CASINO GAMBLING
Peeping Tom
Kaieteur News
January 11, 2007
The Commissioner of Taxes should offer no general apology to the business community since he never painted all businesses as rouges or thieves but merely sought to condemn those unscrupulous businesses (and we do have unscrupulous businesses in Guyana) who are participating in conduct that he considers unbecoming.
It is unfortunate that the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry should consider the criticisms by the Commissioner of Taxes as tainting the entire business community. Such an interpretation is a well-known tactic and should not induce the Commissioner into offering an apology since he cannot be expected to apologise for what he never said.
The criticisms by the Commissioner of Taxes were directed specifically to those businesses that he considered to be treating with VAT unfairly. It was a specific criticism about certain unscrupulous businesses, and therefore cannot be used as a generalised criticism of all businesses.
I have expressed my concerns within these columns about the approach taken by the Guyana Revenue Authority and I still insist that this approach was ill-advised. However, I will insist that the Commissioner of Taxes did not paint the entire business community with the same brush as he did those unscrupulous businesses.
He owes no one an apology expect himself since as the Peeper has advised he ought not to have been concerned with the effects on the cost of living since this is a political and policy implication of VAT, better left to be dealt with by the government.
It is invalid to use a specific criticism of some as applying to all, and I wish to use this very point to counter the arguments made in relation to casino gambling in Guyana .
It has been argued that casino gambling can be used for laundering dirty money. This is true in all countries where casino gambling exists but that fact that there is this specific concern does not imply that those businesses that will apply for licenses for casino gambling will use it for laundering dirty money. That is, we cannot assume that because there is a risk of money laundering that all casinos are established for that purpose.
Of course, it would be best to be on our guard to ensure that this risk does not materialise, but to condemn casino gambling simply because of this risk is to a bit unfair especially considering that the same risk can theoretically be said to exist in other activities that are equally susceptible to money laundering. What are those activities?
For one, money laundering can theoretically also take place through other forms of gambling including horseracing and the lottery. Should we then abolish all forms of public gambling in the country? Should we push gambling underground and in the hands of the mafia or should we ensure that public forms of gambling are regularised and open to public scrutiny?
As Uncle Freddie mentioned yesterday there are many others forms of human activity that are flawed. And I can add that there are numerous other ways in which there is greater risk of money laundering. It is known that businesses can be used for money laundering, including commercial businesses. Should these be abolished?
What makes casino gambling more susceptible to organised crime than businesses? I would think that it would be easier for persons using casinos to launder funds to be caught than let us say someone who is laundering funds through for instance an established business since with a business, the dirty money can be washed over an extended period, and more easily disguised.
Money laundering can take place in two forms through casino gambling. Firstly by the owners of the casino exaggerating profits from casinos to accommodate dirty money The fact is however that the requirements for records and the use of electronic machines and paperless money often used in casinos can leave and audit trail that can be picked up by investigators.
The second way for money laundering to take place is for someone to claim that the wealth they enjoy was won at the slot machines or at the poker table. But why do we need casinos for persons to say this? They can claim that they won it through some online lottery.
For the past weeks, I have been receiving hundreds of e-mails announcing that the Peeper has won some lottery. By now, I should be the richest man in the world. The point is that money launderers really do not need casinos. They can find numerous other ways to launder their funds.
And in the same way casinos can be used to launder funds, so too can other forms of public gambling such as the lottery and horseracing because someone who deals with dirty money can also claim that he or she hit the jackpot at the lottery or at the betting pool.
We cannot condemn casino gambling simply because there is a view that it can be used for illicit purposes. Even churches as we know have been involved in fleecing persons within the United States .
Most of the proceeds from narcotics trafficking ultimately have to be laundered from that country, because it is from there that the illicit funds originate. Yet, within the United States there are thousands of casinos.
I see casinos as adding, not necessarily transforming our tourism product. I see no need for a fuss about casino gambling, since locals will not be allowed to gamble and therefore no Guyanese can jump up and claim that he or she got his wealth through gambling in the casinos.
Those who oppose casino gambling in Guyana because they feel that it will launder dirty money should equally come out and call for the abolition of all forms of public gambling, including the lottery and horseracing because these two can also be used for illicit purposes. Through effective regulation in the form of a Gaming Authority, we can ensure that gambling joints do not become launderers.