L'EGBA commente le projet de Loi Français Noter le sujet : La compatibilité avec le droit européen n'est pas acquise...

[WebMaster]

Communiqué de l'EGBA, 25 mars 2009

Brussels, 25 March 2009

Online gaming and betting: Compatibility of the French draft law with EC law cannot be taken for granted

The French government notified its draft law on the 5 March to Commissioner Verheugen’s services in the context of a preliminary conformity test with EU Law[1]. The draft law, also revealed to the media on the 5th March, was presented today to the Council of Ministers.

Member States and the European Commission have now until the 8 June to examine whether the law is in conformity with the rules of the EC Treaty and to require, if necessary, amendments to be made so as to avoid future litigation.

The European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA) is concerned that a series of key provisions of the draft law envisaged by the French government would conflict with the EC Treaty and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) case law:

• 1. How can the reform and the opening of online sports betting only be consistent when sports betting in the offline environment will remain under the monopoly of FDJ and PMU?
  
• 
  
• 2. Is “French tradition” an acceptable justification to limit the opening of horse betting only to pool betting – especially when fixed odds betting is offered for all other types of sports and is very much appreciated by French and European consumers?
  
• 
  
• 3. Is a ceiling on the pay-back ratio (percentage of stakes paid back to players) to the same level of those currently applied by historical operators compatible with EU law? Given that such ceiling has no proved or known impact on consumer protection, what other objectives than protection of the French market and the position of historical operators can it possibly serve?
  
• 
  
• 4. Will the French online gaming authority, in compliance with the jurisprudence of the ECJ, take into account the warranties and controls already offered by other EU licensing jurisdictions such as for instance UK, Malta or Gibraltar, in order to avoid the application of dual licensing and purely administrative restrictions in the single market?
  
• 
  
• 5. Is the creation of a « sports betting right » granted to the French sport federations in the context of commercial agreements with sports betting operators in France a credible means to prevent match fixing? The majority of stakeholders have already developed partnerships and successful early warning systems to anticipate and prevent those risks.

These five points are for now the most crucial points of the reform from an EU perspective. Other important elements will, indeed, still be clarified in the coming months through various decrees which will also require notification to the European Commission before they can be adopted at national level.

EGBA is particularly concerned about the threat of the creation of a local internet market for online betting and gaming services given the French authorities’ clear intention to adopt payment and ISP blockings and the continued criminal enforcement against EU established online gaming and betting operators This would be completely incompatible with the European dimension and the cross-border nature of this leading internet sector.

According to Sigrid Ligné, secretary general of the EGBA: “The notification procedure is a great tool to anticipate potential conflicts. We are convinced that the recommendations that will be addressed to France by June will facilitate the French Parliament’s discussions and prevent unnecessary litigation once the law comes into force”

--------------------------------

Compléments

[1] In compliance with Directive 98/34/EC http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/tris/pisa/a...N&sNLang=EN

Qu'est-ce que l'EGBA ?
L'EGBA est une association à but non-lucratif créée par les sept principaux opérateurs de jeux en ligne d’Europe : PartyGaming, bwin Group, Unibet, bet-at-home.com, Expekt, Interwetten et Digibet
http://www.eu-ba.org/fr
http://www.eu-ba.org/fr/about/us

[Vesperal]

Pourquoi une association telle que l'EGBA n'a pas porté plainte contre la France auparavant pour atteinte à la libre concurrence ?

[AirCeos]

Chiant de lire des sujets aussi important en Anglais alors qu'on est sur un forum Francophone..

[albert74360]

Si une âme charitable a un lien vers ce communiqué traduit en français, je lui en serais reconnaissant.

[WebMaster]

AirCeos, le 25/03/2009 à 17:14, a dit :

Chiant de lire des sujets aussi important en Anglais alors qu'on est sur un forum Francophone..

Ce n'est pas fini (désolé), j'ai un communiqué du 9 mars dernier, dans lequel les opérateurs semblent plutôt enthousiastes...

Citer

Despite Tax Fears, Operators Eye French Possibilities
9 Mar, 2009 / GamblingCompliance Ltd. / Scott Longley

For European gaming operators weighing up the possibilities of a newly liberalised French gaming market, the news late last week of the first concrete proposals from the French government brought a range of reactions from cautious approval to outright disappointment.
Along with some quiet satisfaction that the budget minister Eric Woerth finally confirmed there would be a “controlled opening” to the French gambling market, there was an equal amount of concern on the part of many operators regarding the tax proposals which raised immediate questions regarding the economic viability of the plan for many.

But while the announcement fell short of provoking unconfined joy within the European online gaming sector, there were at least some positive comments noting the fact that another major European market had finally woken up to the reality of – relatively – free markets.

“We’re pleased,” said Clive Hawkswood, chief executive at the Remote Gaming Association (RGA). “Like all jurisdictions, it’s not unreasonable or surprising that regulators will start cautiously.”

“We welcome the news, though we would flag a few issues. First, though the tax is looking better than we feared, it is still high. This is an issue for the companies to look to their own business models, and people are still crunching the numbers. But we note that it hasn’t been set at a level where they could have been accused of slamming the door in our faces. Then there is the issue of the sports and what they get, so we shouldn’t focus on the tax issue in isolation.”

The proposed tax rates aside – up to 8.5 percent on sports-betting, 2 percent on poker and a swinging 15.5 percent on horseracing – there were some expressions of optimism that the French market might be a lucrative addition to the European sector, and early indications that the list of licence applications might be a lengthy one.

“It’s a massive opportunity for us,” said a spokesperson for Everest Gaming. “It’s our biggest market, so potentially it’s very exciting. We want to be legal, and we’re in touch with the French authorities.”

Konrad Sveceny, head of investor relations at Bwin, said the company was “happy” with the news and would definitely be applying for a licence.

A similarly definitive statement came from Jonathan Strock, chief operating officer at Barrière Interactive Gaming, who added “politically we can’t not apply”. “We’ve been talking about this for quite a long time. At least two years. At last, it seems that something is happening.”

Add in PartyGaming , Sportingbet , Ladbrokes and William Hill – who all issued statements which suggested a watching brief would be the order of the day until the final proposals were passed by the Council of Ministers, but were all broadly welcoming of the news – and it seems likely that the new French licensing body, l’Autorité Administrative Indépendante de Régulation des Jeux en Ligne (ARJEL) will be kept busy processing applications.

There has already been much in the way of manoeuvring on the part of operators readying themselves for a licensed launch in France. In November, Bwin’s announced a partnership with French media group Amaury, publisher of L’Équipe; meanwhile, Eurosport, owned by France’s largest broadcasting network TF1, was last month granted EU clearance to form an online gaming operation to be called SPS Betting along with France-based investment group Serendipity; and although Strock from Barrière Interactive said the company was “very disappointed” not to be able under the proposals to offer its casino operations in France, it was preparing the way later this year for the launch of both poker and sport-betting offerings, both of which will be allowed.

If there is a model for how successful these various offerings might be, and how the market in France might develop over time, then observers need look no further than Italy to see how a newly liberalised market can succeed and grow.

As evidenced most recently by Lottomatica ’s latest results where the company’s Italian consumer-facing sports-betting and poker operation saw revenues triple last year to ¤144.7m, revenues in the Italian gaming market have been on a steep upward trajectory since liberalisation in the summer of 2006. Figures from the Italian government in January showed that the Italian gaming sector registered a total turnover of ¤47.5bn during 2008, almost double the 2004 figure of ¤25bn and three times the ¤15.5bn spent in 2003, the year when scratchcards and slot machines were first introduced in Italy.

For Hawkswood from the RGA, Italy is a “good example” of what operators, regulators and governments can expect if a system develops which each of the stakeholders find to be workable. “It provides a good example. Gradually Italy loosened the reins on tax, and things are moving in the right direction.”

Says Sveceny from Bwin: “Italy is a good example, where the government is continuously reviewing its regulations. The French have taken some experiences from there. Italy showed that the more competitive you made the market, the more the state benefits from tax revenues.”

The Italian example also shows how ex-monopoly operators can thrive in newly competitive markets. SNAI, SISAL, Cogetech and Lottomatica have not just kept their places in the pecking order – they have even seen off some of the new entrants in the market including William Hill which unceremoniously exited Italy last July.

Strock agrees that Francais des Jeux (FDJ) and the PMU do not have too much to fear from the Woerth proposals. “The FDJ probably came out of it a bit better than the PMU, because they will keep their lotteries.” Sveceny agreed. “There isn’t much competition there anyway. We’ll leave the lotteries to the monopolists.”

But it is twill be the treatment meted out to operators which do not opt for a licence in France that will make or break the proposals, according to Strock. “It’s all about the tax levels and the illegal operators,” he says. “It’s whether they will be kept out of the market. They can attempt UIGEA-type actions, and IP blocking. But you have to go beyond that, and I’m not sure what you can do.”

For the RGA’s Hawkswood, the French have developed a blind spot with regard to one particular “fiscal paradise” which has coloured Woerth’s criticism of offshore jurisdictions last Thursday. “France has a thing about Malta. It’s the Zeturf case. In their minds, Malta is Zeturf. But if they have a transparent system, then it has to be consistent, so they can’t just pick on Malta.”

As Charlie McCreevy the European internal markets tzar prepares to vacate his office later this year, he can probably take satisfaction that in all likelihood it was pressure from the European Union (EU) , instigated in part by his directorate, which has pushed first Italy and now France towards the liberalisation of their respective gaming markets.

But how much further the EU and the Commission will play a part is more open to debate. The possibility of the EU ever issuing EU-wide regulations on the subject of online gaming have perceptibly moved further into the distance in the past week. Sveceny pointed out that Bwin will continue lobbying at an EU level. But as to the chances of persuading the EU to issue its own EU-wide regulations, he is more pessimistic, conceding, “I don’t think it’s realistic.”

[maxtamines]

Je pense que la dépêche du 9mars est obsolète.
Depuis, ils ont étudié les chiffres prévus et se sont rendus compte que ca allait être une cata si ils acceptaient une licence sur de telles bases.

[WebMaster]

Je trouve le revirement intéressant.

Je pense qu'ils avaient très bien compris à la seconde de l'annonce du projet de loi, c'est juste une façon de communiquer et d'engager le bras de fer.

[loorent]

WebMaster, le 25/03/2009 à 18:21, a dit :

Je trouve le revirement intéressant.

Je pense qu'ils avaient très bien compris à la seconde de l'annonce du projet de loi, c'est juste une façon de communiquer et d'engager le bras de fer.

par contre, j'ai l'impression que la seule "vraie" contestation juridique du projet de loi français, c'est la non prise en compte de licenses deja delivrées ds d'autres payes EU , non ?

[inconnu]

loorent, le 25/03/2009 à 19:27, a dit :

par contre, j'ai l'impression que la seule "vraie" contestation juridique du projet de loi français, c'est la non prise en compte de licenses deja delivrées ds d'autres payes EU , non ?

Le 10 mars (faisant suite aux travaux initiés lors de la présidence française), l'union européenne à voté un texte permettant à chaque pays de se préoccuper, comme bon lui semble, de la législation concernant les jeux en ligne sur son territoire. Conséquence : un opérateur disposant d'une licence à Malte l'a dans le c*l la balayette pour proposer ses services aux mêmes conditions en France. Il doit se plier à la législation française.

C'est Mr Partouche qui est content maintenant ... heiiin ?

Ce message a été modifié par inconnu : 26 mars 2009 - 08:44

[maxtamines]

inconnu, le 25/03/2009 à 19:40, a dit :

Le 10 mars (faisant suite aux travaux initiés lors de la présidence française), l'union européenne à voté un texte permettant à chaque pays de se préoccuper, comme bon lui semble, de la législation concernant les jeux en ligne sur son territoire. Conséquence : un opérateur disposant d'une licence à Malte l'a dans le c*l la balayette pour proposer ses services aux mêmes conditions en France. Il doit se plier à la législation française.

C'est Mr Partouche qu'il est content maintenant ... heiiin ?

Source please.

[inconnu]

maxtamines, le 25/03/2009 à 21:45, a dit :

Source please.

Z'êtes chiant avec vos demandes de sources ... google est ton ami.

lien

Plus particulièrement l'article 1. au milieu du texte.

Ce message a été modifié par inconnu : 25 mars 2009 - 19:59

[BernardTapis]

Ah j'avais entendu parler de ça ailleurs mais je me demandais si c'était pas un fake vu que ça avait pas du tout été évoqué ici

[maxtamines]

inconnu, le 25/03/2009 à 19:56, a dit :

Z'êtes chiant avec vos demandes de sources ... google est ton ami.

lien

Plus particulièrement l'article 1. au milieu du texte.

Merci bcp, ce texte est une catastrophe pour le joueur francais.
Je suis étonné que les bookmakers n'aient pas réagi par rapport à ca.
En gros la France s'est assuré que son texte de loi puisse passer sans problème au niveau de l'Europe.

[AirCeos]

Mon optimisme des derniers jours suite au reportage de France 2 vient de s'écrouler en une seconde. Ca va bien être la m**de annoncée finalement.

[WebMaster]

dixit Eric Woerth début mars : "Il n'y a pas de problème avec l'Europe, et d'autres pays vont prendre exemple sur la position/politique française".

Il nous reste à mesurer l'ampleur des moyens techniques qui seront effectivement déployés pour bloquer les sites qui choisiront de ne pas avoir de licence (comme visiblement Unibet)

[maxtamines]

WebMaster, le 25/03/2009 à 21:04, a dit :

dixit Eric Woerth début mars : "Il n'y a pas de problème avec l'Europe, et d'autres pays vont prendre exemple sur la position/politique française".

Il nous reste à mesurer l'ampleur des moyens techniques qui seront effectivement déployés pour bloquer les sites qui choisiront de ne pas avoir de licence (comme visiblement Unibet)

Je pense personnellement qu'aucun site ne prendra la licence, en tout cas dans les sites de bookmakers, pour ce qui est du poker, c'est moins évident.

[stratpoker]

quel opérateur sérieux peut prendre une licence avec 2% non capés sur chaque pot?

[tessio30]

maxtamines, le 25/03/2009 à 21:07, a dit :

Je pense personnellement qu'aucun site ne prendra la licence, en tout cas dans les sites de bookmakers, pour ce qui est du poker, c'est moins évident.

C'est clair ! ils s'en branlent , il suffisait de voir la réaction du boss d'unibet lol
Et concrètement si la France arrive à "bloquer " , comment ça va se passer ? il faudra que tous les clients français cashout de ces rooms avant la date butoire ?

[Bwin - lioun06]

stratpoker, le 25/03/2009 à 23:11, a dit :

quel opérateur sérieux peut prendre une licence avec 2% non capés sur chaque pot?

En Italie, les conditions sont bien pires pour le poker (3% sur les tournois, CG interdits) et ca n'a pas empeché Bwin ou Pokerstars de prendre une licence ...

[Bwin - lioun06]

Vesperal, le 25/03/2009 à 18:05, a dit :

Pourquoi une association telle que l'EGBA n'a pas porté plainte contre la France auparavant pour atteinte à la libre concurrence ?

Ca avait été fait

[ToOm]

A suivre de près...

[inconnu]

maxtamines, le 25/03/2009 à 21:21, a dit :

Merci bcp, ce texte est une catastrophe pour le joueur francais.
Je suis étonné que les bookmakers n'aient pas réagi par rapport à ca.
En gros la France s'est assuré que son texte de loi puisse passer sans problème au niveau de l'Europe.

Oui. La France à profité de "sa" présidence pour entamer les travaux de rédaction de ce texte et le faire passer.
Quelques jours plus tard, Woerth a pu faire son show.

[swril]

je suis de belgique mais je sens très concerné par cette nouvelle arnaque (heu taxation pardon ) car il me parait évident que le gouvernement belge va très vite copier tout cela

ce qui me fait le plus peur quand il disent "2% des mises" c'est qu'ils parlent seulement des buy in des tournois et que le cash game soit purement et simplement interdit comme c'est le cas sur pokerstars.it

vu que je joue 99% du temps en CG je suis vraiment très inquiet qu'en pensez vous ?

Ce message a été modifié par swril : 26 mars 2009 - 18:31

[inconnu]

swril, le 26/03/2009 à 19:30, a dit :

vu que je joue 99% du temps en CG je suis vraiment très inquiet qu'en pensez vous ?

il y a de quoi.