Confused about tax on winnings?

A place to discuss anything.
Post Reply
Fleamint
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:12 pm

I know it's extremely hopeful, but I can dream :D Say you won a remotely significant amount from betting, what does that money count as? Is it capital gains or something like that because it's akin to an investment, or does it count as straight up income? Recently been poking around trying to sort out my finances and figuring out exactly what money I have, and it's piqued my interest So I was hoping someone here will know and be able to tell me :)

Thanks in advance!
Last edited by Fleamint on Thu Apr 26, 2018 10:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
spreadbetting
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm

Gambling winnings aren't taxable in the UK because if something can be taxed you can generally also claim rebates of overpaid tax too. For HMRC it's a can of worms so for the small amounts they'd likely make it's just not worth the hassle. Other countries treat it differently though so depends where you're based.
LinusP
Posts: 1873
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:45 pm

spreadbetting wrote:
Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:04 pm
Gambling winnings aren't taxable in the UK because if something can be taxed you can generally also claim rebates of overpaid tax too. For HMRC it's a can of worms so for the small amounts they'd likely make it's just not worth the hassle. Other countries treat it differently though so depends where you're based.
It would actually result in HMRC making a loss due to the bookmaker spreads / exchange commission.
User avatar
BetScalper
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 10:47 pm

So, you can be a full-time sports trader in the UK and pay no tax whatsoever, even if your annual earnings were over £100k etc ?
User avatar
ShaunWhite
Posts: 9731
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am

That's right. Pro gambling used to be a very niche activity that didn't warrent the complications and paperwork. It was also a cash activity not easily tracked.

As it becomes more common, loopholes get closed, and it gets easier for hmrc to track your account activities, it's a situation I wouldn't guarantee will exist forever.

People often say that they won't because losses would be deductable, but they're only a deduction, not a refund.
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 2722
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

ShaunWhite wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:14 am
That's right. Pro gambling used to be a very niche activity that didn't warrent the complications and paperwork. It was also a cash activity not easily tracked.

As it becomes more common, loopholes get closed, and it gets easier for hmrc to track your account activities, it's a situation I wouldn't guarantee will exist forever.

People often say that they won't because losses would be deductable, but they're only a deduction, not a refund.
Totally agree Shaun. I was in the tax industry before retiring. I wouldn't be surprised if HMRC didn't carry out a full review of betting taxes sometime, it's full of anomalies carried over from the days of shop bookmaking and earlier. If you enter a shares trade as a Contact for Differences (CforD)the profit is CGT taxable (for anyone who has not come across these instruments before it's an investment where the return is based on the difference in price of a share without the requirement for you to invest the full value of the shares, you just need to cover the liability) but if you do what is effectively a CforD with a spreadbet company there is no tax because it's betting ... it makes no sense!

HMRC have a long term general rule that if you acquire something with the aim of making a profit then you are trading and trading profits are taxable. Private cars are free of tax (I'm ignoring Road Fund Licence etc.) but if you are a car dealer then your profit when you sell cars is taxable. Why? John bought his car and drove it for 1, 2, 3 or more years before selling it but the dealer bought 100 cars with the intention of selling for a profit. Now compare your position with that of John who goes into his local booking and puts £10 on the favourite in the 3:30 at Epsom. John places a few bets a week and although he hopes for winners he will probably make a loss long term so as Shaun said, HMRC don't want to be giving him relief on his losses but you take 100's of position every day each with the intention of making a profit. Why should you be treated any different to the car dealer?

And remember HMRC can set whatever rules they want. They can pass law that says if you are a trader by their definition and make a profit then you will be taxed. They have the legislation in place now that would go at least half way! If you run a business but do not make a profit they can argue it is a business in name only and not allow you to offset your losses against your other income. This often applies after 2 consecutive years for a 'normal' business but is stretched to 5 years for a farmer :) (there are arguments the taxpayer can raise in mitigation but let's keep this simple :) ). So John's losses on his £10 bets would not be offset in the long run, and probably not at all because law could be drafted such it is left for HMRC to determine whether you are trading or not and John would be unlikely to challenge them.

So even if all that fails HMRC can introduce legislation at any time that would allow them to tax your winnings. Take the recent changes in the Buy to Let (BTL) market. Buying and renting a house is like running a business, you rent the property for income and that incurs expenses. If the income exceeds the expenses then you pay tax at your top rate on the surplus. The tax structure of BTL properties is just about identical to any other business ... or it was! New rules will now limit how you can offset the mortgage interest (an expense) against the rent (the income). So as a business BTL has been singled out and taxed differently to other businesses.

And there is no reason why they couldn't do likewise to manipulate taxing sports betting trading and the more people that do it the more likely it will be brought to their attention. There are two considerations whether to change/introduce tax legislation ...
  • 1) Will it be financially profitable for us to tax this (there is a cost in every tax collection)
    2) Will it be politically positive or negative.
... and the two are not exclusive. A political positive can override a financial negative and to many to tax us naughty don't do an honest days work traders would be politically positive! Furthermore it would be so easy for them to police, force bookmakers to report any account holder that trips a limit, the traders will stand out by a mile.

It may never happen, I'm just putting the case for how and why it could happen.
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 23632
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am
Location: UK

The UK government considered taxing betting profits several years ago but decided to focus on the betting operators instead. I don't know the exact reasons but as far as I can see there are three things that make taxing gamblers difficult.
  1. Gambling is perceived to be highly risky so there will be uncertainty what tax rebate they'll have to pay
  2. Quite difficult to define a professional gambler
  3. Too easy to place hidden cash bets/arbs to hide profits
User avatar
LeTiss
Posts: 5386
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:04 pm

It would still be difficult to administer though.

Many bookies would say they cannot show people's P&L to HMRC for data protection reasons.
They will also be wanting to protect themselves, as it highlight their tactics of closing some people's accounts after only winning £200, whilst others get sucked dry until they are bankrupt and homeless. I don't think bookies would welcome that intrusion.

Some people will bet with many different bookies and exchanges. They will offload bets, and maybe do business with companies outside of UK jurisdiction, especially bwin, or others who have relocated to the Channel Islands where they have different taxation systems

The plus side however, is BF would be forced to review their Premium Charge, as they would never keep successful punters/traders - either that, or the exchanges would end
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 2722
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

Derek27 wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:37 am
The UK government considered taxing betting profits several years ago but decided to focus on the betting operators instead. I don't know the exact reasons but as far as I can see there are three things that make taxing gamblers difficult.
  1. Gambling is perceived to be highly risky so there will be uncertainty what tax rebate they'll have to pay
  2. Quite difficult to define a professional gambler
  3. Too easy to place hidden cash bets/arbs to hide profits
Derek ...

Taxing gamblers yes but I didn't say gamblers, if fact I drew a clear distiction between gamblers and traders, you seem to have missed my point ... not arbers, not cash punters, not gamblers (professional or casual). Traders would ignore all but those will a high turnover of bets and only 2 main market floors to monitor. I could find most of them no problem with access to the computer systems and some code.
foxwood
Posts: 394
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:54 pm

I always chuckle when people profess to be "traders" and deride gambling. What is called "trading" is nothing but gambling at a lower risk than traditional betting.

However, in reply to this thread, this is a copy of a post I made to a different thread discussing the difference between trading/gambling - the tax precedent is legally clear for betting and has been for over 90 years ... those who want to be called "traders" are inviting HMRC to come knocking longer term imho ...
All taxable "trading" involves buying and selling "real property" eg fish, shares, money etc. - ownership of tangible goods or entitlement to services are exchanged between the parties - even if only for a few microseconds.

On sports exchanges there is no such thing as "trading" either technically or legally - it is all peer-to-peer betting (mutual wagers on the outcome of an event) facilitated by the exchange and does not figure as something offered in the T&C's of any exchange as far as I know.

Here, "trading" actually consists of multiple bets on win/lose and even then there is a gamble as to whether you can match any or all of your "bets" or not. It just happens to be a low risk form of gambling - which many manage to make high risk and wipe themselves out !

Tax precedent for ignoring gambling dates back to 1925 - see https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manual ... l/bim22017

However, if you are a volume layer making offers then you could be considered as making a book even if just offering on one runner - potential for tax may arise in that case since you are acting as a bookie.
User avatar
LeTiss
Posts: 5386
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:04 pm

Yes, this is the major reason why financial trading and sports trading are not the same

There are major crossovers between betting and trading on sporting markets. Virtually every single trade starts with a bet of some description - it's only closing out which turns a bet into a trade. Sometimes, traders will just have a punt on something - that doesn't apply in financial trading, you are not betting on an outcome, you are betting on the price moving, but that's not necessarily the case with sports markets

It would be impossible for HMRC to manage
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 2722
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

LeTiss wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:54 am
It would still be difficult to administer though.

Many bookies would say they cannot show people's P&L to HMRC for data protection reasons.
They will also be wanting to protect themselves, as it highlight their tactics of closing some people's accounts after only winning £200, whilst others get sucked dry until they are bankrupt and homeless. I don't think bookies would welcome that intrusion.

Some people will bet with many different bookies and exchanges. They will offload bets, and maybe do business with companies outside of UK jurisdiction, especially bwin, or others who have relocated to the Channel Islands where they have different taxation systems

The plus side however, is BF would be forced to review their Premium Charge, as they would never keep successful punters/traders - either that, or the exchanges would end
LeTiss you have also taken bookies, gamblers etc ... I agree but I was specifically referring to Traders ... no bookies just Betfair and Betdaq. And even if they go overseas you can still regulate them in their UK activity. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulate all investment funds that operate in the UK regardless where they are based. If a Cayman based Investment house wants to market it's products in the UK it has to agree to abide by UK regulations. Add to that the money laudering regulations and it will be very difficult to hide accounts.

As for access to records, they already have such access rules ... HMRC receive interest reports from banks and cross check with tax returns. They drafted the data protection laws, they can change them and as bettors there would be little public sympathy on our side. Have a look at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/per ... style.html

Remember I'm not saying it will happen I'm saying it could happen and this is how they could do it. The best way to keep bet TRADING tax free is to keep our heads down and hope not too many join us. Have a look at http://www.financial-spread-betting.com/Tax-free.html where they discuss in some detail the pros and cons but do say "If you do not have any other regular taxable income other than gambling you will probably be classified as a professional gambler (your trade) and may loose your BIM22017 exemption." There are many other pages on the Internet with roughly the same conclusion.

To me the position is simple, while HMRC have bigger fish to fry they won't bother but it's in the public domain and being discussed and that's generally a bad thing.
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 2722
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

foxwood wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:26 pm
I always chuckle when people profess to be "traders" and deride gambling. What is called "trading" is nothing but gambling at a lower risk than traditional betting.

I don't deride gambling but after more than 30 years in the tax industry I know how HMRC works, and whatever you call it is irelevant, it what HMRC perceive it as that counts.
the tax precedent is legally clear for betting and has been for over 90 years
Yes and so was the tax precedent on relief for life assurance premiums, the tax precedent on pension schemes, the tax precedent on principle residence mortgage interest relief ... taxbooks are full of tax precedents that are no more. Why? Because the law was changed. It matters not a jot what the law said 90 years ago, what matters is what the law says tomorrow. They make the law so they can change the law.
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 2722
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

LeTiss wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:31 pm
It would be impossible for HMRC to manage
Not at all, with modern technology it would be easy. A law could be passed instructing Betfair and Betdaq to supply the data, the tax law could be changed in the next budget and an A-level coder student could write the code required to marry the data and find the activity (I could even do it! :) ).
spreadbetting
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm

Would they be able to handle all the rebate claims from those ex-PPI firms though? They'll all need new jobs come Aug 2019.

At the end of the day trading is still very much a niche market, with few, in relative terms, making a living out of it, financially it wouldn't be worthwhile for HMRC to push for new laws. But let's face it, it isn't HMRC that would request new laws, that's down to politicians playing populist policies. So we'd best hope the superstar traders like the blodger etc keep their heads down and don't tip over the applecart.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion”