailand's cabinet on Thursday approved a draft law for casinos and entertainment complexes, as the government looks to attract more tourists and build a major gaming industry.
Gambling is mostly banned in Thailand apart from state-controlled horse racing, the lottery and on some sports but successive governments have pressed the case for allowing casinos to draw in more foreign visitors and create more jobs and state revenue.
But the latest draft approved by cabinet will significantly limit how many Thai punters can go to casinos, with an entry fee of 5,000 baht and proof of at least 50 million baht in bank deposits ($1.47 million), effectively blocking large swathes of the population, where per capita gross domestic product is about $7,300.
A deputy finance minister had earlier this month said the assets requirement for Thai nationals would be dropped because it would exclude too many people.
Another restriction is that the casino area may only occupy up to 10% of the entire space of an entertainment complex, according to a government statement.
The draft law will be sent to parliament, and if passed, will also need approval from the Senate and the king.
Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra told reporters the details of the law were not final as parliament would have the final say.
A Citi report late last year estimated that about half of people aged 20 and more in Thailand could be casino players, providing a base for the country to potentially become the world's third-largest gambling destination.
The government, led by the populist Pheu Thai party, hopes to attract at least 100 billion baht ($3 billion) in new investment in casinos and entertainment complexes and see an annual boost to foreign arrivals of 5% to 10%, while generating revenue of more than 12 billion baht a year.
Despite most betting and gambling being outlawed in Thailand, illicit operations have operated for years.
A January opinion poll in Thailand indicated there was opposition to the plan, however, and some political parties have argued that building a gambling industry would worsen social problems.
Several countries in Southeast Asia have legalised casinos, but only a few like wealthy Singapore has been successful in drawing global giants such as Las Vegas Sands Corp on the back of robust regulations.
Tourism is a key driver of Thailand, Southeast Asia's second-largest economy. This year, the government expects 38 million foreign arrivals, closing in on its pre-pandemic record of nearly 40 million tourists.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
22 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump tax bill would help the richest, hurt the poorest, CBO says
Advertisement Households in the middle of the income distribution would see an increase in resources of $500 to $1,000, or between 0.5 percent and 0.8 percent of their income. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The projections are based on the version of the tax legislation that House Republicans passed last month, which includes much of Trump's economic agenda. The bill would extend tax cuts passed under Trump in 2017 otherwise due to expire at the end of the year and create several new tax breaks. It also imposes new changes to the Medicaid and SNAP programs in an effort to cut spending. Overall, the legislation would add $2.4 trillion to US deficits over the next 10 years, not accounting for dynamic effects, the CBO previously forecast. The Senate is considering changes to the legislation including efforts by some Republican senators to scale back cuts to Medicaid. Advertisement The projected loss of safety-net resources for low-income families come against the backdrop of higher tariffs, which economists have warned would also disproportionately impact lower-income families. While recent inflation data has shown limited impact from the import duties so far, low-income families tend to spend a larger portion of there income on necessities, such as food, so price increases hit them harder. The House-passed bill requires that able-bodied individuals without dependents document at least 80 hours of 'community engagement' a month, including working a job or participating in an educational program to qualify for Medicaid. It also includes increased costs for health care for enrollees, among other provisions. More older adults also would have to prove they are working to continue to receive SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps. The legislation helps pay for tax cuts by raising the age for which able bodied adults must work to receive benefits to 64, up from 54. Under the current law, some parents with dependent children under age 18 are exempt from work requirements, but the bill lowers the age for the exemption for dependent children to 7 years old. The legislation also shifts a portion of the cost for federal food aid onto state governments. CBO previously estimated that the expanded work requirements on SNAP would reduce participation in the program by roughly 3.2 million people, and more could lose or face a reduction in benefits due to other changes to the program. A separate analysis from the organization found that 7.8 million people would lose health insurance because of the changes to Medicaid. With assistance from Alex Newman. Advertisement
Los Angeles Times
22 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
House approves Trump's request to cut funding for NPR, PBS and foreign aid
WASHINGTON — The House narrowly voted Thursday to cut about $9.4 billion in spending already approved by Congress as President Trump's administration looks to follow through on work done by the Department of Government Efficiency when it was overseen by Elon Musk. The package targets foreign aid programs and the Corp. for Public Broadcasting, which provides money for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service as well as thousands of public radio and television stations around the country. The vote was 214-212. Republicans are characterizing the spending as wasteful and unnecessary, but Democrats say the rescissions are hurting the United States' standing in the world and will lead to needless deaths. 'Cruelty is the point,' Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said of the proposed spending cuts. The Trump administration is employing a tool rarely used in recent years that allows the president to transmit a request to Congress to cancel previously appropriated funds. That triggers a 45-day clock in which the funds are frozen pending congressional action. If Congress fails to act within that period, then the spending stands. 'This rescissions package sends $9.4 billion back to the U.S. Treasury,' said Rep. Lisa McClain, House Republican Conference chair. 'That's $9.4 billion of savings that taxpayers won't see wasted. It's their money.' The benefit for the administration of a formal rescissions request is that passage requires only a simple majority in the 100-member Senate instead of the 60 votes usually required to get spending bills through that chamber. So if they stay united, Republicans will be able to pass the measure without any Democratic votes. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said the Senate would likely not take the bill up until July and after it has dealt with Trump's big tax and immigration bill. He also said it's possible the Senate could tweak the bill. The administration is likening the first rescissions package to a test case and says more could be on the way if Congress goes along. Republicans, sensitive to concerns that Trump's sweeping tax and immigration bill would increase future federal deficits, are anxious to demonstrate spending discipline, though the cuts in the package amount to just a sliver of the spending approved by Congress each year. They are betting the cuts prove popular with constituents who align with Trump's 'America first' ideology as well as those who view NPR and PBS as having a liberal bias. In all, the package contains 21 proposed rescissions. Approval would claw back about $900 million from $10 billion that Congress has approved for global health programs. That includes canceling $500 million for activities related to infectious diseases and child and maternal health and another $400 million to address the global HIV epidemic. The Trump administration is also looking to cancel $800 million, or a quarter of the amount Congress approved, for a program that provides emergency shelter, water and sanitation, and family reunification for those forced to flee their own country. About 45% of the savings sought by the White House would come from two programs designed to boost the economies, democratic institutions and civil societies in developing countries. Democratic leadership, in urging their caucus to vote no, said that package would eliminate access to clean water for more than 3.6 million people and lead to millions more not having access to a school. 'Those Democrats saying that these rescissions will harm people in other countries are missing the point,' McClain said. 'It's about people in our country being put first.' The Republican president has also asked lawmakers to rescind nearly $1.1 billion from the Corp. for Public Broadcasting, which represents the full amount it's slated to receive during the next two budget years. About two-thirds of the money gets distributed to more than 1,500 locally owned public radio and television stations. Nearly half of those stations serve rural areas of the country. The association representing local public television stations warns that many of them would be forced to close if the Republican measure passes. Those stations provide emergency alerts, free educational programming and high school sports coverage, and highlight hometown heroes. Advocacy groups that serve the world's poorest people are also sounding the alarm and urging lawmakers to vote no. 'We are already seeing women, children and families left without food, clean water and critical services after earlier aid cuts, and aid organizations can barely keep up with rising needs,' said Abby Maxman, president and chief executive of Oxfam America, a poverty-fighting organization. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said the foreign aid is a tool that prevents conflict and promotes stability, but the measure before the House takes that tool away. 'These cuts will lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, devastating the most vulnerable in the world,' McGovern said. 'This bill is good for Russia and China and undertakers,' added Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.). Republicans disparaged the foreign aid spending and sought to link it to programs they said DOGE had uncovered. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said taxpayer dollars had gone to such things as targeting climate change, promoting pottery classes and strengthening diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Other Republicans cited similar examples they said DOGE had revealed. 'Yet, my friends on the other side of the aisle would like you to believe, seriously, that if you don't use your taxpayer dollars to fund this absurd list of projects and thousands of others I didn't even list, that somehow people will die and our global standing in the world will crumble,' Roy said. 'Well, let's just reject this now.' Freking writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Effort to strip Fed of interest paying power seen likely to bring upheaval to markets
By Michael S. Derby NEW YORK (Reuters) -A Republican senator's plan to take away the Federal Reserve's power to pay banks interest on cash they park on central bank books could cause chaos for monetary policy implementation if it were implemented, market participants said. In recent days, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has been speaking about this power and his desire to see it ended as part of what he views as an effort to save money by the federal government. Stripping the Fed of the longstanding power would save the government $1 trillion, Cruz said in a CNBC interview last week. The senator said then that he did not know if it was likely his effort would work but that it was certainly possible. On Wednesday, Bloomberg reported that Cruz had also lobbied President Donald Trump, who has long been at odds with the Fed, as well as Republican colleagues, about his idea. 'We're agonizing trying to find a $50 billion cut here and there. This is over a trillion dollars, big dollars in savings,' Cruz told Bloomberg, saying of the payments, 'half of it is going to foreign banks, which makes no sense.' Cruz's office did not respond to a request for comment. The Fed declined to comment. Cruz's effort is being treated cautiously by Senator Tim Scott, the Republican from South Carolina who chairs the Senate Finance Committee. "While the desire to return to pre-crisis monetary policy operating procedures is understandable," the matter must be considered under normal Senate procedures, Scott said in a statement. Any move on this must start with a hearing, Scott said, adding, "this is not a decision to be rushed – it must be carefully considered and openly debated." The Fed's power to pay banks interest, granted by Congress, took effect in 2008 as the financial crisis dawned. It quickly gained prominence as part of a large-scale overhaul of the monetary policy architecture, as the Fed confronted the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression. As it now stands, the Fed pays deposit-taking banks 4.4% for reserves. It uses another tool called the reverse repo facility to take in cash from money market funds and others, paying them 4.25%. Together, the two rates are designed to keep the federal funds rate, the central bank's main tool for influencing the economy, within the desired range. Paying financial firms for de facto loans of cash is essential for interest rate control due to the very large amount of liquidity created by bond buying stimulus efforts. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Fed more than doubled the size of its balance sheet to a peak of $9 trillion, with asset purchases providing support to the economy beyond what the then near-zero short-term rates could deliver. If the Fed did not have the power to pay interest on deposits, the still substantial amount of liquidity sloshing around in markets would prevent it from controlling short-term rates. That said, concerns have long existed, even among some former central bankers, that paying banks money to deposit cash at the Fed is effectively a subsidy to banks. The other issue with paying interest on reserves is that it has led the Fed into an unprecedented period of loss-making. The Fed has been operating in the red because the interest rate it now has in place outstrips the income it earns off bonds it owns. Most analysts expect the loss-making to occur for some time to come. Fed losses mean that it is not handing over profits back to the Treasury, as it is required to do when it is in the green. Sums handed back to the Treasury over recent years contributed modestly to lowering deficits. Experts believe Cruz's plan would completely fail to achieve its goals and would instead cause huge upheaval in money markets. Barclays Capital economists said on Tuesday that ending the power would simply push the cash into the reverse repo facility, which means the central bank would still be paying lots of interest to financial firms, thus negating any deficit savings. J.P. Morgan strategists said in a note last week that under Cruz's plan, 'the Fed's ability to control money market rates may be compromised, complicating its efforts to guide broader financial conditions via the fed funds rate and other money market rates.'
