Nevada Gaming Commissions Policies - Coursework Example

Nevada Gaming Commission’s policies The Nevada Gaming Commission is a body appointed by the governor of the State of Nevada that consists of a five-member team. The board members serve on a part time capacity in which their job is to work on the submissions by the Gaming Control Board in matters pertaining to licensing. They also make rulings on issuance of work permit appeals in which they are the last authority in terms of approving and dismissing licenses of gaming submissions. In addition, they have the authority to prohibit, revoke, suspend, or restrict any gaming license across the Nevada state. Further, the regulatory body has the responsibility of implementing government legislation regarding the gaming practice. On the other hand, gaming in Las Vegas became legal in 1931 where it became an entertainment activity. It is a legal practice for people over the age of twenty-one and children do not have access to any gaming hall. Sequentially, this essay will delve on some key aspects that the committee should reconsider in order to ensure that the gaming industry thrives. In excess, the paper will highlight antiquate of the entertainment taxation because of its difficulty to calculate, enforce, and not worth the cost hence needing replacing. Policies on the gaming industry In essence, this policy is in section seventy- eight of the Senate Bill, number eight of the twentieth special paper. In essence, gaming is a privilege that the state has the power to with hold the inherent rights to infringe on gaming occupations and trades. On the other hand, it is as much a privilege to work as a key employee in a casino as much as it is a privileged to own one (Kilby, Fox & Lucas 18). For instance, it is a law requirement that anyone working in casino in matters pertaining to gaming has to get licensing and registered by the state. Therefore, they require valid gaming work permits Gambling in a casino is also a privilege that the commission and the licensing may revoke at any given time. Moreover, any individual wishing to attain a gaming license must apply to the application department under the investigations arm of the licensing board. The work of the investigation department is to ascertain whether the applicant is suitable to operate under a gambling license. Ideally, the applicant bears the whole cost of the department’s investigation. Prior payment of the estimated cost of the investigation is mandatory to any applicant where upon completion, the investigation department give its recommendations to the board based on its findings. Sequentially, the board forwards the application to the gaming commission where the applicant undergoes another independent vetting. At the end of the vetting, the commission members’ vote to ascertain the applicants suitability to receive a gambling license. Moreover, the licenses offered by the gaming licenses commission are in two categories that are the restricted and none restricted. For instance, a restricted license allows an applicant to operate less than fifteen with no poker table, and no poker games. While the latter, is for an applicant willing to operate more than fifteen slots with one or more poker tables. As part of the commission’s requirements, applicants must be individuals of irreproachable character in order for them to pass as suitable candidates for the acquisition of gambling license. Secondly, it becomes a mandatory requirement that the applicant be of repute and have a healthy background for their association to pass as one that will not bring unneeded attention to the Nevada state. Additionally, the applicant must also have excellent business record of accomplishment in terms of management and profitability. Competency of the applicant in the gambling field becomes an added advantage to those seeking top acquire licenses in gambling. In excess, the applicant must show their ability to fund their intended bushiness venture in that they need not have a background of debt when starting the gambling business. They need to prove that are able to provide the winnings to gamblers immediately after they win. Taxation on winnings As per the 1945 legislation on the taxation of winnings, a one percent entitlement goes to the Nevada state. Prior, the state only received taxation through table tax and fees from slot machines in which revenue came from card games. However, some legislators felt that the taxation on these winnings was unnecessary hence sort to block this move by the state. Some argue that the winnings need not attract any taxation, but instead the burden of the taxation should be on the applicant through the licensing fee. Therefore, suggestion was that the gambling business only contributes to the economy in that single way. According Kilby, Fox, and Lucas (35), governor Carville insinuated that it was vital to establish how much the one percent taxation translated as revenue. He questioned the challenges, and the applicability of the legislation in the operation of the state financial functionalities. He reiterated that it was critical for the legislative arm of government take up inquisitive actions in order to make the absolute and appropriate on the matter. Subsequently, legislature increased the taxation from one percent to percent contrary to the governor’s suggestion. The tax mode of collection is usually cash in which the tax liability is subject to questioning (Kilby, Fox & Lucas 36). Additionally, the cash form of tax collection makes casinos pay after the casinos have made their entire funds collection. The calculation of the profit includes the analysis of the previous months’ winning earnings subtracting any credits made during that month and adding the credit earning collected during that month. The total becomes the taxable gross income. In essence, the collection of taxes needs revising on since this system is cumbersome and delaying. Seemingly, not many are able to perform these calculations hence making it difficult to enforce. On the contrary, the state needs to revise this calculation to make it easy to ascertain the profit. Otherwise, the process remains a privilege to the elite who may have this knowledge. It is also easy for these business entrepreneurs to evade full taxation on their earnings since the documents provided act as proof of transaction. Moreover, the government needs to ensure that all gaming entertainment spots have in place software that links them to the central taxation system in order to ensure that they submit their true earnings for full taxation. Despite the measures put in place, casinos owners have to file a monthly gross income report that they may somehow manipulate, to the Nevada Gaming Commission (Kolby, Fox & Lucas 38). This helps the commission ascertain the business’ performance whether it is a making any profits or losses. As earlier mentioned, a casino may opt to give manipulated information meaning that they may not give the full report on their earnings to the required bodies. Essentially, a third of Nevada state general tax revenue comes from gaming taxes from the many casinos within the state. In this regard, gaming winnings attract a twenty to thirty percent interest depending on how much one has won to which the internal revenue service claims ownership. Upon winning, the gamer has to produce proof of being tax compliant by producing a social security number and a taxpayer’s identification pin number. This applies to citizens of America while foreign gamers submit a mandatory thirty percent of their winnings to this taxation body. On the contrary, when gamers lose they can claim compensation with proof of actually participating in the gaming. This is through the tickets issued as approval to participate in a certain game. However, the claim may not exceed the winnings earned. Therefore, any high winning finds its way to the attention of the IRS since the law requires the casinos to do so or risk license revocation. Essentially, this is not necessary as it becomes cumbersome to have to keep in touch with the IRS on such matters. Ideally, the taxation body, through affirmative legislation may establish mechanisms in which they can do tax collection on a regular interval. This may be on quarterly, half year or after a period of a year instead of doing it once there is a tremendous winning. Conclusion The taxation policy existing in the State of Nevada regarding gaming need revising as some of them have aged compared to the technological advances made in the world today. In essence, tax collection needs to be online like any other tax submission. The idea of doing this collection in cash and in person is a time and resource waster. The taxation imposed on the winnings is barbaric since the winnings entirely depend on luck and not guaranteed. In addition, the attainment of profit estimates is a crucial affair where casino owners may evade taxation. Therefore, stringent applications need devising to ensure that no casino provides in accurate information regarding their gaming earnings as the filling of the data is by hand. Lastly, the state needs to devise ways in which they can collect accumulated revenues instead of doing it every time a gamer makes a winning because of documentation. It should be periodical making tax collection on the gaming industry less strenuous. Works Cited Kilby, Jim, Jim Fox, and Anthony F. Lucas. Casino Operations Management. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2006. Read More