Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The Betting (Amendment) Act 2015 was enacted on 15 March last. It provides a regulatory system for remote bookmakers and betting intermediaries, otherwise known as betting exchanges, that offer betting services in Ireland, regardless of their location. The Act provides for fair and equal treatment of all bookmakers by extending betting duty to remote operators, thereby widening the tax base and protecting the Exchequer from the leakage of potential tax revenue. Prior to the enactment of the legislation, excise duty was payable at a rate of 1% on bets entered into with a traditional bookmaker. Since the application of duty to the remote sector from 1 August 2015, licensed remote bookmakers are now liable for 1% duty on the amount of a bet from customers in the State and licensed remote betting intermediaries are now liable for 15% duty on the commission charged to customers in the State.

There have been a number of calls for an increase in the rate of duty applying to betting. However, my preferred approach has been to put a regulatory regime in place for the sector and then to extend the base on which the 1% rate applies, thereby ensuring the tax is applied fairly and widely on a level playing field for all. This system is now in place. The first two months of duty from the remote sector have yielded €3.3 million, which would imply a yield of approximately €20 million in a full year. It is better to wait until the new remote taxation regime has bedded in before considering changes to the rate and type of taxation. As I said, the priority is to allow time for the new regulatory regime to bed in. In addition, the application of a charge directly on the punter as requested would be problematic. Punters who bet via remote means are highly sensitive and such a change would incentivise tax avoidance. All betting firms, including betting exchanges, share this view. They would prefer the tax liability to remain with the firms. That these companies would prefer to bear the tax is a clear indication of how challenging it would be to enforce this proposal.

All taxes are reviewed on an ongoing basis by officials from my Department and Revenue. I assure the Deputy that the betting tax will be kept under review to monitor the operation of the new regime. Accordingly, I cannot accept the amendment.