UK gamblers cannot use Credit Cards for gambling from April 14, 2020

[Kakmakr]

This whole issue has two sides.

1. It is never a good idea to gamble with money that you do not have. Each situation has it's own merit though and you might get someone that would run into some money in the near future, but they enjoy gambling and wants to have early access to that money and they would pay it back later when they get it. < A bonus from work or some money left through inheritance etc. >

2. Why should a third party have control over what you spend the credit on? It is also very stupid to think that restrictions like this would stop people from gambling with credit. Example : The gambler might stroll into a Mall and buy a bunch of things on credit with his or her credit card and then pop into a Pawn shop to sell it for cash. They then deposit that into a debit card and then use it for gambling. 

People are very intuitive when it comes to restrictions like this, but I guess a lot of them will be put off by the longer process that needs to be followed to bypass these restrictions, so they might be discouraged to do it. 

[qwertyup23]

Under the police power of the State, they have the power to regulate and impose such restrictions for the welfare of its people. If the State recognizes the detrimental effects of gambling to its citizens, they can further create laws tending to this problem. Although the restriction was made directly into credit cards, gamblers can still circumvent the law by withdrawing directly the cash from the credit card and gamble with fiat.

It will still benefit those gamblers who are abusing their credit cards for gambling but they will surely still find another mode of the transaction just to pursue playing. As long as crypto gambling is legal in their country, no one could stop players to gamble because there are still alternative ways except for credit cards.

Like what most people have mentioned, even if the restriction failed to consider other aspects in which gamblers can still gamble using their credit cards, it is still a good start in limiting their addiction. They would still have to go to an ATM and withdraw their cash instead of directly using to their convenience the credit card for gambling.

[Danslip]

This whole issue has two sides.

1. It is never a good idea to gamble with money that you do not have. Each situation has it's own merit though and you might get someone that would run into some money in the near future, but they enjoy gambling and wants to have early access to that money and they would pay it back later when they get it. < A bonus from work or some money left through inheritance etc. >

2. Why should a third party have control over what you spend the credit on? It is also very stupid to think that restrictions like this would stop people from gambling with credit. Example : The gambler might stroll into a Mall and buy a bunch of things on credit with his or her credit card and then pop into a Pawn shop to sell it for cash. They then deposit that into a debit card and then use it for gambling.  

People are very intuitive when it comes to restrictions like this, but I guess a lot of them will be put off by the longer process that needs to be followed to bypass these restrictions, so they might be discouraged to do it.  

It is more general than I thought but the traditional banking have hidden hands to control the economy. Gambling money turnover is not an exception, unfortunately. After the latest GDPR rules this was expected to happen. Let's see what's next move.  The restrictions will be the barriers for representing hard access in gaming funds. Even if the gambler has funds in credit card account balance, the long process will be the last chance to continue losing cycle in gambling site. Punters can be harmful to themselves and family members with spending the limits of the CC without thinking future consequences. Kinda debatable theme, everyone has different opinion.

[maydna]

It's for the citizen's protection, and also for the banks. It might hurt the demand for these sites, but it's better rather than having a population relying on gambling for living, which not only makes them poor, but also makes the economy slower by having a part of their population not being much productive and fund-wise.

That is right. If people realize that the credit card is not just for playing gambling, they will not use a credit card to gambling. The danger of credit card is when someone cannot pay the money that has been used for anything they bought with the credit card. So if they spend too much money in a month, they need to pay back the money plus they need to pay the fee, and I am sure that the fee will be too expensive too. Besides that, using a credit card is too risky, especially if we use a credit card on the internet because we heard about stealing data of the credit card owner on the internet. So be careful when you want to use a credit card for buying anything you want.

[Ucy]

This whole issue has two sides.

1. It is never a good idea to gamble with money that you do not have. Each situation has it's own merit though and you might get someone that would run into some money in the near future, but they enjoy gambling and wants to have early access to that money and they would pay it back later when they get it. < A bonus from work or some money left through inheritance etc. >

 2. Why should a third party have control over what you spend the credit on? It is also very stupid to think that restrictions like this would stop people from gambling with credit. Example : The gambler might stroll into a Mall and buy a bunch of things on credit with his or her credit card and then pop into a Pawn shop to sell it for cash. They then deposit that into a debit card and then use it for gambling.  

People are very intuitive when it comes to restrictions like this, but I guess a lot of them will be put off by the longer process that needs to be followed to bypass these restrictions, so they might be discouraged to do it.  

People who do this are most likely addicted especially if they have been doing so for a while. I believe more in the prevention of what causes addiction. Depression, stress, hopelessness etc. Many people around the world are unfortunately addicted to one thing or another, but hardly accept they are addicted.

[STT]

Restricting convenience is always something I think does help reduce addiction and the re-occurrence of bad habits.   Like anyone who wants to eat less should most definitely not then place that food nearby, the easiest tip is to avoid convenience foods at all costs because its gone in a second.   Having to go through the whole process of cooking is the best idea, I dont believe an absolute diet as it can just turn people into binging not controlling emotions.   Same thing applies to gambling, gamble spare cash and credit cards are way too convenient.
   Most of the worlds population should never take out or own a credit card, you have to be the type of person who takes a calculator to the supermarket to say you are better off with one really.

[fortunecrypto]

The government it seems have made a study and based on the study so many of their people are very much into gambling and this is a precautionary measures to insure that these gamblers will not go into debt burden, for me it's a good idea and many country might adapt and this is to stopped people go deep in debt because of gambling.

[BALIK]

It's for the citizen's protection, and also for the banks. It might hurt the demand for these sites, but it's better rather than having a population relying on gambling for living, which not only makes them poor, but also makes the economy slower by having a part of their population not being much productive and fund-wise.

In the end, gambling is neither net positive, nor negative for society.

When a player loses their money to a casino, that casinos pays tax on their profits, which are then funneled back into the economy.

Even if the player had kept his money and purchased something with it, the retailer would have paid tax on their profits and the same thing would have happened. The only difference would be if the player kept their money, then never used it for the rest of their life to do anything.

[inthelongrun]

It's for the citizen's protection, and also for the banks. It might hurt the demand for these sites, but it's better rather than having a population relying on gambling for living, which not only makes them poor, but also makes the economy slower by having a part of their population not being much productive and fund-wise.

In the end, gambling is neither net positive, nor negative for society.

When a player loses their money to a casino, that casinos pays tax on their profits, which are then funneled back into the economy.

Even if the player had kept his money and purchased something with it, the retailer would have paid tax on their profits and the same thing would have happened. The only difference would be if the player kept their money, then never used it for the rest of their life to do anything.

I haven't heard a nation's population relying on gambling as their way of earning for a living. That won't happen because casinos have their house-edge. No matter how small it is, it matters when the volume increases.

Even if someone is just storing its winning money in the bank doing nothing, it can still move the economy. Because banks are the ones utilizing their depositors funds thru various investments.   

[Sadlife]

There are a lot of workarounds for this regulations, the first one is UK citizens are only prohibited to use credit cards, but it doesn't mention anything about cryptocurrency.
Secondly online gambling sites that are based on P2P crypto transactions doesn't require KYC(Know your customer) verification and most of them you can easily sign up.

This law will only make it worse for their people and their economy.

[TheUltraElite]

The government it seems have made a study and based on the study so many of their people are very much into gambling and this is a precautionary measures to insure that these gamblers will not go into debt burden, for me it's a good idea and many country might adapt and this is to stopped people go deep in debt because of gambling.

Many of them are already in debt, but the government wants that but does not want in their books. So they stop people from using credit card to deposit but does not say anything about non-traditional methods of transaction. No how far they are correct about the gambling scene is beyond our discussion because we all know how truthful governments are.

The gamblers who want to play will play. But these news articles allow people to think that the authorities are doing something good - in effect they are pleasing the crowd.

[Saisher]

It's for the citizen's protection, and also for the banks. It might hurt the demand for these sites, but it's better rather than having a population relying on gambling for living, which not only makes them poor, but also makes the economy slower by having a part of their population not being much productive and fund-wise.

Makes sense, imagine banks getting a lot of clients who goes bankrupt because of to much gambling and the clients do not have collateral to give on their loan, this is something the government and the banks don't want to happen, and by restricting gamblers to use their credit card they save the gamblers to some extend and the banks as well.

[ChrisPop]

Well this is a wisest move I have seen in a while. Not only it will stop people gambling away their life by getting into gambling debt(at least partially), but some people might also look into alternatives like buying cryptocurrencies and playing with them - or maybe taking a loan on them for gambling - which I HIGHLY DON'T recommend.

This decision will take its toll on the gambling industry though.. Curious to see some stats after the law is enforced.

[panganib999]

There’s a new regulation for gamblers who reside in UK i.e. from April 14th, 2020 you’ll can’t use your credit cards for online gambling. Now on paper this rule does seem harsh, but when I read their reasoning behind this decision I felt they have taken the right approach and it’ll help UK’s citizens. The key reason why I’m saying that this decision is correct because this move shall force people to gamble only with the money they have, but I’m sure many will not like this decision hence you’ll can post below and tell the community why you didn’t like this decision.

Source:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51103006

Well, I think it is the right thing the government have done to lessen the problem gamblers from playing gambling using their credit cards because at time like this wherein the pandemic is still on and many people have no work and no income to be generated, it will be a big problem to pay borrowed money that you have used through credit card to play gambling. It will be a hard time to pay it and for sure the borrowed money have interest and once not paid can lead to debt. It is the right thing to do at times like this to prohibit people who does not have money to play gambling and avoid problem related on it to arise. There is nothing wrong with that implementation because it is just a wise thinking for the sake of the people. Better to play only with the money you do have and avoid borrowing money just for the sake of playing because there is a greater chance of loss rather than wins.