Loophole in stopping Money Laundering through Wagering

[noormcs5]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

[1715351159]

1715351159

[1715351159]

1715351159

[1715351159]

1715351159

[1715351159]

1715351159

[Nwada001]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

There is no sure winning in gambling; even the lowest odds can still lose a game. So if the intention of the user is to launder money through the Casino, their chances of losing the entire money before even getting it out are high.
 
Lower Odds give one some confidence that their chances of winning are huge, but it does not always happen that way. So trying to use that as a loophole in an online casino might lead you to fall victim to losing all your wagers.

[Oshosondy]

The point is just that it is difficult for those sites to know money laundered. This is because money that were laundered are included in legit businesses which makes it difficult to trace.

As for your question. A good gambling site would have made investigation immediately they see someone that deposit very huge amount of money in a way the launderer will not be able to withdraw even his winning, no matter how small the winning is.  Although I think it would be difficult for a gambling site to identify laundered money unless there is an ongoing case about the money and traced to a gambling site account.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

Play 1.01 odd 100 times and see that the winning chance is far lesser than 99%. Those odds are only deceiving people to use huge amount of money to bet and to bet frequently.

[mocacinno]

I remember people talking about using gambling platforms instead of mixers for many, many years... The fact does remain that a gambling platform is not built to mix (or launder) money. They do keep extensive logs (part of their business actually depends on those logs so they can catch fraudsters), sometimes they even require KYC... If you're going to launder criminal funds using casino's, you're just going to get caught sooner or later (and since we're talking about criminal funds, i kinda hope the launderers get caught)

Personally, i don't see anything wrong if you just want to hide your money to protect yourself from a $5 crowbar attack or beggars... You can use about any service that allows you to deposit and withdraw funds... An exchange, a casino, a custodial wallet,... I don't know if the wager requirements of casinos are actually there to stop money laundering, and i wonder if their main goal is to make sure their business stays afloat. Only by requiring your balance to be wagered, they stop people from not gambling... The fact they're discouraging money launderers is just a happy coincidence. Personally, if i'd just want to hide my funds from criminals and beggars, i'd rather use a big exchange for this purpose: the risk is much lower than using a gambling website.

Full disclosure: i'm not a "real" gambler. I did visit gambling sites in the past a couple of times, but i'm far from an experienced gambler, and i haven't logged on to any of my accounts for years... Maybe my image of the gambling industry is wrong...

[Synchronice]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

To be honest, wagering equipment is just an excuse to increase the chance of the person losing money on casino and has nothing to do with money laundering. Isn't it curious that they only think about money laundering when you try to withdraw your coins but when you deposit and lose it, they act like money laundering hasn't happened. They don't ask for KYC documents when you deposit coins, only when you withdraw, everything is 100% clear here.

Btw, don't really think that if you play dice at 1.01x odd to wager your money you'll be safe, play with some money in a row and you'll see how common it is to nuke yourself on 1.01x odd.

[Apocollapse]

Although the casino ask for 2 or 3 times wager requirements in order to withdraw your money, you must know they also ask the minimum odds you need to gamble, not a safe odds like 1.01x. If we talking about money laundering, it must be related with huge amount of money, if the amount is less than $1000, it just a peanut for the casino and they don't mind to let you to withdraw.

If you deposit a huge amount of money to the casino, they will ask KYC and you will lose your privacy. Remember any casino is centralized and they can't be accessed via Tor, so mixing through casino isn't 100% anonymous.

[yahoo62278]

You want to test the system out and deposit $1,000,000 and play dice at x1.01? What are you going to do when you lose 1 of your bets and say $250,000 goes in the toilet?

I'm not sure why they have a wager requirement really except to make a user wager on the site. They say for anti money laundering but essentially making a wager 1x is pretty easy no matter the amount. Where you really need to be concerned is when they ask you for proof of funds. If you cannot prove where the funds came from in a way that satisfies their requirement, you could lose it all.

[Cantsay]

It's an hypothesis that could work but if anything should go wrong that means your money is gone...

I have seen in crash games where my highest odds that they system was supposed to auto cash out for me was 1.02x and yet the game banged at 1.01x so shit could happen at anytime imagine you wager all your money and the game banged before it even had the chance to even begin in the first place...

Just use your gambling account to gamble and use a reputable mixer to mix your coin rather than make some risk that are not worth it. Besides I don't even see a reason why anyone would want to risk their money this way when we have so many mixers that charge little to no charge (whirlwind.money can be used for free).

[piebeyb]

I think even if you play once, I still think it's very dangerous, even if you bet with 1.01x odds because you could be unlucky at that time and the casino system works to win the game with you, the casino system will definitely read when you make a deposit with big money then the casino suspects your account even though you have played several times to meet the requirements for withdrawing money but don't ever think that casinos are also stupid, they are of course smart to see the potential for money laundering so they will ask anyone to complete KYC.

But that's only users who make deposits with big money and only play a few times then withdraw, of course the casino will suspect you, especially if their system detects it, you will lose all your money if you can't prove where your money came from, because of course, don't ever play. to commit money laundering in casinos let alone other gambling platforms.  

[Wapfika]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

This is not a loophole because there’s a potentila risk of losing all the money with only one bet. This is very risky and I’d rather go slow on high winning percentage dice with small bets instead of doing all in bet on small odds sports bet. I think there’s a lot of story like this that users lose millions of dollars by wagering on small bets for a peanuts profit that turn out badly.

Money launderers will not use this kind of method that can lose everything in single bet. Besides, Casino will notice this same pattern if they keep doing this while they have a very huge bankroll. It’s clearly the account is laundering if all bet made is just safe bet until they withdraw the funds.

[klidex]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Actually betting on all types of bets with a 99% win rate in casino games or betting on sports bets with odds @ 1.01 does not guarantee a win and also each bet has a maximum bet amount limit.
Some examples of someone who bets in a dice game with a 98% chance of winning and bets all of the balance he has but he loses and loses all of his balance.
Another example of someone betting on sports at odds @1.01 bets $1 million but also ends up losing because the opposing team counterattacks.
From all of these incidents, we can ensure that there is no loophole for money launderers to place their money in gambling because gambling or casinos don't want to get too close to money laundering.

[davis196]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

The wagering requirement has little to do with money laundering and something to do with the casino bonus programs.
The KYC procedures were imposed, in order to fight money laundering. Perhaps the wagering requirement helps for preventing many money launderers to stay away from online casinos, but it's main purpose is to prevent abuse of the bonus programs.
I don't think that the best way to launder money via the gambling industry is to deposit them at an online casino/sportsbook and bet on low odds like 1.01. The best way is to create your own casino/sportsbook and use the dirty money as a bankroll.

[FatFork]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

No, there is no loophole. Even if you have a 99% probability of winning, there is still a 1% chance of losing. From the perspective of the casino, statistically speaking, one out of every 100 individuals will lose, allowing the casino to cover the expenses of paying the other 99 people.

But, most importantly, this is not how money laundering through casinos works. If you try this method, it's a piece of cake for the authorities to track the money and figure out where it came from. The whole point of money laundering is to hide the money's origin and make dirty money look clean and legit.

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

They can ask you to wager x2, x3 or x4 of your deposit value.

What is a 2x turnover amount?
In order to withdraw amount from your account, you have to turn over your deposit amount two times. Basically, bet twice the amount of your first deposit.

You will notice that your withdrawal remains to process if you deposit a certain amount and then withdraw the funds without making a bet or betting just a small portion of it. "Coin Mixing" is described as simply transferring funds around in this manner, and it is strictly prohibited in the scope of an online casino. Since this sort of conduct may be viewed as something more sinister and malicious, we are obligated not to enable it. To prevent this, we present two solutions that are utilized in certain circumstances. Utilizations of the following options will be made according to Our judgment.

We can refund the amount to your balance, after which you will use the platform for what it was built for, as a casino, and affirm that you will not repeat the following action.

As per our second option, you will be asked to submit your KYC documents.

I remember people talking about using gambling platforms instead of mixers for many, many years... The fact does remain that a gambling platform is not built to mix (or launder) money. They do keep extensive logs (part of their business actually depends on those logs so they can catch fraudsters), sometimes they even require KYC... If you're going to launder criminal funds using casino's, you're just going to get caught sooner or later (and since we're talking about criminal funds, i kinda hope the launderers get caught)

If they are criminals, they will pick mixers to hide their coin after mixing. Because as criminals, they would have big enough money to use professional mixer services and pay service fees. They will not use gambling sites to mix their coins as saving a little service fee is not a matter with criminals.

Risk to use gambling sites to mix their coins will be bigger than service fee from a professional mixer service.

[mak013]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Yes, it is possible. But we saw here a thread, when someone bet more than $1.000.000 with the odd less than 1.01 and lost it. There are no guarantee of winning in gambling, so some moment you can lose even with such odds.
And the casino can KYC such gamblers. Most time it becomes a problem for launderers.

[Eureka_07]

<snip>

That's not a loophole. It may sound easy as you described it, but engaging in such a strategy is a huge gamble, especially when dealing with large sums of money. As other members have mentioned, there is still a possibility of losing. Regardless of the potential winning percentage, placing such a significant bet for a minimal return carries significant risk. Just imagine losing all your money from the first draw!

My current thoughts suggest that the actual loophole might involve the money being laundered by the casino owners. What are your thoughts on this?

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

Yes, it is possible. But we saw here a thread, when someone bet more than $1.000.000 with the odd less than 1.01 and lost it. There are no guarantee of winning in gambling, so some moment you can lose even with such odds.

No guarantee to win with 100% chance in gambling even you bet with low odds like 1.01.

Risk of losing all money by 1 bet with low odds and with all capital to meet 1 wager turn requirement for withdrawal is terrible. Why criminals must accept that risk if they have other choices like using mixers and pay mixing fees?

List of crypto casinos with high wagering requirements

These terms applied to normal deposits (no-bonus deposits)

|	Casino Name	|	Required Wagering	|	Details	|
|	funclubcasino	|	x10-x30	|	10X wagering on slots and 30X wagering on table games if the player is playing on Deposit	|
|	Livecasino.io	|	>x5	|	wagering requirement of at least 5 times the deposit amount when player is suspected	|
|	Bitcasino.io	|	>x5	|	wagering requirement of at least 5 times the deposit amount when player is suspected	|
|	Sportsbet.io	|	>x5	|	wagering requirement of at least 5 times the deposit amount when player is suspected	|
|	thorcasino.com	|	>x5	|	wagering requirement of at least 5 (five) times the deposit amount	|
|	Trustdice.win	|	x5	|	In order to make a withdrawal you must wager 5x for the first deposit only, more details here in this reply	|
|	FortuneJack.com	|	x2-x5	|	x2 wagering requirements for normal users and up to x5 for suspected users	|
|	wildtornado.casino	|	x3	|	x3 wagering and sum of bets made on table games shouldn't be less than 10 times of deposit	|
|	megaslot.com	|	x3	|	Any deposit has to be wagered 3 times before the withdrawal	|
|	BetChain.com	|	x3	|	Any deposit has to be wagered 3 times before the withdrawal	|
|	Coinslotty.com	|	x3	|	Any deposit has to be wagered 3 times before the withdrawal. Additional fees will be charged if users try to withdraw without completing the requirement	|
|	Roobet.com	|	x3	|	Any deposit has to be wagered 3 times before the withdrawal	|
|	BetFury.com	|	×1-x3	|	The deposit has 1× wagering requirement on casino games and 3× wagering requirement on sports betting	|
|	Vave.com	|	×1-x3	|	The deposit amount must be wagered at least x3 for Casino/Live Casino bets and/or x1 for Sports bets prior to requesting a withdrawal.	|

[YOSHIE]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I have never seen and heard of a gambling site that offers a 99% chance of winning, that seems impossible and will never happen, but I don't know, it seems like a joke.

However, what you say really happens with a 99% chance of winning, for me if the user is honest it really wins fairly, without any other elements that the casino should suspect, I don't think that's one reason it's considered money laundering, the casino should admit it's real luck for those users, even if they have to go through KYC requirements in withdrawals. For example, a user only needs to deposit once and play once in the casino, that is not a reason for money laundering.

However, can it happen.....! 99% chance, that's a bit amusing to hear, usually things like that rarely happen, 99% chance of losing.

[swogerino]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

In theory it may look so however there are a couple of threads here where people have lost even with 1.01 odds,beside that is not that easy to find any 1.01 odds in pre match markets,only in live markets which most of these guys chase but the casino cannot do anything about it,in every system there are loopholes and exploits otherwise we would not see a single hack if there were no loopholes in the IT industry.It can be done however the money laundering guys I doubt are that patient to be placing 1.01 bets.

Beside that gambling is dangerous as these guys may be tempted to play slot machines and thus losing all that big of a balance,not the smartest way to try and launder money through gambling sites although it can be done.

[ethereumhunter]

Casinos don't ask us to gamble and risk our entire balance, but we can't resist the temptation to gamble and instead spend all our balances. This usually happens when we participate in a certain promo with wagering requirements before we can withdraw all the money. And if we can win a lot, the casino will ask us to do KYC before we can withdraw the money.

Money launderers should be able to pass these wagering requirements easily as they have experience doing it. Those who don't know the plot will be left wondering and curious about what they will do. If you want to take a promo provided by the casino, you should pay attention to the wagering requirements before participating because the wagering requirements are usually higher than usual.

[Doan9269]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

This is very common to most of the gambling platforms as long as they are kyc casinos, you should expect such from them from time to time because the kyc verification requirements is in phases and stages and they release them also in batches as well, this has to be taken care of and we must always have the required informations needed at hand to provide them with before they requested for them.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

The casinos shouldn't have more attention on money laundering because that's not their sole responsibility and when they try to introduce such control measures against money laundering, they may be loosing their customers at the cause of doing that and it may not be well enough for them to adapt on this kind conditions because they will record a low income due to reduced numbers of gamblers.

[Mahdirakib]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

There is no loophole in the AML policy and wagering requirement. A casino may allow you to withdraw your funds once or twice with the minimum wagering requirement. Then the anti-fraud system of the casino will trigger the KYC verification if a user continuously does it. In that case, the user has to pass the source of funds verification process (as yahoo62278 has said above). It won't be possible for anyone to complete the source of funds verification if his/her funds are coming from unverified sources.

[Slow death]

I think thieves are very smart enough that they don't deposit stolen money in casinos knowing that there will be a great chance of being asked for kyc, having to make a lot of bets and losing those bets and consequently losing money, having to reveal their ip, and a very big risk, when they can simply use a mixer, even if the thief is afraid of mixers because they are new mixers, he will still have the option to list many mixers and put few coins in each mixer and with that he would test which mixers will be reliable

for him to continue using it in the long term, as you can see this without a doubt would be the best path the thief would use and I am convinced that all thieves use mixer instead of casinos and big exchanges to launder money. in the casino it doesn't matter if there is an odd of @1.01 or @5.00 even so, at the end of the day the person will leave with long-term losses, thieves are very intelligent people and obviously they know how to do research before using any website, they knew it would be the worst mistake if they used a casino to launder money

[so98nn]

This era is full of surprises. The more we digital become the more digital crimes are happening everywhere. However, let us not forget that even more safety measures are being taken by most of the service providers. That is why we still need human intelligence working behind the desk who catches this kind of fraud. Even with the biggest mixer, we saw this fallback. I am not sure if money was getting laundered but the books were not clean which makes it look more fishy than anything else. In similar ways, every casino will have a fraud protection layout working around the clock. The casinos are all about the money so they need to be extra precautions about everything.

I assume the wagering requirement is one of the primary systems which works against fraud. That is also a good point and will answer many peeps as to why there is such high wagering requirement when it comes to newly adopted bonuses, sign-ups etc.

[DoublerHunter]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

^That is possible that will happen and who knows then.
However, though that is possible will happen we know that gambling sites employ various measures to detect and prevent money laundering activities. These measures include identity verification, transaction monitoring, and flagging suspicious betting patterns. If a player consistently places high-volume wagers with extremely low odds, it would likely raise red flags and trigger further scrutiny of the player that is put into suspicious activity. That is the reason why the legitimate gambling casino applied KYC verification just because of this purpose.

[pawanjain]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Well technically they can do that but do you really think it is worth the risk ?
What if the unfortunate happens and you lose. All your stack will be gone and you cannot even complaint.
To be honest, the 1.01x odds does not guarantee a 99% win. In fact I just lost my stack in 1.01x bet after 10-15 consecutive wins.
It felt bad for a moment but I could afford to lose it but the money launderer would not.

[Yogee]

Money launderers may have done that easily in the past when regulators weren't so strict on crypto casinos but I doubt that's still the case now. Have you ever read about those players complaining why their funds where put on hold and they claim they didn't do anything wrong? Suspicious gaming behavior is probably one of that which triggered the security check. I bet casinos and game providers can identify those users trying to wash their funds 9 out of 10 times.

[Frankolala]

Using a casino for money laundering might make you end up losing the money to the casino. It is either that with time the money will be detected and your account will be freeze OR you will end up gambling all your money due to the wager requirement and rules for withdrawal of funds.

Your point is good because low odds have a big advantage of you winning the game,but you should also know that not all low odds means that the game will end up base on the odds,which means it doesn't work all the time. Gambling depends on luck and not on odds,so I would advise that instead of thinking on how to launder money through a casino,it would be better to use a mixer.

[arwin100]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Maybe not a loophole because there's a chance for money launderer to lose a lot of money if they lose and that is not ideal thing to do because they cannot take all the money stolen from anywhere. I doubt those criminals will use a casino which have wager requirements and also have Kyc since they might get trace out or they might carried away on the climax given by playing on a casino. Maybe those criminals will look for mixers rather than casino since this is less hassle to them.

[noormcs5]

You want to test the system out and deposit $1,000,000 and play dice at x1.01? What are you going to do when you lose 1 of your bets and say $250,000 goes in the toilet?

I'm not sure why they have a wager requirement really except to make a user wager on the site. They say for anti money laundering but essentially making a wager 1x is pretty easy no matter the amount. Where you really need to be concerned is when they ask you for proof of funds. If you cannot prove where the funds came from in a way that satisfies their requirement, you could lose it all.

Firstly i never said that anyone should play dice with 1.01x as i think this is still risky but I prefer to bet on sports and when a site gives you 1.01x sort of bet on any game, it means that the team is very likely to win.

Secondly, if any money launder wants to complete the wager of $1,000,000 , he would be fully stupid to put all $1,000,000 in a single bet. Rather he can place many number of bets with 1000$ only. Yes, it may take time but even the evil things  also need some sort of hard work.

Maybe not a loophole because there's a chance for money launderer to lose a lot of money if they lose and that is not ideal thing to do because they cannot take all the money stolen from anywhere. I doubt those criminals will use a casino which have wager requirements and also have Kyc since they might get trace out or they might carried away on the climax given by playing on a casino. Maybe those criminals will look for mixers rather than casino since this is less hassle to them.

Again, they can't lose much if they plan and execute with small amounts and complete the wagering in many numbers of bets.
Yes, mixers or exchanges can be easier for those criminals but since we are in the gambling section, the discussion is how can money launders life made more difficult at gambling casinos.

[ralle14]

Secondly, if any money launder wants to complete the wager of $1,000,000 , he would be fully stupid to put all $1,000,000 in a single bet. Rather he can place many number of bets with 1000$ only. Yes, it may take time but even the evil things  also need some sort of hard work.

I've done this once but at a smaller scale, and it's more costly than using other methods available because you'll still be losing around 20-30 bets even if you use smaller amounts.

With bigger amounts, it's probably risky since you have to go through verification because there's a limit on how much you can withdraw for non verified accounts and there's a possibility that the casino will increase deposit rollover for your account.

There used to be a casino that allows you to bypass the wagering requirements for your deposit but the downside is you need to get verified.

[Fortify]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

This is not really a loophole and it will be well known by casino's already. There are such a different variety of setups, but any reasonable security system could detect such activity. Besides that, the person sending funds into a wallet and then betting is not instigating some sort of mixing action with the bitcoin. You seem slightly confused that the act of betting is somehow sending money elsewhere and an act of disguising the source, it's not. All of these funds will be highly segregated and controlled, on top of which an unrelated layer of data management can take place separate from the wallets.

[iv4n]

Money has been laundered through casinos since there have been casinos... probably not through every casino, there are always exceptions, but I think it's something that has been done for a long time. When I first heard about some major money laundering in EU casinos by Serbians who did illegal stuff there, it was about roulette, a couple of guys play roulette and mostly bet on red or black. If they lose some money, it's the commission, which is always paid, one way or another.

It's a loophole, but I will go with Yahoo on this... 1x is pretty easy to wager, and there are better ways to catch money launderers than this wagering requirements, it's more about casinos making people wagering.

[Learn Bitcoin]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

No matter how much is the wagering requirements. No matter how much winning chance are you playing with? You still can lose the bet even if you place bets with a 99% win chance. Real gamblers do not do money laundering. Casinos require a wagering requirement saying it prevents money laundering, but they want a player to lose money.

Legit casinos won't force their players to wager more than 3x of their deposits if they do not take any kind of deposit bonus or other bonus. If they do, you should avoid such platforms. There is an opposite side as well, Why a real player would withdraw his money without even playing if he is a real gambler?

[Hispo]

Technically, it is not a loophole, because there is a chance the criminals trying to launder illicit money will end up losing an important amount to the casino. People who seek to launder try to do it with large enough amounts so the time they use can be justified.

Still, besides all this, I would also assume that the staff of the casino could easily ask for proof of origins of that money, in the case they noticed something strange going on with a particular user. Like some new account depositing much and, playing with high odds and has not completely gone through KYC, for example.

[Beparanf]

Technically, it is not a loophole, because there is a chance the criminals trying to launder illicit money will end up losing an important amount to the casino. People who seek to launder try to do it with large enough amounts so the time they use can be justified.

Still, besides all this, I would also assume that the staff of the casino could easily ask for proof of origins of that money, in the case they noticed something strange going on with a particular user. Like some new account depositing much and, playing with high odds and has not completely gone through KYC, for example.

Not instantly casino will ask proof of funds. I think a standard KYC that requires Identity verification is enough for whale players that will deposit huge since casino doesn’t want scared them off. Proof of source of income is only imminent if casino is already have a lead to users account that involves on money laundering.

Money launderer is not dumb enough to bet using same pattern because it can be caught easily by casino security team. Launderer usually play like a normal player since they have a huge bankroll, They can’t be beaten easily by betting on 50% win chance rate bet using small bets. Launderers bet randomly to avoid making a bet pattern. OP suggestion is definitely not a loophole and a dumb ways to launder money.

[ImThour]

There is still a risk of losing that bet where 1% chance is of losing it all and I am sure, the one who is money laundering will never want to lose the money on any % of odds.
They might be using some other sort of techniques to launder money which are unheard by the rest of the people as they try to keep these things as a secret.

But If I was to ask to wager 100% of my money, I would just bet 50% on Red and 50% on Black in a roulette just after green is already hit.

[aylabadia05]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

As far as I know there is no gap to be able to pass the requirements as you mean.
Apart from that, as long as I am involved in any type of gambling game, the chances of winning never reach up to 99% if I am not mistaken in understanding what you mean.
From the explanation of the former casino owner who has quit the gambling life where he initially started his career as an operator or technical worker to establish his own online casino, that the formula for each casino regulates the percentage to lose for each player is greater.

Regarding money laundering, I think it would be easy for the authorities to trace the origin of money deposited by someone in the casino.

[bangjoe]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

There is no sure winning in gambling; even the lowest odds can still lose a game. So if the intention of the user is to launder money through the Casino, their chances of losing the entire money before even getting it out are high.
 
Lower Odds give one some confidence that their chances of winning are huge, but it does not always happen that way. So trying to use that as a loophole in an online casino might lead you to fall victim to losing all your wagers.

I strongly agree in this matter, if even then has a smaller multiplication than that there is no guarantee that the bet that is done has a victory, it is only a prediction speculation, and if you often see it changing as the gamble goes, even gambling in football , the team that had been confirmed to win in the last minute in the match they found a draw that was drawn and or even his position turned into a defeat, and the money will disappear.

If it is so possible, it is likely that many people can be rich more easily, even I who have even small capital in betting if I do it consistently with the certainty of profits based on the multiplication of victory on the gambling platform I will easily become rich. LOL

[jrrsparkles]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

This is not really a loophole but I can think it can be an actual trap if someone tries to launder their money using casino because the wagering requirements are the only measure to avoid money launderers, in most cases when thet feel something shady the casino is going to ask for the proof of funds then it will get them to more difficult situation.

Even with 99% probability of winning still that 1% can make the whole amount to bust cause I tried dice with such strategy so I can make some but always ended up losing though.

[BitcoinPanther]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

This percentage does not guarantee a win,  I believe we have all experienced wagering this kind of strategy and at the end we lost something even before reaching a 1x wagering if we happen to wager a small amount just to be to minimize the possible losses. 

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I do not think that this kind of requirement has a loophole since casino can always tag accounts they are suspecting of money laundering and disable their withdrawal function until they submitted the needed requirement to prove that the money deposited is not intended for money laundering.

[famososMuertos]

I really it doesn't matter how you bet, it is something that the casino evaluates regardless of the type of bets you make, it is relative, at the end of the day, AML, KYC is independent of the wager, there are simply other variables involved that They not only depend on each deposit, but individual, country, betting habits, etc.

[o48o]

You want to test the system out and deposit $1,000,000 and play dice at x1.01? What are you going to do when you lose 1 of your bets and say $250,000 goes in the toilet?

I'm not sure why they have a wager requirement really except to make a user wager on the site. They say for anti money laundering but essentially making a wager 1x is pretty easy no matter the amount. Where you really need to be concerned is when they ask you for proof of funds. If you cannot prove where the funds came from in a way that satisfies their requirement, you could lose it all.

I am guessing that op means that you would get washed money. As i imagine it would cost lot to wash it anyway. And you still would have to pay taxes for your wins in order it would be clean. But there's one problem OP didn't thought about, and that's FATF travel rule where you have to provide a proof where you got that money in the first place. Casinos are legally obligated to freeze your funds for inspection if they suspect it's dirty money, because of AML laws.

I personally don't think that casinos are used to wash money. At least anymore. Laws are too strict on that. NTFs however...

[stomachgrowls]

You want to test the system out and deposit $1,000,000 and play dice at x1.01? What are you going to do when you lose 1 of your bets and say $250,000 goes in the toilet?

I'm not sure why they have a wager requirement really except to make a user wager on the site. They say for anti money laundering but essentially making a wager 1x is pretty easy no matter the amount. Where you really need to be concerned is when they ask you for proof of funds. If you cannot prove where the funds came from in a way that satisfies their requirement, you could lose it all.

Going into that 1.01x wont guarantee because in order to hit up that 2x then it would really take a while plus you would be needing to make huge bets if you are really that in a hurry. What if you lost that bet? For sure you

would really be ending up on chasing those losses until you do lost all of your bankroll and this is something that not good to look at. ITs true that no matter what the amount if you do even play on that 2x odds then it wont really be that so hard on reaching or breaking that threshold if you are really that eager on getting out those laundered money but well we do know that gambling is risky and there's no assurance where you could
really conclude that you are lucky on that moment.What if you would be that on the opposite? You would be losing it all.

Its true about that KYC possibility because if there's some huge deposit that would ring out that bell then expect that there would really be further verifications.

[suzanne5223]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

It is not every casino that requires their user to wage all their deposit balance before they could make a withdrawal.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

When you mean money laundering, are you referring to gamblers that use casinos to clean their crypto? If yes, the idea doesn't look right from my own belief and instead of doing that there are crypto tumbler websites and there are also some exchanges that provide anonymous service for this.

[BitDane]

I personally don't think that casinos are used to wash money. At least anymore. Laws are too strict on that. NTFs however...

I think otherwise, many people still use casinos to wash money.  I think this is one of the problem that will stay no matter how strict the casino is.  A player can provide the proof where the fund came from but the person on the receiving end of that fund will never know where it is coming from nor the source of that money since it has been mixed in the casinos hand.  In cryptocurrency, the fund is often released from the hot wallet of the casino and not from the address of the person who withdraw the money.  

But if we talk about money laundering, the casino has the separate security for that.  The wagering requirement is not to prevent mone laundering or washing coins but rather as a requirement so that a casino can have the chance to at least eat some of the gambler's balance.

[AmoreJaz]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

It is not every casino that requires their user to wage all their deposit balance before they could make a withdrawal.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

When you mean money laundering, are you referring to gamblers that use casinos to clean their crypto? If yes, the idea doesn't look right from my own belief and instead of doing that there are crypto tumbler websites and there are also some exchanges that provide anonymous service for this.

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements is low.

[maydna]

Casinos may try to investigate the accounts of gamblers who use big money and ask them to verify them to make sure they are not involved with money laundering. And I think money launderers can still do it because they have many ways, and gambling is not the only place to launder money. If they see that it is difficult to launder money in casinos, they will use other methods so that their activities can continue as usual. And they will keep gambling if they like to gamble, and maybe they will verify their account with the help of other people. Someone experienced in the field knows what to do when a road is closed.

[coin-investor]

But if we talk about money laundering, the casino has the separate security for that.  The wagering requirement is not to prevent mone laundering or washing coins but rather as a requirement so that a casino can have the chance to at least eat some of the gambler's balance.

Why would casinos have that house edge and wagering requirement for them to compel players to play and lose but casinos will mark you as a launderer if you use the casino as a transit point when you deposit you have to play, there is no reason why you'll deposit and not play, but casino is not a good choice for money laundering because they have wagering requirement as we all know and even if the chance to win is high, there's still a risk to lose everything, money launderer will take a chance on mixer, no requirements and no KYC involve.

[Cling18]

Casinos may try to investigate the accounts of gamblers who use big money and ask them to verify them to make sure they are not involved with money laundering. And I think money launderers can still do it because they have many ways, and gambling is not the only place to launder money. If they see that it is difficult to launder money in casinos, they will use other methods so that their activities can continue as usual. And they will keep gambling if they like to gamble, and maybe they will verify their account with the help of other people. Someone experienced in the field knows what to do when a road is closed.

That's the reason why casinos would ask for KYC to track and secure the safety and legitimacy of each transaction. The wagering requirement is actually their strategy just so players would bet more funds before the withdrawal process.
I agree that launderers will still find ways to transact or play with the funds that they have stolen.
There are plenty of ways to use their laundered money and if their illegal activity could be tracked by such casinos, they will surely find other methods to pursue their activity no matter how secure a casino is. Launderers already know how to play the game and I'm that they also know what to avoid.

[DoublerHunter]

But if we talk about money laundering, the casino has the separate security for that.  The wagering requirement is not to prevent mone laundering or washing coins but rather as a requirement so that a casino can have the chance to at least eat some of the gambler's balance.

Why would casinos have that house edge and wagering requirement for them to compel players to play and lose but casinos will mark you as a launderer if you use the casino as a transit point when you deposit you have to play, there is no reason why you'll deposit and not play, but casino is not a good choice for money laundering because they have wagering requirement as we all know and even if the chance to win is high, there's still a risk to lose everything, money launderer will take a chance on mixer, no requirements and no KYC involve.

^That is correct, I am a shoe of a money launderer I will not choose the gambling casino to mix money because that is very risky on my part as I know that the gambling casino always looking for a KYC verification. So ideally, that is not a good option to choose a gambling casino for a fraud like this, even if the chances of winning may be perceived as high, gambling outcomes are ultimately unpredictable, and there is always a possibility of losing the deposited funds. Money launderers tend to opt for alternative methods, such as cryptocurrency mixers or other platforms that offer anonymity and lack the stringent regulations and requirements of legitimate casinos and you are right.

[Yatsan]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

As we do know, lower odds won't guarantee winning. Anything could happen as long as the game is not done yet which should impose risk still for those who are planning to bypass their funds through gambling sites. Wagering requirement, as far as I know, does not work on betting all of your funds but with minimum and maximum amounts withdrawable in a certain period.  It would be unfaair as well if gambling sites would reqquire people to bet all of their funds just to withdraaw their funds 'coz what if they lose in that bet?

If it is avoiding money laundering, there are many ways to do so such as simply putting their money in this blockchain. The only problem they would get is not being able to withdraw all of it in a single transaction 'coz your bank would be larmed. So atleast it would be hidden from taxation.

[serjent05]

But if we talk about money laundering, the casino has the separate security for that.  The wagering requirement is not to prevent mone laundering or washing coins but rather as a requirement so that a casino can have the chance to at least eat some of the gambler's balance.

Why would casinos have that house edge and wagering requirement for them to compel players to play and lose but casinos will mark you as a launderer if you use the casino as a transit point when you deposit you have to play, there is no reason why you'll deposit and not play, but casino is not a good choice for money laundering because they have wagering requirement as we all know and even if the chance to win is high, there's still a risk to lose everything, money launderer will take a chance on mixer, no requirements and no KYC involve.

^That is correct, I am a shoe of a money launderer I will not choose the gambling casino to mix money because that is very risky on my part as I know that the gambling casino always looking for a KYC verification. So ideally, that is not a good option to choose a gambling casino for a fraud like this, even if the chances of winning may be perceived as high, gambling outcomes are ultimately unpredictable, and there is always a possibility of losing the deposited funds. Money launderers tend to opt for alternative methods, such as cryptocurrency mixers or other platforms that offer anonymity and lack the stringent regulations and requirements of legitimate casinos and you are right.

I think cryptocurrency exchanges are easier to commit money laundering than a casino since a centralized exchange platform can easily wash the trace of money by exchanging Bitcoin to any other form of altcoins and voila, traces of the source of fund is hidden since the exchange will not give the information unless there is a court issue of in digging deeper on the source of fund that can be found on the exchange.

[danadc]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

This percentage does not guarantee a win,  I believe we have all experienced wagering this kind of strategy and at the end we lost something even before reaching a 1x wagering if we happen to wager a small amount just to be to minimize the possible losses. 

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I do not think that this kind of requirement has a loophole since casino can always tag accounts they are suspecting of money laundering and disable their withdrawal function until they submitted the needed requirement to prove that the money deposited is not intended for money laundering.

A casino to do something like this is when they have enough suspicions to do it, and sometimes when they suspect such a specific case it is because they have seen a movement of money that is not so usual, it is always for a lot of money and the person wants to withdraw quickly, that is the way I see that it can be done.

Those who launder money in a casino are somewhat stupid thieves, because if they put money in a casino knowing that they are going to ask for many requirements, that is not intelligent, it is a very novice act, for that it is better to put it in a mixer and that's it , you don't have to pass it through a platform where your funds are frozen and goodbye.

[dothebeats]

If that's the way you think then you don't know how cruel that odds are for gamblers that are looking to make some quick buck or to launder money. Even if you are successful on your first try to launder money through this means, the succeeding ones might not be the same. Also, the casino might flag your account for suspicious behavior if they see that a repeat activity of the same nature happens on your account, with the money going in, making one bet, then going out. This is outright daring but not smart, if I can describe it.

[Wexnident]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I wouldn't say it's a loophole, just that from the way casinos try to guard against money laundering, what you said was the bare minimum to apply to it, which always exists in any type of restriction in general imo. Fact remains that the money was gambled after all. Plus, casinos keep a log of records of whoever does those kinds of stuff so who knows, they may just jave an internal monitoring that tracks those specific accounts that does those types of bets after depositing.

Plus, if they were to be somehow really unlucky and land on that 1%, free money for the casino.

[Bitinity]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

You may think that it is easy but in fact anyone may lose the bets with such low odds even in their first bets or even they can lose few times in a row. Actually I dont think that people who want to do money laundry will use online casino because the risk is bigger because wagering 1-2x of the whole balance just to launder is like risking the whole amount. I think smart people who want to do it will prefer to use mixer or even exchange than casino. With mixer, they simply pay the fee and with exchange they can do some safe trades (at least less risk than gamble it).

[Don Pedro Dinero]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

If there is, they don't use it because there are still some casinos without wagering requirements, so they won't have to deal with the ones that do have them. Besides, there are mixers that are much better in this respect. And it would not be easy, compared to the other options.

You may think that it is easy but in fact anyone may lose the bets with such low odds even in their first bets or even they can lose few times in a row. Actually I dont think that people who want to do money laundry will use online casino because the risk is bigger because wagering 1-2x of the whole balance just to launder is like risking the whole amount.

That's it.

[danherbias07]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

But also imagine the risk he will take upon taking the bet. Yeah, let's say it's just 1.01 and most will say it's a sure win but what if that 0.01 wins? It might work with sports betting but in casino games, I have seen 1.00 come out a lot of times either in Dice or other original casino games like Crash especially if the amount bet was too high. One time there was one gambler who put in a bet of 1 BTC and I saw it gone in Crash game. It's a risky move that most gamblers won't take unless they have enough courage to do so.
I don't think it's a loophole because there is still risk involved. And, would that be enough for the gambling site to let you go just because you reach their wager amount? I think there's still an investigation that must be done and I don't doubt they will do that. A big amount of money still requires KYC and they may also look at your settled bets to see if you are just taking advantage of such things.

[benalexis12]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

What they are doing is still a risk that I can say, there is no gambling without the capital that you will use here. And there is no casino that will just let you deposit and withdraw immediately without even playing on their platform, nothing like that.
That's why all casinos implement that you bet this amount first before we allow you to withdraw money, that's their rules.

[noormcs5]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

What they are doing is still a risk that I can say, there is no gambling without the capital that you will use here. And there is no casino that will just let you deposit and withdraw immediately without even playing on their platform, nothing like that.
That's why all casinos implement that you bet this amount first before we allow you to withdraw money, that's their rules.

Why do we think that when the gambling site requires that we do wagering against the deposit amount the motive behind is to stop money laundering ? Why can't they use the KYC data in case they suspect any money laundering cases ? Also that is the purpose of the KYC to discourage users involved in illegal financial activities and money laundering.

When the gambling site wants you to wagger that deposit amount before the withdrawal I think the main motive behind is that you gamble with that amount and they know that when you will gamble you will lose a big portion of that money and in that case the gambling site will make profit.

This is another point of view taking that kYC data into account.

[Reatim]

You want to test the system out and deposit $1,000,000 and play dice at x1.01? What are you going to do when you lose 1 of your bets and say $250,000 goes in the toilet?

I'm not sure why they have a wager requirement really except to make a user wager on the site. They say for anti money laundering but essentially making a wager 1x is pretty easy no matter the amount. Where you really need to be concerned is when they ask you for proof of funds. If you cannot prove where the funds came from in a way that satisfies their requirement, you could lose it all.

This is not what OP did not understand completely , he only thought of the wager requirements but did not pay attention to the attitude of the casino nowadays.
there are even cases that even a small winning or withdrawal asking them to provide proofs like KYC and like what you said a where the funds came from and if this does not satisfied them then you are burn and may harder to gain back your money.
so if you have no other bad intention why not just use a legit way of transacting ?casino houses now knows why we tries to use them for sending and taking money and this is why they are now using that AML thing to take peoples money ,  because they believe that only legit gamblers will deposit and play and those wanted to deposit and withdraw has some red flags on it and yes they will also try to take advantage of that.

[Weawant]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

The casinos shouldn't have more attention on money laundering because that's not their sole responsibility and when they try to introduce such control measures against money laundering, they may be loosing their customers at the cause of doing that and it may not be well enough for them to adapt on this kind conditions because they will record a low income due to reduced numbers of gamblers.

OP that's not a loophole as it seems easier to be down with your thinking than doing it practically. There is every possibility for you to lose one of your bet and since you're waging all your money that means you're staking big and one loss will lose you a big part of your money.

Casino can't ignore money laundering because they're required to report any defaulter they discover are trying to use their casino for that purpose. If they don't report and the culprit get caught and it's been disclosed that it was this particular casino they use, they're an accomplice.

They won't be closed down immediately but after investigation and it's discovered that they knew their casino was been used for money laundering without doing anything about it and they can't prove to be innocent then they'll get punished and lose their license.

[maydna]

~snip~

That's the reason why casinos would ask for KYC to track and secure the safety and legitimacy of each transaction. The wagering requirement is actually their strategy just so players would bet more funds before the withdrawal process.
I agree that launderers will still find ways to transact or play with the funds that they have stolen.
There are plenty of ways to use their laundered money and if their illegal activity could be tracked by such casinos, they will surely find other methods to pursue their activity no matter how secure a casino is. Launderers already know how to play the game and I'm that they also know what to avoid.

By using the wagering requirements, the casino can spot a player with a lot of money and investigate the account immediately. And if they are not related to illegal activities such as money laundering and want to verify, the casino will have no problem with that and will verify their accounts in no time. But if the casino finds anything suspicious about its account, it must investigate more deeply. Perhaps, the casino will also ask for additional documents to ensure that the casino still controls everything. And the money launderers must have experience laundering their money, so they don't just use the casino.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

I really it doesn't matter how you bet, it is something that the casino evaluates regardless of the type of bets you make, it is relative, at the end of the day, AML, KYC is independent of the wager, there are simply other variables involved that They not only depend on each deposit, but individual, country, betting habits, etc.

     -  It's also not accurate because what the op refers to as a percentage is actually not accurate. Even if it is said that there is a 95% chance of winning, there is still a 5% chance of losing. And when you get the one you lose, the size of your funds will be lost.

Then the size of what you lost is long before you get back the amount you bet on what you gambled on, I have tried what the OP is talking about, it is not effective either, especially if you are unlucky while playing.

[yahoo62278]

You want to test the system out and deposit $1,000,000 and play dice at x1.01? What are you going to do when you lose 1 of your bets and say $250,000 goes in the toilet?

I'm not sure why they have a wager requirement really except to make a user wager on the site. They say for anti money laundering but essentially making a wager 1x is pretty easy no matter the amount. Where you really need to be concerned is when they ask you for proof of funds. If you cannot prove where the funds came from in a way that satisfies their requirement, you could lose it all.

This is not what OP did not understand completely , he only thought of the wager requirements but did not pay attention to the attitude of the casino nowadays.
there are even cases that even a small winning or withdrawal asking them to provide proofs like KYC and like what you said a where the funds came from and if this does not satisfied them then you are burn and may harder to gain back your money.
so if you have no other bad intention why not just use a legit way of transacting ?casino houses now knows why we tries to use them for sending and taking money and this is why they are now using that AML thing to take peoples money ,  because they believe that only legit gamblers will deposit and play and those wanted to deposit and withdraw has some red flags on it and yes they will also try to take advantage of that.

A gambler can be legit and still not want to share all their info. The KYC process is pretty invasive IMO. I have money, I want to gamble. Why is it the casino's business to know where my money came from? Either you want my business or you don't IMO.

[klidex]

~snip~

That's the reason why casinos would ask for KYC to track and secure the safety and legitimacy of each transaction. The wagering requirement is actually their strategy just so players would bet more funds before the withdrawal process.
I agree that launderers will still find ways to transact or play with the funds that they have stolen.
There are plenty of ways to use their laundered money and if their illegal activity could be tracked by such casinos, they will surely find other methods to pursue their activity no matter how secure a casino is. Launderers already know how to play the game and I'm that they also know what to avoid.

By using the wagering requirements, the casino can spot a player with a lot of money and investigate the account immediately. And if they are not related to illegal activities such as money laundering and want to verify, the casino will have no problem with that and will verify their accounts in no time. But if the casino finds anything suspicious about its account, it must investigate more deeply. Perhaps, the casino will also ask for additional documents to ensure that the casino still controls everything. And the money launderers must have experience laundering their money, so they don't just use the casino.

Actually I think someone who acts illegally laundering their money will not put that money into gambling because they know the risks that will be accepted when detected by the casino.
All casinos have various ways to detect illegal acts in gambling and gambling also does not want this action to concern the casino, so it is always warned that any gambling does not accept money resulting from illegal actions.
It's not the casino's fault if one day this problem occurs and all funds on the platform are confiscated by the casino.

[aioc]

I agree that launderers will still find ways to transact or play with the funds that they have stolen.
There are plenty of ways to use their laundered money and if their illegal activity could be tracked by such casinos, they will surely find other methods to pursue their activity no matter how secure a casino is. Launderers already know how to play the game and I'm that they also know what to avoid.

I doubt if there are loopholes for money launderers to use casinos the way they ask KYC for every action of players, casinos' security is bound by laws and regulations, and part of that regulations are tracing and prosecuting money launderers, I don't know but OP is just speculating that you can win and get your all your money that the money launderer washed.
It may be the case in the past but now with the upgraded security of casinos money laundering through casinos is hard to accomplish.
 

[paxmao]

If you have personally tried the strategy an method mentioned by the OP in question and found it ineffective, then it is  important to trust your own experiences rather than whatever other may tell you and have your own judgment. Strategies or systems claiming to guarantee consistent wins in gambling are often scams and can lead to further unhindered losses.

[Solosanz]

Why do we think that when the gambling site requires that we do wagering against the deposit amount the motive behind is to stop money laundering ? Why can't they use the KYC data in case they suspect any money laundering cases ? Also that is the purpose of the KYC to discourage users involved in illegal financial activities and money laundering.

Because if the casino ask the player to verify their account during registration in order to combat against of money laundering, the casino will lose a lot player because most people don't like to verify their account. People like to verify their account when they don't have any choice especially they're make money from the casino.

That's why they use wagering requirement as the step to combat against of money laundering.

[Doan9269]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

The casinos shouldn't have more attention on money laundering because that's not their sole responsibility and when they try to introduce such control measures against money laundering, they may be loosing their customers at the cause of doing that and it may not be well enough for them to adapt on this kind conditions because they will record a low income due to reduced numbers of gamblers.

OP that's not a loophole as it seems easier to be down with your thinking than doing it practically. There is every possibility for you to lose one of your bet and since you're waging all your money that means you're staking big and one loss will lose you a big part of your money.

There's no moderacy in gambling and I don't think casinos can also get this done since they aren't forcing gamblers to gamble on their sites, they decided to place a particular amount of money to be used for gambling just as we have the right to spend our money in buying any item in the market without anyone giving query to the source of our money, same are these casinos expected to operate without being bias.

Casino can't ignore money laundering because they're required to report any defaulter they discover are trying to use their casino for that purpose. If they don't report and the culprit get caught and it's been disclosed that it was this particular casino they use, they're an accomplice.

I can't expect any casino to report any case of money laundering since it's for their own benefits for he gambler to use the money on their website gambling than for them to report him and everything went down to the hands of the government agencies and officials as loot, this is not to encourage money laund but there are agencies saddled with such responsibility and that's their own role to monitor such.

[FatFork]

Why do we think that when the gambling site requires that we do wagering against the deposit amount the motive behind is to stop money laundering ? Why can't they use the KYC data in case they suspect any money laundering cases ? Also that is the purpose of the KYC to discourage users involved in illegal financial activities and money laundering.

When the gambling site wants you to wagger that deposit amount before the withdrawal I think the main motive behind is that you gamble with that amount and they know that when you will gamble you will lose a big portion of that money and in that case the gambling site will make profit.

This is another point of view taking that kYC data into account.

Yes, maybe the gambling sites are secretly run by a gang of mathematically gifted, profit-seeking geniuses who have mastered the art of making us lose our hard-earned money!  

But in all seriousness, you make a good point. Wagering requirements are a common practice in the gambling industry to ensure that players actually engage in the games and don't simply deposit and withdraw funds without any gameplay. It's a way for the gambling site to keep people active and potentially increase their chances of making a profit. And as we all know, the house usually wins in the long run. It's a sneaky move, no doubt, but hey, they're running a business after all. What's the point of depositing money anyway if you have no intention of gambling, right?

[Sim_card]

Why do we think that when the gambling site requires that we do wagering against the deposit amount the motive behind is to stop money laundering ? Why can't they use the KYC data in case they suspect any money laundering cases ? Also that is the purpose of the KYC to discourage users involved in illegal financial activities and money laundering.

When the gambling site wants you to wagger that deposit amount before the withdrawal I think the main motive behind is that you gamble with that amount and they know that when you will gamble you will lose a big portion of that money and in that case the gambling site will make profit.

This is another point of view taking that kYC data into account.

Yes, maybe the gambling sites are secretly run by a gang of mathematically gifted, profit-seeking geniuses who have mastered the art of making us lose our hard-earned money!  

But in all seriousness, you make a good point. Wagering requirements are a common practice in the gambling industry to ensure that players actually engage in the games and don't simply deposit and withdraw funds without any gameplay. It's a way for the gambling site to keep people active and potentially increase their chances of making a profit. And as we all know, the house usually wins in the long run. It's a sneaky move, no doubt, but hey, they're running a business after all. What's the point of depositing money anyway if you have no intention of gambling, right?

Casinos hate it when you tempt them with funds and I believe that they have experience when a gambler deposits and the casino will be happy that they will benefit from your funds and before they know it that gambler has withdrawn back his funds and this is the reason why they came up with wagering requirements. So that if you deposit,they have assurance that it is no longer your funds but their own due to their wagering requirement. This is the tricky side of the casino to make sure that they benefit from you either by your loss or will not allow you to withdraw your deposit so that you must gamble by all means,since they know that the house edge always win.

[dezoel]

How can consider that a loophole when you can clearly lose a bet with even 1.01x odds? This has happened a lot in the past, a guy even lost $1.4m in a single bet with 1.01x odds maybe because he had the same thought that he will never lose and will win some money and stop, but what happened was probably shocking for him and for us as well, losing $1.4m in a single bet isn't a joke even if you are a billionaire.

So, someone trying to place bets with his entire balance or maybe half of it using a 1.01x multiplier hoping he won't lose and quickly complete the wagering requirement is actually making a mistake, it is gambling and we all know that anything can happen in gambling, it's better to play it safe.

[goldkingcoiner]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I am not sure if I would call that a loophole. Every 100 times that a money launderer launders money this way, they lose all their money once. They could of course do it all in one go but ALL your money for a 1% chance of losing it? Still too high for me.

Now, about money laundering: Obviously the casino has records of losses and wins and they would give these documents to any law enforcement or government agency anyway. So that person would still have to explain the source of the deposits of his funds.

I think it would be easier for the casinos to get their 1% of the money launderer's money, so they keep quiet because its more profitable for them.

[Jody.Drummer]

How can consider that a loophole when you can clearly lose a bet with even 1.01x odds? This has happened a lot in the past, a guy even lost $1.4m in a single bet with 1.01x odds maybe because he had the same thought that he will never lose and will win some money and stop, but what happened was probably shocking for him and for us as well, losing $1.4m in a single bet isn't a joke even if you are a billionaire.

So, someone trying to place bets with his entire balance or maybe half of it using a 1.01x multiplier hoping he won't lose and quickly complete the wagering requirement is actually making a mistake, it is gambling and we all know that anything can happen in gambling, it's better to play it safe.

Yep, no matter how big the chance of winning is given, if at that time we have to lose, then defeat will be unavoidable. Sometimes these things we take for granted, and remember that this is a gamble that allows anything to happen and I agree with what you say. Mistakes don't have to be something big, like trying to risk all of our balance with a minuscule chance of winning, but they can happen to things we might not think about before looking at things realistically.
Once again I say this is a gamble that we will not know what the outcome will be.

[danadc]

How can consider that a loophole when you can clearly lose a bet with even 1.01x odds? This has happened a lot in the past, a guy even lost $1.4m in a single bet with 1.01x odds maybe because he had the same thought that he will never lose and will win some money and stop, but what happened was probably shocking for him and for us as well, losing $1.4m in a single bet isn't a joke even if you are a billionaire.

So, someone trying to place bets with his entire balance or maybe half of it using a 1.01x multiplier hoping he won't lose and quickly complete the wagering requirement is actually making a mistake, it is gambling and we all know that anything can happen in gambling, it's better to play it safe.

Yes, it doesn't matter how much the chance of winning is given, if at that time we have to lose, then defeat will not be inevitable. Sometimes these things we take for granted, and keep in mind this is a gamble that allows anything to happen, so I agree with you. Mistakes don't have to be something big, like trying to put all of our balance on a bet with a very slim chance of winning, but mistakes can happen to things we might not have thought of before seeing things as realistic.
Once again I say this is a gamble that we will not know what the outcome will be.

The only solution I see to money laundering is already there and it is KYC, I don't see anything else that can combat it, casino security systems can do it, if not, I think these things would not make sense, I have seen cases where There are many players who play in a casino with a VPN, and when the casino detects that they have won and are going to make a withdrawal, they block their funds and say that it is wrong because they used a VPN, if they have that capacity, then when there are illegal movements of money They can stop it too, and I don't think that those who go to Laavar Diero do 100 counts and do 100kyc, this is the only thing that can stop it.

[Lida93]

.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

The 1% less risk as you reason it has championed many losses to gamblers as those very low multipliers could be so deceiving many times. Since the existence of gambling there's nothing like a sure or easy odd as a result of it's size so such presumed loophole-odds still establishes losses.

The gambling companies knows very well that gambling is a game of chance/luck that's why they imposed such wagering requirements clause as there's every possibility that 7 out of 10 money laundering bets ma incur a loss irrespective of odd size if such gambler is not lucky and smart put together. Gambling is a game of uncertainty nothing is sure

[suzanne5223]

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements is low.

Yes, there's the probability of washing crypto through the use of casinos but if check the risk involve in losing all the funds I don't think it is something anyone should try. Remember "not your key, not your coin" especially now that most casinos are changing their TOS.
When privacy is a top priority it is better to use a crypto tumbler site and a good anonymous exchange than use a casino where the risk is high.

[Wiwo]

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements are low.

Yes, there's the probability of washing crypto through the use of casinos but if check the risk involve in losing all the funds I don't think it is something anyone should try. Remember "not your key, not your coin" especially now that most casinos are changing their TOS.
When privacy is a top priority it is better to use a crypto tumbler site and a good anonymous exchange than use a casino where the risk is high.

Aside from casino being used for money laundering being the reason for wager demands on deposits,  it is still a game by the casino to get the customer hucked,  since wager is a most on all deposits it then means the casino will make more money from players quest to meet the wagering requirement and failing in the process,  and sometimes some of the casino place unreasonable wager requirement on deposits balance and players continue to lose trying to fulfil that retirement on multiple times.

So the casino is not protecting the player or the government by enforcing wager requirements,  but they are also fulfilling their obligation to generate revenue for the business using that tactic.

[DoublerHunter]

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements is low.

Yes, there's the probability of washing crypto through the use of casinos but if check the risk involve in losing all the funds I don't think it is something anyone should try. Remember "not your key, not your coin" especially now that most casinos are changing their TOS.
When privacy is a top priority it is better to use a crypto tumbler site and a good anonymous exchange than use a casino where the risk is high.

^Definitely right that there is a possibility of laundering cryptocurrency through casinos. However, it is important to consider the risks involved, such as the potential loss of all funds. As the saying goes, "not your key, not your coin," which is especially relevant given the changing terms of service (TOS) in many casinos. If privacy is a major concern, it would be wiser to use a crypto tumbler site or coin mixer and a reputable anonymous exchange. By doing so, the risks associated with using a casino can be minimized, offering a safer and more secure approach to protecting one's assets while maintaining anonymity.

[Casdinyard]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

There is no sure winning in gambling; even the lowest odds can still lose a game. So if the intention of the user is to launder money through the Casino, their chances of losing the entire money before even getting it out are high.
 
Lower Odds give one some confidence that their chances of winning are huge, but it does not always happen that way. So trying to use that as a loophole in an online casino might lead you to fall victim to losing all your wagers.

While you are right in the idea that 99% doesn't mean everytime, you also have to consider the fact that it is almost every time, and that alone is enough for these money launderers to use these gambling sites as a form of money laundering method. It may not be the best, but against losing it entirely to the IRS and getting jailed for god knows how long, the prospect of losing all your money which I believe you can gain anyway considering the fact that you're trying to hide it from the IRS is minuscule.

So while for the average person losing money on a bet like this could cause them mental anguish and pain, for the average money launderer who as I said earlier could earn back what they lost in a snap thanks to their unlawful/shady business practices, this is just a minor setback.

[Saint-loup]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I don't think it's a loophole, because even with odds of 1.5 they have a little bit less than 66% to win their bets, so they would win 2 times on 3 and win +50% of profit each time, I don't think it's a big issue when you need to launder money.

[dothebeats]

Now, about money laundering: Obviously the casino has records of losses and wins and they would give these documents to any law enforcement or government agency anyway. So that person would still have to explain the source of the deposits of his funds.

I think it would be easier for the casinos to get their 1% of the money launderer's money, so they keep quiet because its more profitable for them.

Sometimes the casino platforms also have to play ball with the law enforcement, so as to make sure that they are not getting a lot of attention and be a hot target for surveillance and whatnot. I'm pretty sure casinos know who launders money and who doesn't, and they would certainly let the bigger fishes pass while the smaller ones, they catch and send the additional layer of KYC, getting them records, and letting the relevant authorities know before they let these fishes' funds go.

[ultrloa]

Now, about money laundering: Obviously the casino has records of losses and wins and they would give these documents to any law enforcement or government agency anyway. So that person would still have to explain the source of the deposits of his funds.

I think it would be easier for the casinos to get their 1% of the money launderer's money, so they keep quiet because its more profitable for them.

Sometimes the casino platforms also have to play ball with the law enforcement, so as to make sure that they are not getting a lot of attention and be a hot target for surveillance and whatnot. I'm pretty sure casinos know who launders money and who doesn't, and they would certainly let the bigger fishes pass while the smaller ones, they catch and send the additional layer of KYC, getting them records, and letting the relevant authorities know before they let these fishes' funds go.

That's why KYC has been added plus they additional supporting documentation on their Kyc provided to verify the real identity of the owner. This make the life of money laundering hard because some reputable casino ask this when they see something strange activity happen in some account. Criminals now are not into casino because they know the current requirements implemented which make them hard to make their evil plan to succeed. They go to mixers because for now this is easy escape route for them to cover up their crime.

[khaled0111]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

[serjent05]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

True, some casinos even give a list of casino games that can be played that can count toward wagering requirements.  I was somehow baffled when they have this kind of rule and recently I found out that many crypto washers are taking advantage of their low odds game to meet the wagering requirement with the lowest possible losses.  This is somehow a very clever way of telling the players that they cannot let money launderer take advantage of their low wagering requirement for withdrawal.

[Hispo]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

Very clever. Makes me wonder whether it is an strategy which was originally conceived by casino owners or it was some measure imposed by regulators when they themselves realized that it was possible for criminals to take advantage of those low multipliers.

Anyways, besides keeping criminals away, this should be also a good reason for us to read a bit the ToS of our preferred casinos, before realizing we cannot withdraw our possible (small) gains.

[Hamphser]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

True, some casinos even give a list of casino games that can be played that can count toward wagering requirements.  I was somehow baffled when they have this kind of rule and recently I found out that many crypto washers are taking advantage of their low odds game to meet the wagering requirement with the lowest possible losses.  This is somehow a very clever way of telling the players that they cannot let money launderer take advantage of their low wagering requirement for withdrawal.

Simply these platforms doesnt really like for themselves to get involved when it comes to this aspect and this is why they would really be normally be going into those methods or things which it would really be
that impossible for certain users to be able to hit up and wash out their money so easily specially into those launderers and this is why they would really be making out some exclusion on what are the
games which could be able to count on wagering their balance. On the time that these people been aware that it is hard to make out such thing on a certain site then for sure they would
really be looking into other place.

You wouldnt really be making yourself that getting along on platforms which you do seem that it is hard to reach that wager requirement but if you arent that a money launderer then why would mind that much? 

[Twentyonepaylots]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

Very clever. Makes me wonder whether it is an strategy which was originally conceived by casino owners or it was some measure imposed by regulators when they themselves realized that it was possible for criminals to take advantage of those low multipliers.

Anyways, besides keeping criminals away, this should be also a good reason for us to read a bit the ToS of our preferred casinos, before realizing we cannot withdraw our possible (small) gains.

On the other hand, is it solely to avoid people with bad intentions of hiding their wealth in gambling winnings or is it also the casino's intention to lure the players and push them to bet with higher risk, as one of the house edge? 'coz if it is low odds alone, then it should be a valid bet 'coz it is not a single gambler who dictates the odds of the match. Then laundering should be measured by other factors such as KYC and providing proofs that the money wo be withdrawn is aan amount from winnings and such. Actually the idea of hiding their wealth through gambling never crossed my mind but it is indeed possible. However, if it is by odds, what if other players who are not laundering and are just seeking for small but with higher tendency, to earn, are being marginalized as well? What do you think?

[Peanutswar]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.
So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

The reason why ideal to read first the terms and conditions, and faqs most of us does not read those and just create and register an account and continuously playing with their bonuses and once we hit a jackpot makes an immediate withdraw and some possible chance might freeze and suggest a KYC.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

At that point I'm not saying that there are but I can see this with the mines, you can make a bet with mine games choose only one tiles and if you hit makes a good 2x or any multiplier with your bet, and make another game, repeat the process but cant deny that there's a chance you lose on it.

[SmartGold01]

There is no way this could be possible because there are some gambling site that are too manipulative whereby if you gambles there is every chances you could lose the gamble to the site and your money is lost. Lets say bettor trying to reduce their odds, yes but there is no surety that no game would go off point, so it is very difficult for that to happened.

[slapper]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

Very clever. Makes me wonder whether it is an strategy which was originally conceived by casino owners or it was some measure imposed by regulators when they themselves realized that it was possible for criminals to take advantage of those low multipliers.

Anyways, besides keeping criminals away, this should be also a good reason for us to read a bit the ToS of our preferred casinos, before realizing we cannot withdraw our possible (small) gains.

On the other hand, is it solely to avoid people with bad intentions of hiding their wealth in gambling winnings or is it also the casino's intention to lure the players and push them to bet with higher risk, as one of the house edge? 'coz if it is low odds alone, then it should be a valid bet 'coz it is not a single gambler who dictates the odds of the match. Then laundering should be measured by other factors such as KYC and providing proofs that the money wo be withdrawn is aan amount from winnings and such. Actually the idea of hiding their wealth through gambling never crossed my mind but it is indeed possible. However, if it is by odds, what if other players who are not laundering and are just seeking for small but with higher tendency, to earn, are being marginalized as well? What do you think?

I'm intrigued by this viewpoint. You're navigating gambling, odds, and money laundering. The concept of concealing riches through gaming gains seldom comes up in public debates, but it's worth exploring. Casinos may promote high-risk wagers to boost income ("the house always wins"), but they are heavily regulated and monitored. KYC and AML rules apply. Thus, casinos don't cause this. Then, low odds might be a good gamble. Money laundering is about the source of money, not odds or wins. Casinos must implement comprehensive protocols to assure lawful wagering. Finally, anti-laundering regulations might marginalise certain players. However, these controls are in place to maintain the game's integrity and provide a level playing field for everybody.

[Doan9269]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

Yes you're right, wagering requirements don't count in most cases were applied to some particular games or low winning amount of money involved, which means in other words, we have to get the requirements for wagering meant if we are dealing with a high volume of money being involved especially when you already make a win before you can claim them, i guess only fee casinos will not add such requirements to their platform in this regard.

[mak013]

Yes, it is possible. But we saw here a thread, when someone bet more than $1.000.000 with the odd less than 1.01 and lost it. There are no guarantee of winning in gambling, so some moment you can lose even with such odds.

No guarantee to win with 100% chance in gambling even you bet with low odds like 1.01.

Risk of losing all money by 1 bet with low odds and with all capital to meet 1 wager turn requirement for withdrawal is terrible. Why criminals must accept that risk if they have other choices like using mixers and pay mixing fees?

You must ask someone another about criminals risk. I saw here the thread with such a bet for more than $1.000,000 and i don`t know is it criminal or not. The same time if someone makes it the main income source, why someone can`t use it for laundering? I think that it is possible situation.

[Learn Bitcoin]

Aside from the risk of losing a good chunk of your money despite gowing with low odds mentioned by other members above, on most casinos, small odds bets usually do not count toward the wagering requirement. Some of them don't even count bets made on some games like dice, crash and the like. At best they have a different wagering requirement for bets made on such games like 5x or more.
Casino owners are too smart and it's not that easy to fool them

You might lose some users if you are a casino owner and decide to impose complex restrictions on wagering requirements for non-bonus deposits. Look, I am a player and like playing my favorite games. If I play a couple of bets with a low winning chance and I hit a big win, wagering a meager amount, I won't take the risk to wager more, and I would like to withdraw my winnings.

The restrictions you put on the non-bonus deposit won't allow me to withdraw my winnings. In this case, the player will be frustrated about it. It makes sense when casinos require a wager on deposit with bonuses and in certain games. But when it comes to non-bonus deposits, it should not be more than 1-2x and not on some selective games.

[maydna]

There is no way this could be possible because there are some gambling site that are too manipulative whereby if you gambles there is every chances you could lose the gamble to the site and your money is lost. Lets say bettor trying to reduce their odds, yes but there is no surety that no game would go off point, so it is very difficult for that to happened.

If you don't want to experience losing bets, it's better not to gamble at that casino and choose another casino so you don't get into any trouble. But sadly, many gamblers still stick with the casinos, and even many deposit large sums of money there in hopes of getting deposit bonuses or promos. But I don't think there is any loophole that can stop money laundering through betting because the casino will prevent it, especially if the casino finds something fishy in someone's account. And the casino will check the details of the account and will ask them to do a detailed KYC to find out the person's background.

[Haunebu]

What the heck are you trying to say here op? It seems like you are indirectly stating that crypto gambling sites should increase their wagering requirements in order to fend off money launderers which is dumb as hell.

These sites already have an edge over gamblers thanks to the house edge factor and their wagering requirements should stay low since the average gambler isn't a money launderer.

Think before stating such anti-gambler ideas op.

[dimonstration]

What the heck are you trying to say here op? It seems like you are indirectly stating that crypto gambling sites should increase their wagering requirements in order to fend off money launderers which is dumb as hell.

These sites already have an edge over gamblers thanks to the house edge factor and their wagering requirements should stay low since the average gambler isn't a money launderer.

Think before stating such anti-gambler ideas op.

Increasing wagering requirements is possible implication if many users will abuse on the low odds bet just to mix on the casino. Some casino already have more than x1 wagering requirements like Trustdice which has a x5 wagering requirements for deposit. Casino is very vigilant when it comes to busting money launderer and OP suggestion is probably one of the trick of launderer to mix money with low risk involved.

Casino security always looking for players pattern and immediately flag the account if there’s a sign of abuse and money laundering using low risk bet with huge amount.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Nwada001 have said it as it is, there is absolutely no sure winning bets as long as gambling, betting is concerned, personally on my own, I don't need to speculate if its true or not, I've had several first hand experiences..
Several times I've placed bets on games with odds like you mentioned, 1.01x, 1.02 and so on, and still lost, so with this experience, I on my own would never use or consider such type of games as a means to launder money, only a complete newbie gambler would make such a mistake to think that there are sure win games on betting, all games come with risk no matter how low or high the odd is.

[panjul07]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

It is not a loophole as there is still big risk to lose the entire balance in single bet even with the highest winning odds.
I will call anyone who try to use casino for money laundering as stupid person and I believe no one will do it for big amount at least.
As far as I know there are indeed some users in some casinos who are suspected to do money laundering but afaik there is no solid evidence for it.
IMO, most of the cases are just because players do not know about the wagering requirement for deposit and they try to withdraw their money after few bets when they have not reached the wagering requirement.

[Jawhead999]

There's always a loophole and it's impossible for the casino to stop money laundering.

If the casino have minimum wagering requirement, the gambler only need to gamble with low odds.

If the casino ask to increase the odds, the gambler need to choose a safe game like sport bookie.

If the casino ask to submit KYC, the gambler can submit a fake or photoshopped KYC and the casino will never know if the KYC is fake.

To stop money laundering is to deal with it, you can't expect your rules will completely prevent money laundering.

[Haunebu]

Several times I've placed bets on games with odds like you mentioned, 1.01x, 1.02 and so on, and still lost, so with this experience, I on my own would never use or consider such type of games as a means to launder money, only a complete newbie gambler would make such a mistake to think that there are sure win games on betting, all games come with risk no matter how low or high the odd is.

Exactly. Let's see a money launderer would want to launder money using 1.01x dice. He/she could be successful if they stick to laundering in the short-term, but they will lose a lot of money if they try this trick again and again in the long-term.

Why? Because the edge will catch up eventually. I have noticed that you tend to lose 2-4 rolls among 100 rolls in Dice at 1.01x. Very risky loophole.

[Odusko]

There is nothing like sure bets and no one can predict the outcome of a bet, and since it is like that even the lowest odds can still produce a losing bet and so we must not underrate t the casino since there have a mechanism in place to always put the casino interest first and same goes with wager requirements.
The reason why casinos out 1x wager requirements on deposits is to avoid money laundering they also know that not all 1x wagers will give winning and sometimes the gambler loses all the deposits to the casino in trying to meet that requirement.

[o48o]

I personally don't think that casinos are used to wash money. At least anymore. Laws are too strict on that. NTFs however...

I think otherwise, many people still use casinos to wash money.  I think this is one of the problem that will stay no matter how strict the casino is.  A player can provide the proof where the fund came from but the person on the receiving end of that fund will never know where it is coming from nor the source of that money since it has been mixed in the casinos hand.  In cryptocurrency, the fund is often released from the hot wallet of the casino and not from the address of the person who withdraw the money.  
-cut-

You are talking what happens after we withdraw our money from casino, but i meant that person on the receiving end would be that casino in the first place. They have an obligation too to check that money is legit in the first place. And once again, we are not talking about small sums.

But i am not an expert in any way about money laundering tactics and you might be correct. I however wasn't talking what happens after casino.

[BitcoinPanther]

Several times I've placed bets on games with odds like you mentioned, 1.01x, 1.02 and so on, and still lost, so with this experience, I on my own would never use or consider such type of games as a means to launder money, only a complete newbie gambler would make such a mistake to think that there are sure win games on betting, all games come with risk no matter how low or high the odd is.

Exactly. Let's see a money launderer would want to launder money using 1.01x dice. He/she could be successful if they stick to laundering in the short-term, but they will lose a lot of money if they try this trick again and again in the long-term.

If the casino noticed that an account deposit a huge amount of money and just meet the 1x wagering before withdrawing then they can be suspicious of the person's activity.  A normal gambler will never do such pattern so it is possible that the account can be tagged with money laundering suspicion and the casino may probably ask for KYC and source of fund verification.

Why? Because the edge will catch up eventually. I have noticed that you tend to lose 2-4 rolls among 100 rolls in Dice at 1.01x. Very risky loophole.

And will have more losses way more than that if we keep rolling pass 100x.

[abel1337]

There's always a loophole and it's impossible for the casino to stop money laundering.

If the casino have minimum wagering requirement, the gambler only need to gamble with low odds.

If the casino ask to increase the odds, the gambler need to choose a safe game like sport bookie.

If the casino ask to submit KYC, the gambler can submit a fake or photoshopped KYC and the casino will never know if the KYC is fake.

To stop money laundering is to deal with it, you can't expect your rules will completely prevent money laundering.

Well this is true, there's so many ways to avoid the demands of a casino but I think money launderers has way more options rather than laundering on a casino and expect this kind of challenges if ever the casino noticed that they are trying to launder money. Casino just want to avoid a money laundering abuse this is why they implement this kind of rule, but to be honest it's very easy to get that 1x wager requirement. If a launderer has been doing this for a long time, I'm pretty sure that they are ready for the casino requirements a long time ago. It's hard to stop money launderers as they can always think about what kind of solution they will make to bypass the challenges to launder their money.

[suzanne5223]

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements are low.

Yes, there's the probability of washing crypto through the use of casinos but if check the risk involve in losing all the funds I don't think it is something anyone should try. Remember "not your key, not your coin" especially now that most casinos are changing their TOS.
When privacy is a top priority it is better to use a crypto tumbler site and a good anonymous exchange than use a casino where the risk is high.

Aside from casino being used for money laundering being the reason for wager demands on deposits,  it is still a game by the casino to get the customer hucked,  since wager is a most on all deposits it then means the casino will make more money from players quest to meet the wagering requirement and failing in the process,  and sometimes some of the casino place unreasonable wager requirement on deposits balance and players continue to lose trying to fulfil that retirement on multiple times.

So the casino is not protecting the player or the government by enforcing wager requirements,  but they are also fulfilling their obligation to generate revenue for the business using that tactic.

Maybe the casino implemented the wagering requirement on all deposits just to hook the gamblers but let's be honest and think like the casino owner. Why would a gambler deposit some funds on a casino if the purpose was not about using the fund to play games?
If the process is through launcering dont tell the casino wont be held responsible if the fund was traced to their platform. If you're the owner of the casino wont you take the necessary move to safe the casino reputation?

[Hamphser]

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements are low.

Yes, there's the probability of washing crypto through the use of casinos but if check the risk involve in losing all the funds I don't think it is something anyone should try. Remember "not your key, not your coin" especially now that most casinos are changing their TOS.
When privacy is a top priority it is better to use a crypto tumbler site and a good anonymous exchange than use a casino where the risk is high.

Aside from casino being used for money laundering being the reason for wager demands on deposits,  it is still a game by the casino to get the customer hucked,  since wager is a most on all deposits it then means the casino will make more money from players quest to meet the wagering requirement and failing in the process,  and sometimes some of the casino place unreasonable wager requirement on deposits balance and players continue to lose trying to fulfil that retirement on multiple times.

So the casino is not protecting the player or the government by enforcing wager requirements,  but they are also fulfilling their obligation to generate revenue for the business using that tactic.

Maybe the casino implemented the wagering requirement on all deposits just to hook the gamblers but let's be honest and think like the casino owner. Why would a gambler deposit some funds on a casino if the purpose was not about using the fund to play games?
If the process is through launcering dont tell the casino wont be held responsible if the fund was traced to their platform. If you're the owner of the casino wont you take the necessary move to safe the casino reputation?

We know that these platforms are really that regulated or really abiding government laws on which it would really be that normal that they would really be that monitored and being that checked about incoming or outgoing transactions in between those funds that had been going in and out on the said platform. As an owner then since you have agreed on what are those terms and conditions that they have been set out then
it would really be normal that you would really be  trying out to implement on whats been asked out in regarding about money laundering.

We know that gambling business or platform could really be able to mixed up or clean up those tarnished funds if there's someone who would really be tending on making up a deposit on a certain casino
and would really be planning on wagering it out to make those coins clean and if those things would be easy to achieve then this would become the best place on cleaning up illegal coins which is something
that owner of these business wouldnt really be letting it to happen since they do know that they are putting up their business at risks.

[Ojima-ojo]

Have the wager requirements helped in combating money laundering through casino?


Because even if anyone want to launder money won't casino be a bigger risk for them since their can lose all the money trying to get it into casino wallet and meet the wager requirements,  and also what if the said individual loses the bet?


I think anyone wanting to launder money will probably make use of mixing services to avoid the risk of losing money through the casino.

[dothebeats]

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements are low.

Yes, there's the probability of washing crypto through the use of casinos but if check the risk involve in losing all the funds I don't think it is something anyone should try. Remember "not your key, not your coin" especially now that most casinos are changing their TOS.
When privacy is a top priority it is better to use a crypto tumbler site and a good anonymous exchange than use a casino where the risk is high.

Aside from casino being used for money laundering being the reason for wager demands on deposits,  it is still a game by the casino to get the customer hucked,  since wager is a most on all deposits it then means the casino will make more money from players quest to meet the wagering requirement and failing in the process,  and sometimes some of the casino place unreasonable wager requirement on deposits balance and players continue to lose trying to fulfil that retirement on multiple times.

So the casino is not protecting the player or the government by enforcing wager requirements,  but they are also fulfilling their obligation to generate revenue for the business using that tactic.

Maybe the casino implemented the wagering requirement on all deposits just to hook the gamblers but let's be honest and think like the casino owner. Why would a gambler deposit some funds on a casino if the purpose was not about using the fund to play games?
If the process is through launcering dont tell the casino wont be held responsible if the fund was traced to their platform. If you're the owner of the casino wont you take the necessary move to safe the casino reputation?

We know that these platforms are really that regulated or really abiding government laws on which it would really be that normal that they would really be that monitored and being that checked about incoming or outgoing transactions in between those funds that had been going in and out on the said platform. As an owner then since you have agreed on what are those terms and conditions that they have been set out then
it would really be normal that you would really be  trying out to implement on whats been asked out in regarding about money laundering.

We know that gambling business or platform could really be able to mixed up or clean up those tarnished funds if there's someone who would really be tending on making up a deposit on a certain casino
and would really be planning on wagering it out to make those coins clean and if those things would be easy to achieve then this would become the best place on cleaning up illegal coins which is something
that owner of these business wouldnt really be letting it to happen since they do know that they are putting up their business at risks.

You will never know. There are still casinos that aren't really that compliant with law enforcement and regulators unless they're really pressed hard to divulge information on the said matter. To some casino operators, it's just additional work, though these casinos are very few and far between. As we can see, a minor deviation from your account's usual pattern often triggers the casino's security systems to raise the alarms and send the additional KYC. So I think in this aspect of the casino, the money launderer stands no chance if they got their funds held for obvious reasons.

[khaled0111]

Yes you're right, wagering requirements don't count in most cases were applied to some particular games or low winning amount of money involved, which means in other words, we have to get the requirements for wagering meant if we are dealing with a high volume of money being involved especially when you already make a win before you can claim them, i guess only fee casinos will not add such requirements to their platform in this regard.

It's not about small bets (like betting 1 or 20 sats on an event), it's mire about the odds. You can place à 1 sat bet and it will be counted if the odds are reasonable enough (usually, when it's more than 1.4).
Casinos have developed sophisticated algorithms and they have paid billions for those algorithms to spot players who are trying to cheat them. Those who are trying to bypass wagering requirements are the easier to spot.

[suzanne5223]

well, most of the time, it is none of casino's business where you got the money but the player should always check the ToS of the site to avoid possible problem. because once they saw some unusual activities or amounts in your account, they might flag you down.
there may be gamblers who are washing their money via casinos, but it is how you play your cards not to get caught. so the probability of washing money in casinos is always there, especially if the wagering requirements are low.

Yes, there's the probability of washing crypto through the use of casinos but if check the risk involve in losing all the funds I don't think it is something anyone should try. Remember "not your key, not your coin" especially now that most casinos are changing their TOS.
When privacy is a top priority it is better to use a crypto tumbler site and a good anonymous exchange than use a casino where the risk is high.

Aside from casino being used for money laundering being the reason for wager demands on deposits,  it is still a game by the casino to get the customer hucked,  since wager is a most on all deposits it then means the casino will make more money from players quest to meet the wagering requirement and failing in the process,  and sometimes some of the casino place unreasonable wager requirement on deposits balance and players continue to lose trying to fulfil that retirement on multiple times.

So the casino is not protecting the player or the government by enforcing wager requirements,  but they are also fulfilling their obligation to generate revenue for the business using that tactic.

Maybe the casino implemented the wagering requirement on all deposits just to hook the gamblers but let's be honest and think like the casino owner. Why would a gambler deposit some funds on a casino if the purpose was not about using the fund to play games?
If the process is through launcering dont tell the casino wont be held responsible if the fund was traced to their platform. If you're the owner of the casino wont you take the necessary move to safe the casino reputation?

We know that these platforms are really that regulated or really abiding government laws on which it would really be that normal that they would really be that monitored and being that checked about incoming or outgoing transactions in between those funds that had been going in and out on the said platform. As an owner then since you have agreed on what are those terms and conditions that they have been set out then
it would really be normal that you would really be  trying out to implement on whats been asked out in regarding about money laundering.

We know that gambling business or platform could really be able to mixed up or clean up those tarnished funds if there's someone who would really be tending on making up a deposit on a certain casino
and would really be planning on wagering it out to make those coins clean and if those things would be easy to achieve then this would become the best place on cleaning up illegal coins which is something
that owner of these business wouldnt really be letting it to happen since they do know that they are putting up their business at risks.

You will never know. There are still casinos that aren't really that compliant with law enforcement and regulators unless they're really pressed hard to divulge information on the said matter. To some casino operators, it's just additional work, though these casinos are very few and far between. As we can see, a minor deviation from your account's usual pattern often triggers the casino's security systems to raise the alarms and send the additional KYC. So I think in this aspect of the casino, the money launderer stands no chance if they got their funds held for obvious reasons.

@Hamphser Years ago before the SEC intervene in the cryptocurrency market some gamblers are using casinos to clean illegal coins and the casino are the ones held responsible in other prevent the same thing from happening again which could lead to casinos losing the platform they build for years in just a moment was the reason why different rules and regulation was implemented after the SEC intervened.
@dothebeats If there are still some casinos that are truly not complaining or have no rules for wager required on money laundering they will have it when it is time just like we see KuCoin introducing KYC now all users.

[wiss19]

There's always a loophole and it's impossible for the casino to stop money laundering.

If the casino have minimum wagering requirement, the gambler only need to gamble with low odds.

If the casino ask to increase the odds, the gambler need to choose a safe game like sport bookie.

If the casino ask to submit KYC, the gambler can submit a fake or photoshopped KYC and the casino will never know if the KYC is fake.

To stop money laundering is to deal with it, you can't expect your rules will completely prevent money laundering.

None of the points you've mentioned can be considered loopholes and cannot be used by a money launderer to successfully launder the money without losing it at all. Who says that you cannot lose a bet with low odds? There are people who lose thousands of dollars only because they use low ads with the confidence that they won't lose and will gain a couple of hundred dollars per bet which doesn't always work as house edge gets you once for sure.

Even sports betting can't guarantee that you will win, what if you choose a favorite team and they don't win that day? It's not always important that the favorite wins all the time, and, one can definitely not get away with a photoshopped KYC document since most casinos these days would ask you to take a picture with your document in your hand which can't be done with a photoshopped document.

[Magoo8]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

That's not a good idea since one loss wipes you out. It does happen.

[Crypt0Gore]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Hmm this makes a bit of sense but I think the best way to say this is, it will increase your chance of winning more but it won't kill the chances of losing money, instead of thinking of how much you will make using this technique think about how much you will lose using this method.

The chances of losing is still available and it will be even more painful if you lose this money because you are betting on low odds, I have tried this with a brother who is a football fan, even the lowest of odds doesn't bring wins most times, to me I see not much difference.

[LUCKMCFLY]

Yes you're right, wagering requirements don't count in most cases were applied to some particular games or low winning amount of money involved, which means in other words, we have to get the requirements for wagering meant if we are dealing with a high volume of money being involved especially when you already make a win before you can claim them, i guess only fee casinos will not add such requirements to their platform in this regard.

It's not about small bets (like betting 1 or 20 sats on an event), it's mire about the odds. You can place à 1 sat bet and it will be counted if the odds are reasonable enough (usually, when it's more than 1.4).
Casinos have developed sophisticated algorithms and they have paid billions for those algorithms to spot players who are trying to cheat them. Those who are trying to bypass wagering requirements are the easier to spot.

I do not doubt that the security of a casino is like this and has that type of security, in fact there is a lot of talk about money laundering through the casino, but I do not understand how they do it and why, most casinos all ask for KYC, And a criminal or someone who wants to launder money knows about this option, why does he do it? I don't know, but most of the time money laundering is not done through casinos, and unless they are online casinos, most money laundering is done in other ways, and with fiat money, it's very difficult. find criminals who do. , also a criminal knows and understands that when he puts his money on another platform, the money is no longer in control and domain of him, but in control of the platform, which generates panic.

Personally, currently, those who launder money the most are corrupt government entities and they do not do so, they have other much safer options and they launder large amounts of money, so money laundering via casino is actually for novice criminals.

A person who really wants to do without the origin of their funds can use a mixer, it is the most sound, and what is safest for it, for this reason we can mainly think that money laundering, although it is very possible, is unreliable It's not safe, current criminals have some knowledge, and I swear they have to learn, so I don't see it as an option.

[swogerino]

Have the wager requirements helped in combating money laundering through casino?


Because even if anyone want to launder money won't casino be a bigger risk for them since their can lose all the money trying to get it into casino wallet and meet the wager requirements,  and also what if the said individual loses the bet?


I think anyone wanting to launder money will probably make use of mixing services to avoid the risk of losing money through the casino.

Some people have used it unfortunately,they are unique and rare and are sport bettors,they place the maximum amount which the casino allows them to bet and place really low odds which the majority of the time they come true,I am talking about 1.10 and 1.15 odds which we can find in Tennis much more easily than in soccer.

I can say that the fact that they want to launder money through casinos it means they are not sweat money and as such they can afford to play it on blackjack,roulette or slot machines trying to go as fast as possible through wagering,they have got nothing to lose as they have non sweated money.

[Hamphser]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

It is not a loophole as there is still big risk to lose the entire balance in single bet even with the highest winning odds.
I will call anyone who try to use casino for money laundering as stupid person and I believe no one will do it for big amount at least.
As far as I know there are indeed some users in some casinos who are suspected to do money laundering but afaik there is no solid evidence for it.
IMO, most of the cases are just because players do not know about the wagering requirement for deposit and they try to withdraw their money after few bets when they have not reached the wagering requirement.

As long the chance isnt 0% then there's always a chance on losing up your entire bankroll or money in an instant.Its true that no one on their right minds would really be having that kind of wagering just to pull out

their laundered money.Its the most bad idea on doing so, although when we do speak about the odds then its really that less risk because of the odds but in overall if you dont want to blown up your money then
its better not to do so. Money launderers wouldnt really be so dumb on doing such thing which they do know that it is way too risky. They would rather be making use of Mixers
than on making up bets on 99% chance of winning or less which it cant really make out assurance that you would be able to get out without busting your balance.
They wont really be that so easily making out such decision if they do know that they cant really take out an advantage which its a common approach.

[tusandii]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

Even though there is a 1.01 chance, that also doesn't guarantee a win, and of course you understand that it's not easy to deceive gambling sites just because there is a 1.01 chance, which you feel can give 99% a win.
If you only rely on the 1.01 odds to bet as a whole and do it actively, there will be suspicions from the casino and of course there will be some obstacles that occur.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I'm not sure that could be a loophole for money laundering, moreover risking very large amounts of money so of course the dealer cannot easily give a win even with only 1.01.
Moreover, if there is a casino account with a large amount of money transactions, there must be KYC requested which will make it difficult for someone to commit money laundering.

[Learn Bitcoin]

As long the chance isnt 0% then there's always a chance on losing up your entire bankroll or money in an instant.Its true that no one on their right minds would really be having that kind of wagering just to pull out

their laundered money.Its the most bad idea on doing so, although when we do speak about the odds then its really that less risk because of the odds but in overall if you dont want to blown up your money then
its better not to do so. Money launderers wouldnt really be so dumb on doing such thing which they do know that it is way too risky. They would rather be making use of Mixers
than on making up bets on 99% chance of winning or less which it cant really make out assurance that you would be able to get out without busting your balance.
They wont really be that so easily making out such decision if they do know that they cant really take out an advantage which its a common approach.

Imagine they deposited their money to a scam casino website like 1xbit and get scammed. There are some shady casinos as well which trigger KYC whenever a player makes a large amount of deposit. It's super easy to use mixers these days. But, have to choose a reliable platform like Yomix. If it's a small amount of money, I don't think any platform cares about it. But, casinos might trigger KYC if they notice some suspicious betting pattern from a particular user.

However, I have seen a wallet like freewallet.org which scams their user by asking for a KYC which is not possible to pass anyway. The only reliable way is using a mixer. Sometimes mixers get seized as well. So, have to be careful about that as well.

[Strongkored]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Maybe you have to understand first with the 1x wager requirement, what is meant by the 1x wager requirement is not to make 1x bet and after that the player can immediately make a withdrawal, but what is meant is 1x rollover of the deposit amount that the player made, and also whether there is certainty win at gambling even for the odds that you mentioned the chance to lose is still there and this has often been experienced by gamblers, and if I'm not mistaken usually the wagering requirement that is carried out on sports bets will have a minimum odds that will be calculated for example the minimum is @1.50, and the wager requirement is not only to prevent money laundering but also because casinos are not exchanges or online wallets so naturally they apply wager requirements.

[adzino]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

How is that a loophole? The person who is going to launder money is already risking something. There  is still that 1% chance that he is going to lose his money. Do you really think he is going to take that chance? And don't forget, each bet has some sort of limit. You can't wager millions in a single bet. As far as I know, you will need to contact the casino if you wish to place such huge bet. I am sure they will start asking you questions before they let you place the bet. There are also security measures in the casino that can detect suspicious betting. And then most casinos require KYC. So casino isn't really a best place for someone random to launder his money.

[Hispo]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

How is that a loophole? The person who is going to launder money is already risking something. There  is still that 1% chance that he is going to lose his money. Do you really think he is going to take that chance? And don't forget, each bet has some sort of limit. You can't wager millions in a single bet. As far as I know, you will need to contact the casino if you wish to place such huge bet. I am sure they will start asking you questions before they let you place the bet. There are also security measures in the casino that can detect suspicious betting. And then most casinos require KYC. So casino isn't really a best place for someone random to launder his money.

Even if the casino did not require KYC verification as the user signs up for an account, I am sure that as soon as the new user started to deposit huge amounts of money and started to wager some of it, a member of the casino staff would notice and ask the user to go through the proper verification and even go as far as ask for proof of the origin of the money (if it is an amount big enough), in that case the person would lose their money which intended to launder. In the end, casinos are not the criminal paradise some conservative people claim. It is in their best interest to keep criminals away, so they can operate uninterrupted by regulators and the law.

[Beparanf]

Even if the casino did not require KYC verification as the user signs up for an account, I am sure that as soon as the new user started to deposit huge amounts of money and started to wager some of it, a member of the casino staff would notice and ask the user to go through the proper verification and even go as far as ask for proof of the origin of the money (if it is an amount big enough), in that case the person would lose their money which intended to launder. In the end, casinos are not the criminal paradise some conservative people claim. It is in their best interest to keep criminals away, so they can operate uninterrupted by regulators and the law.

That's you should not play on a casino that has KYC requirements if you don't have a valid documents to verify your identity. Bank account statements is just a requirement on extreme cases for user that has a problematic Identity Card that is currently live on country that restrict gambling. Not all casino use KYC to restrict user to withdraw but they are just using it if they find something shady on someone account that is close behavior for a money launderer such us frequently withdraw and deposit after few profit in the casino.

[bitbollo]

compared to other systems, recycling money in this way is something more or less "cheap", but compared to other systems you can easily lose everything, provide a KYC and you can always get controls by the casino/gambling platform: show me the origin of the funds.... in a certain way, dealing with such entities is difficult enough for honest people....

[Mr.right85]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Suey there isn't anything as sure bet but am sure your aware of that and a 0.1% risk is still a huge risk. This becomes the case and easily realisable when you've got your huge stake on the line.

It could be so disappointing watching such games as you would be so focused on not allowing anything to go wrong with the prediction because, it could always go wrong.

Yeah, money laundering is possible and it's something that is hoped to be avoided but, its often based on the agency following up the case to pursue it yo a point of truth. Your deposit becomes the first means to any traces.

[Slow death]

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Suey there isn't anything as sure bet but am sure your aware of that and a 0.1% risk is still a huge risk. This becomes the case and easily realisable when you've got your huge stake on the line.

It could be so disappointing watching such games as you would be so focused on not allowing anything to go wrong with the prediction because, it could always go wrong.

Yeah, money laundering is possible and it's something that is hoped to be avoided but, its often based on the agency following up the case to pursue it yo a point of truth. Your deposit becomes the first means to any traces.

in addition to all the points you mentioned, there is a great point that we must not forget: when thieves steal money and need to launder the money, in most cases it is large amounts of money something like millions of dollars, they don't they are going to put millions of dollars in a casino where they can be asked for kyc and thieves are in a hurry, they need to clear their tracks early because the police will be chasing them, so time is something very important for thieves and they cannot afford it of leaving a lot of money in their wallets, which is why the best and only option for them is to use the mixers

if they used the casinos they would have to deposit small amounts of money and still risk losing everything in the casino and being tracked by the police, that's why using the mixer to launder a lot of money quickly is the option they used. I don't see why the governments keep putting pressure on the casinos knowing this logic that I mentioned, for example the casinos could adopt the 2x system for withdrawals, with that people would have to play in the casino until they managed to win up to the amount they deposited to withdraw and not needed kyc and would have to fear money laundering

[ScamViruS]

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

[bittraffic]

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

Once the casino asks for the source of funds and the user can't provide detailed info, that's when the casino is going to really suspect something and freeze the amount.

But I'm not really sure about the wagering requirement that one user has to lose it all. That's a mess up, I would certainly avoid that one even if I deposit a small amount all the time.
Depositing and then playing a bit and then withdrawing the funds seem not a good way to launder, ain't that a very obvious dumb way and the casino will indeed suspect.

[maydna]

As long the chance isnt 0% then there's always a chance on losing up your entire bankroll or money in an instant.Its true that no one on their right minds would really be having that kind of wagering just to pull out

their laundered money.Its the most bad idea on doing so, although when we do speak about the odds then its really that less risk because of the odds but in overall if you dont want to blown up your money then
its better not to do so. Money launderers wouldnt really be so dumb on doing such thing which they do know that it is way too risky. They would rather be making use of Mixers
than on making up bets on 99% chance of winning or less which it cant really make out assurance that you would be able to get out without busting your balance.
They wont really be that so easily making out such decision if they do know that they cant really take out an advantage which its a common approach.

Imagine they deposited their money to a scam casino website like 1xbit and get scammed. There are some shady casinos as well which trigger KYC whenever a player makes a large amount of deposit. It's super easy to use mixers these days. But, have to choose a reliable platform like Yomix. If it's a small amount of money, I don't think any platform cares about it. But, casinos might trigger KYC if they notice some suspicious betting pattern from a particular user.

However, I have seen a wallet like freewallet.org which scams their user by asking for a KYC which is not possible to pass anyway. The only reliable way is using a mixer. Sometimes mixers get seized as well. So, have to be careful about that as well.

If they deposit their money to the scam casino, it is their risk because there is a possibility they will be fooled and lose all the money. And that is a loss for them because they cannot carry out their plans to wash their money. Maybe they can make money laundering through other places and not in gambling because they can risk losing money if they don't get a suitable casino.

Yes, the mixer will also be their choice in washing the money because it looks like it will be safer for them to avoid tracking from the government or regulator. But they will look for comfortable places to wash their money, and washing money is not new to playing in the business because they must have had places they have often used to wash their money.

[serjent05]

compared to other systems, recycling money in this way is something more or less "cheap", but compared to other systems you can easily lose everything, provide a KYC and you can always get controls by the casino/gambling platform: show me the origin of the funds.... in a certain way, dealing with such entities is difficult enough for honest people....

I believe reputable casinos tends to return the deposit amount of the player if they failed to show the source of funds and just nullify the winning amount.  Unless the casino is aiming for the deposited fund, then they will just ignore all the documents submitted and pretend that it does not comply with their requirements.  In this kind of event, the intention of the player to wash the trace of their funds resulted in a disaster where they fund are confiscated by the casino platform.

[ScamViruS]

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

Once the casino asks for the source of funds and the user can't provide detailed info, that's when the casino is going to really suspect something and freeze the amount.

But I'm not really sure about the wagering requirement that one user has to lose it all. That's a mess up, I would certainly avoid that one even if I deposit a small amount all the time.
Depositing and then playing a bit and then withdrawing the funds seem not a good way to launder, ain't that a very obvious dumb way and the casino will indeed suspect.

This may not really be a way of money laundering, but who knows there may be many players who are doing this. Before I deposit in a casino I think several times whether I can eventually withdraw my funds from this casino without any hassle. Casinos are also getting tougher by the day to catch those who engage in such activities.

Now if a gambler deposits his funds in a bad casino with the intention of money laundering, and if that casino freezes his funds with any excuse, then it becomes a nightmare for that gambler. So I also think this can't be a good way, and if the gambler gambles with his funds for the purpose of mixing then there will still be a risk of losing the funds.

[so98nn]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I think this is why we have KYC verifications and wagering requirements when entering in a casino and multiplying hundreds thousand dollars just like that.

If you check deposit bonuses or promos then they will always have wagering requirement so that means you will have to multiply your money to specific times and then you would be eligible for the withdrawal limits or else your money is stuck on the casino. This is one of the fraud protection practice.

The second that id wel known to all of us, KYC at different levels. Many of them have segregated the KYC levels according to the money that is being wagered.

This is refresher actually, this is discussed many times in different threads.

[piebeyb]

compared to other systems, recycling money in this way is something more or less "cheap", but compared to other systems you can easily lose everything, provide a KYC and you can always get controls by the casino/gambling platform: show me the origin of the funds.... in a certain way, dealing with such entities is difficult enough for honest people....

I believe reputable casinos tends to return the deposit amount of the player if they failed to show the source of funds and just nullify the winning amount.  Unless the casino is aiming for the deposited fund, then they will just ignore all the documents submitted and pretend that it does not comply with their requirements.  In this kind of event, the intention of the player to wash the trace of their funds resulted in a disaster where they fund are confiscated by the casino platform.

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

This also prevents the casino from being involved in money laundering cases and is considered to support criminal acts being subject to legal sanctions, but not many casinos want to return user money and only freeze the winnings, it is rarely found, if the user does not meet the requirements requested by the casino then the account will be suspended also the money will be confiscated by the casino.

[Mauser]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

It's not really a loophole, because you still have to bet your whole balance a lot of times (maybe 100x times at 1.01 odds) to fulfil the requirements. There more requirements than just betting your full balance only once, some websites have minimum odds of 1.5 to bet on and other require you to fill up a bar of risked money where you would need a lot of bets if you only stick to low risk bets. It's been a while since I got a new bonus, so I am not too familiar what the industry norm is right now on clearing the withdraw restrictions. For me it was always combi bets that I used to combine multiple low risk bets to make one higher risk bet to clear bonuses. The problem with placing all your money many times on these low-risk bets is that there is no guarantee it's going to work. Only missed bet where the favourite plays a draw and not a win, is enough for you to lose all your money. It's a huge downside risk that I would rather avoid, because its more likely that in 100 games something will go wrong.

[tusandii]

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

This also prevents the casino from being involved in money laundering cases and is considered to support criminal acts being subject to legal sanctions, but not many casinos want to return user money and only freeze the winnings, it is rarely found, if the user does not meet the requirements requested by the casino then the account will be suspended also the money will be confiscated by the casino.

Not most, but only individuals who have committed criminal acts of fraud or embezzlement of funds so that they try to remove traces by laundering money on gambling sites.
However, cases like this will not occur in casinos that have official licenses and KYC requirements because KYC can put pressure on criminals who want to launder large amounts of money.
Money laundering can damage the reputation and operation of gambling sites because there will be legal authorities involved in involving gambling sites in crimes committed by irresponsible persons, therefore many gambling sites monitor their customers closely so that there is no involvement in money laundering.

[bittraffic]

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

Once the casino asks for the source of funds and the user can't provide detailed info, that's when the casino is going to really suspect something and freeze the amount.

But I'm not really sure about the wagering requirement that one user has to lose it all. That's a mess up, I would certainly avoid that one even if I deposit a small amount all the time.
Depositing and then playing a bit and then withdrawing the funds seem not a good way to launder, ain't that a very obvious dumb way and the casino will indeed suspect.

This may not really be a way of money laundering, but who knows there may be many players who are doing this. Before I deposit in a casino I think several times whether I can eventually withdraw my funds from this casino without any hassle. Casinos are also getting tougher by the day to catch those who engage in such activities.

Now if a gambler deposits his funds in a bad casino with the intention of money laundering, and if that casino freezes his funds with any excuse, then it becomes a nightmare for that gambler. So I also think this can't be a good way, and if the gambler gambles with his funds for the purpose of mixing then there will still be a risk of losing the funds.

Maybe there are users doing it however it's more risky than doing it with fiat as it's traceable. When coins get into their wallets and are linked to a bank account, it's already identified. If authorities will really check the KYC of the casino, that user will be in trouble. From what I know, launderers mix their dirty money with clean money using a legitimate business with receipts making it cleaner and taxable for the government. They launder money but at the same time pay tax for it.

[noormcs5]

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

This also prevents the casino from being involved in money laundering cases and is considered to support criminal acts being subject to legal sanctions, but not many casinos want to return user money and only freeze the winnings, it is rarely found, if the user does not meet the requirements requested by the casino then the account will be suspended also the money will be confiscated by the casino.

How will casino know that the black money is being deposited on any casino ? No casino checks where the money is coming from. They only care how much they get the deposits from their gamblers. Similarly if the specific gambler ( who is also a money launderer), wins and wagers the minimum requirement and cash out on the different side, the casino never care as to which address the money is being transferred.

So i guess that casino have least interest in catching the money launderers. All they care about is how they can get more people to gamble and increase their bankroll.

[Youngkhngdiddy]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I consider this strategy a good way of reducing the rate of money laundering through online casinos and gambling sites, because many money launderers to divert stolen funds through this means but this new implementations by most of this sites that require them to wager their money and stake on certain games would scare them away.
 Sometime ago in my country the government decided to set limitations of a certain amount to have in a personal account, asides from business account, to help regulate money laundering and punish suspected bank account holders so many individuals who are guilty decide to use sports betting as a means of saving thereby making it difficult for the government to discover them, so if this wagering system was implemented by then it would scares then away due to the fear of losing everything when they gamble on games,because in the world of gambling no matter how little the odd is no games is 100% sure if not there wouldn't be any predictions on it. So I think this wagering system is another means to to avoid money laundering through sport betting.

[lienfaye]

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

This also prevents the casino from being involved in money laundering cases and is considered to support criminal acts being subject to legal sanctions, but not many casinos want to return user money and only freeze the winnings, it is rarely found, if the user does not meet the requirements requested by the casino then the account will be suspended also the money will be confiscated by the casino.

How will casino know that the black money is being deposited on any casino ? No casino checks where the money is coming from. They only care how much they get the deposits from their gamblers. Similarly if the specific gambler ( who is also a money launderer), wins and wagers the minimum requirement and cash out on the different side, the casino never care as to which address the money is being transferred.

So i guess that casino have least interest in catching the money launderers. All they care about is how they can get more people to gamble and increase their bankroll.

Well, I think it depends on the amount. Because if we're talking a huge figure here ($100k up) and let's say you deposited, able to fulfill the wagering requirement and then tried to withdraw. Certainly you'll be ask to comply the KYC procedure to verify your identity. There's a case wherein the casino asked the user (after not processing the withdrawal) to give additional documents of proof of funds to know where the money came from, part of their AML procedure. Though this is a rare case, still it depends on the situation and the money involved.

[Bitinity]

Well, I think it depends on the amount. Because if we're talking a huge figure here ($100k up) and let's say you deposited, able to fulfill the wagering requirement and then tried to withdraw. Certainly you'll be ask to comply the KYC procedure to verify your identity. There's a case wherein the casino asked the user (after not processing the withdrawal) to give additional documents of proof of funds to know where the money came from, part of their AML procedure. Though this is a rare case, still it depends on the situation and the money involved.

Depends on the casino, not all casino will ask KYC based on the amount of the money. Mostly yes, but I still believe that there are still some reputable casinos that wont ask players to complete KYC based on the withdrawal amount unless there is a specific term that the casino has a withdrawal limit to ask KYC. By the way, I think it is getting further from the main topic as the main topic is about the chance to wager with high odds to complete wagering requirement.

[ethereumhunter]

Well, I think it depends on the amount. Because if we're talking a huge figure here ($100k up) and let's say you deposited, able to fulfill the wagering requirement and then tried to withdraw. Certainly you'll be ask to comply the KYC procedure to verify your identity. There's a case wherein the casino asked the user (after not processing the withdrawal) to give additional documents of proof of funds to know where the money came from, part of their AML procedure. Though this is a rare case, still it depends on the situation and the money involved.

That happens to many people who use big money when disappointed because the casino asks them to do KYC. Some of them don't want to do KYC but that's the rules of the casino that must be fulfilled by its members, especially for those who use big money. So KYC is a way for the casino to know if there are members who want to launder their money at the casino so that the casino can prevent it before they can withdraw the money. And people who want to launder their money in the casino already know this, so maybe they are looking for other ways that won't require KYC.

[darkangel11]

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

Money laundering is just one of the options casinos have to close your account and take your money. It's a loophole they can use against you, not the other way round.
We're talking about crypto casinos here so there's no money laundering taking place but rather coin mixing. Is coin mixing money laundering is another debate because I'd say it isn't since cryptocurrency isn't money. The process of laundering starts and ends with exchanges. If someone sends crypto to a casino it's just a step in the whole process.

[ScamViruS]

~~

Money laundering is just one of the options casinos have to close your account and take your money. It's a loophole they can use against you, not the other way round.
We're talking about crypto casinos here so there's no money laundering taking place but rather coin mixing. Is coin mixing money laundering is another debate because I'd say it isn't since cryptocurrency isn't money. The process of laundering starts and ends with exchanges. If someone sends crypto to a casino it's just a step in the whole process.

This can be a riskier approach than other approaches to coin mixing. But how many things people do online, just as the casino wants to prevent the gambler, the gambler also wants to fool the casino by using the casino's system. But the casino is in an advantageous position here, as they can freeze the gambler's funds without any prior notice.

So I think since this question has arisen I think there is a reality behind it. Because not everyone thinks in a good way like us, there are many dishonest people who use the weakness of the system to continue their work.

[Webetcoins]

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

And why would a casino believe you are involved in money laundering if that is not really true? They would only suspect that you are involved in something illegal if you are doing activities that are suspicious and aren't normal, but if you know that you are clean and haven't been doing anything illegal or have any unusual activities, you shouldn't be worried at all because they can't confiscate your funds without any reason and you can always claim them back.

Also, one cannot find any casino that is both trusted and doesn't require KYC, even if it's not mandatory initially, a gambler will eventually be asked for it once they either make a big deposit or request a withdrawal that is higher than their average withdrawals which raises a red flag for the management.

[Hispo]

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

.... because I'd say it isn't since cryptocurrency isn't money. ...

It depends whom you ask, though.
I would say that in this instance cryptocurrency is actually money because it serves as medium to transmit value and without a third party. The fact a third party is not within the equation is the reason why the regulation on casinos and exchanges is getting tighter each day that comes and goes. With traditional FIAT casinos (specially those which only operate online) there is a higher risk the authorities would reach and freeze the money the criminals intend to clean up.  There comes the preference of criminals for cash, noone can tell either a bill is "clean" or not just by looking at it.

Even if we see Bitcoin and altcoins, not as money, but casino chips; they are still assets and hence can be laundered.

[Fortify]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

It's unlikely that much money laundering actually takes place through online casinos, at least not the major ones, because the way they've been structured actually makes it a lot easier to trace than you might think. Pretty much every big site now will also be enforcing kyc type actions on a regular basis, so any fake accounts will be detected after a minimum threshold and mule accounts are going to be reported to the tax or government authorities if there is the slightest suspicion. There are many other sites sitting in grey areas that are likely to be doing this stuff instead of casino's.

[Beparanf]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

It's unlikely that much money laundering actually takes place through online casinos, at least not the major ones, because the way they've been structured actually makes it a lot easier to trace than you might think. Pretty much every big site now will also be enforcing kyc type actions on a regular basis, so any fake accounts will be detected after a minimum threshold and mule accounts are going to be reported to the tax or government authorities if there is the slightest suspicion. There are many other sites sitting in grey areas that are likely to be doing this stuff instead of casino's.

Money launderer play smart since they can play normally in a casino using 50% winning chance rate and recover past of their loses through VIP reward rakeback and tournaments which they will surely win due to the volume of money they are pouring on their wager to launder money. Casino VIP rewards makes launderer can play a normal game without relying on a low risk games alone just to farm wager safely.

It's very to detect launderer these days even with KYC since they can simply hire a mule like what you said while they can play normally leaving no evidence for a casino to accuse them for committing such crime.

[TimeTeller]

It's unlikely that much money laundering actually takes place through online casinos, at least not the major ones, because the way they've been structured actually makes it a lot easier to trace than you might think. Pretty much every big site now will also be enforcing kyc type actions on a regular basis, so any fake accounts will be detected after a minimum threshold and mule accounts are going to be reported to the tax or government authorities if there is the slightest suspicion. There are many other sites sitting in grey areas that are likely to be doing this stuff instead of casino's.

They can get away with it if the money involved is small, however, if the money is significant enough, the site may really ask for KYC.
And that will possibly happen for gambling sites with license as they need to comply with their AML/KYC policy.
I still believe that most money laundering activities still do happen via fiat-based transactions.
But we can't totally discard the idea that some of them are already happening in crypto casinos.
Some casinos are only requiring 1-5x wagering requirements before withdrawal, so yes, that would be easy to comply with.

[klidex]

Well, I think it depends on the amount. Because if we're talking a huge figure here ($100k up) and let's say you deposited, able to fulfill the wagering requirement and then tried to withdraw. Certainly you'll be ask to comply the KYC procedure to verify your identity. There's a case wherein the casino asked the user (after not processing the withdrawal) to give additional documents of proof of funds to know where the money came from, part of their AML procedure. Though this is a rare case, still it depends on the situation and the money involved.

That happens to many people who use big money when disappointed because the casino asks them to do KYC. Some of them don't want to do KYC but that's the rules of the casino that must be fulfilled by its members, especially for those who use big money. So KYC is a way for the casino to know if there are members who want to launder their money at the casino so that the casino can prevent it before they can withdraw the money. And people who want to launder their money in the casino already know this, so maybe they are looking for other ways that won't require KYC.

As discussed by some people who are here if money laundering will be smarter like when a casino asks for KYC they will use other people's data or buy other people's data to do KYC and when buying KYC they will not buy carelessly of course money launderers know if depositing or withdrawing large amounts of money will later pass KYC level 3 or 4 so as to buy the data of people who can later pass KYC.
So there are many ways they can do it because money launderers have a lot of money they can do anything including cheating the casino with fake data.

[3kpk3]

I still believe that most money laundering activities still do happen via fiat-based transactions.
But we can't totally discard the idea that some of them are already happening in crypto casinos.
Some casinos are only requiring 1-5x wagering requirements before withdrawal, so yes, that would be easy to comply with.

Agreed. Money laundering is definitely happening in crypto gambling sites now and then despite all their restrictions based on what I observed. They are a lot smarter than we think basically.

It's almost impossible to stop them completely though they can be minimised through improvements to security protocols and rules regularly.

[n0ne]

I'm not sure how how is this happening around. Through some means there is big chance available to make untaxed money reach different destinations. In my country one incident took place and the police caught the people involved on the same day. The money involved is stolen money. Two persons have involved, they've played one on one match. Here one person losses and the other wins.

[goaldigger]

I still believe that most money laundering activities still do happen via fiat-based transactions.
But we can't totally discard the idea that some of them are already happening in crypto casinos.
Some casinos are only requiring 1-5x wagering requirements before withdrawal, so yes, that would be easy to comply with.

Agreed. Money laundering is definitely happening in crypto gambling sites now and then despite all their restrictions based on what I observed. They are a lot smarter than we think basically.

It's almost impossible to stop them completely though they can be minimised through improvements to security protocols and rules regularly.

They can easily buy someone’s information for the sake of KYC, so yes money laundering is still present and in crypto gambling there’s a big possibility for this. The site should strengthen their security, they should have more options to check the account and look for irregularities, if one category for laundering is present, they should start their investigations and freeze as well those account in connection of laundering.

[BenCodie]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

If someone joins a platform, makes a bet with the highest chance of winning and then creates a withdrawal, I am sure they would be questioned about the reason why they deposited in the first place.

There is also the variable that the site is rigged in a way. A 99℅ chance bet might be even more unlikely than what is advertised. That aside, if one bet loses, then all of a sudden the whole idea for the malicious user is no more, a huge loss is made instead.

Let anyone who disagrees try and learn the hard way. If you are just looking for privacy, use a privacy coin like Monero and/or use a mixer. There us no point locking yourself into a wagering restriction just for privacy, and I hope no one is doing that.

It should be noted to anyone as well that you can be questioned or ask for KYC no matter what kind of bets you make or when you withdraw. Many casinos lately are KYC'ing anyone they want, mostly with no justification.

[seleme]

There are methods to fight against money laundering and there are KYC, and AML rules on many gambling platforms for obvious reasons. If the gambler uses wagering methods to launder money, it is easily detectable by the system after withdrawing big amounts. So I doubt it is a good idea to use gambling sites for this purpose. There are other methods they use mostly NFT industry, AFAIK. Just my 2 cents.

[uneng]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I disagree with this rule, because it's too intrusive towards the gambler. Maybe the gambler made a big deposit, gambled a little bit, was extremely lucky, made 10%-20% profit and want cashout his entire balance without gambling further.

By this rule, he can't. He is forced to continue playing and risking his own prize until wagering the deposit value once, with serious chances of finishing this task in loss.

Moreover, there isn't anything like safe bets to increase wagering statistics of the account. If there were, every gamblers would increase their ranks on virtual casinos for extra rewards and benefits.

[letteredhub]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

This kind of requirement by those gambling sites as measure to tackle money laundering also puts innocent and clean money owners using such gambling sites in a disadvantageous position. This creates a wide window of opportunity for the gambling site to gain much as chances are that large numbers of losses is highly possible, a ratio of 70:30. And this includes both normal gamblers monies and those of launderers.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Those small odds doesn't guarantee you will win your bet as there are no easier or cheap odds in gambling, you just need to be lucky enough to pick the right odds with the right prediction else you would consistently be losing every wager you place.  We just got to avoid gambling sites that requires us to make wagering of total amounts in our account before we can make withdrawal, IMO, such requirement is far worse than that of kyc.

[harizen]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Correction, it doesn't need to wager the whole balance. Just a percentage of it e.g 20% of the deposit amount or in most cases, ranging from 1x to 2x turnover, etc. But honestly, just come to think of it, why users will just deposit an amount on that gambling site and then later on, will withdraw it without even playing? It's already alarming and will really lead to suspicious activity.

Aside from that, anything about AML policy is one of the requirements that a centralized gambling site should comply with. No choice but to follow.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

It's a wrong mindset to think that odds like 1.01x is a sure win. If it does, you should have already seen that as an effective strategy on most sports bettors. Specifically referring to saving the ass on the purpose of doing money laundering, kind of risky for me to just bet on that kind of odds to make the plan succesful.

[Vaskiy]

There are methods to fight against money laundering and there are KYC, and AML rules on many gambling platforms for obvious reasons. If the gambler uses wagering methods to launder money, it is easily detectable by the system after withdrawing big amounts. So I doubt it is a good idea to use gambling sites for this purpose. There are other methods they use mostly NFT industry, AFAIK. Just my 2 cents.

Amidst all these technical things money laundering still continues through the gambling industry. There are gambling sites in which the insiders help with it for a big commission. This is very rare to find, apart from that we were able to see huge deposits that are converted to gambling chips and used. Later the same gets withdrawn, which is the common form practised all around. Whatever the restrictions, people continue to find loopholes and get into these kind of activities.

[AmoreJaz]

There are methods to fight against money laundering and there are KYC, and AML rules on many gambling platforms for obvious reasons. If the gambler uses wagering methods to launder money, it is easily detectable by the system after withdrawing big amounts. So I doubt it is a good idea to use gambling sites for this purpose. There are other methods they use mostly NFT industry, AFAIK. Just my 2 cents.

Amidst all these technical things money laundering still continues through the gambling industry. There are gambling sites in which the insiders help with it for a big commission. This is very rare to find, apart from that we were able to see huge deposits that are converted to gambling chips and used. Later the same gets withdrawn, which is the common form practised all around. Whatever the restrictions, people continue to find loopholes and get into these kind of activities.

if the site is strict in complying with the regulations regarding AML+KYC, they can easily catch a gambler who is using the site for money laundering purposes. they can actually see the large deposits and the games history of the person and their withdrawal frequencies. that is, if the site cares for their compliance, but if not, people can easily get away with it.

[n0ne]

There are methods to fight against money laundering and there are KYC, and AML rules on many gambling platforms for obvious reasons. If the gambler uses wagering methods to launder money, it is easily detectable by the system after withdrawing big amounts. So I doubt it is a good idea to use gambling sites for this purpose. There are other methods they use mostly NFT industry, AFAIK. Just my 2 cents.

Amidst all these technical things money laundering still continues through the gambling industry. There are gambling sites in which the insiders help with it for a big commission. This is very rare to find, apart from that we were able to see huge deposits that are converted to gambling chips and used. Later the same gets withdrawn, which is the common form practised all around. Whatever the restrictions, people continue to find loopholes and get into these kind of activities.

if the site is strict in complying with the regulations regarding AML+KYC, they can easily catch a gambler who is using the site for money laundering purposes. they can actually see the large deposits and the games history of the person and their withdrawal frequencies. that is, if the site cares for their compliance, but if not, people can easily get away with it.

Gambling platforms can't easily make a statement on a person for money laundering. The deposit and withdrawal frequencies can be considered as a reason, but the same can be requested for clarification as Whale gamblers usually deposit and withdraw huge funds. Making a tag of money laundering on those gamblers will surely create some negative impression over the platform from the Whale players. This could affect the business, so platforms handle it in a much smoother way.

[GxSTxV]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

If it's a loophole, then all people must have thought about it besides the casino team itself. therefor they surely won't allow anyone to use this method to escape and trick the requirements and prevent money laundering systems. Wagering requirements are usually imposed only on large funds and deposits (legit casinos at least) not small amounts. And Logically nobody would attempt to launder a sum as low as $100 or $200 in a casino.
beside that risking more than $1000 in a casino and regardless of the winning percentage (as long as it's not 100%), should be enough to avoid money laundering especially for large sums of money. But nowadays there are other loopholes available to evade these rules and law enforcement which only few people knows them.

[serjent05]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

If it's a loophole, then all people must have thought about it besides the casino team itself. therefor they surely won't allow anyone to use this method to escape and trick the requirements and prevent money laundering systems. Wagering requirements are usually imposed only on large funds and deposits (legit casinos at least) not small amounts. And Logically nobody would attempt to launder a sum as low as $100 or $200 in a casino.
beside that risking more than $1000 in a casino and regardless of the winning percentage (as long as it's not 100%), should be enough to avoid money laundering especially for large sums of money. But nowadays there are other loopholes available to evade these rules and law enforcement which only few people knows them.

People had been using casinos to wash the history of their money whether they intend to launder money or not.  The casino had made aware of these actions and intentions reason why they setup the initial steps in combating this money laundering by requiring players to wager at least 1x (this differs in every casino).  the casino also implements a list of things that will trigger the security for money laundering.   

[khaled0111]

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

I always wonder, if the casino really cares about AML policies and want to comply with regulations and if they really want to prevent illigal activities such as money laundry then why they don't enforce kyc on registration before making any deposit. By doing this, no user will complain about being cheated.
The wagering requirement is a totally different matter. It's main purpose is to make the customer lose as much as possible and there is nothing wrong about that, BTW. Just my opinion.

[arwin100]

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

I always wonder, if the casino really cares about AML policies and want to comply with regulations and if they really want to prevent illigal activities such as money laundry then why they don't enforce kyc on registration before making any deposit. By doing this, no user will complain about being cheated.
The wagering requirement is a totally different matter. It's main purpose is to make the customer lose as much as possible and there is nothing wrong about that, BTW. Just my opinion.

That is the lapses of the implementation since they could really do that so the users could be aware and no complain will happen in long run. But maybe they are afraid that users will go away because they don't like this implementation but rather go with this requirements since the user will don't have a choice but to comply so thag they can withdraw their funds or continue to play on their casino.

Wager requirements is I think not enough since scammers could just meet the wager requirement and withdraw the funds they had stolen to the user so its best to have Kyc and wager required to drive away those money laundering on casinos.

[ethereumhunter]

As discussed by some people who are here if money laundering will be smarter like when a casino asks for KYC they will use other people's data or buy other people's data to do KYC and when buying KYC they will not buy carelessly of course money launderers know if depositing or withdrawing large amounts of money will later pass KYC level 3 or 4 so as to buy the data of people who can later pass KYC.
So there are many ways they can do it because money launderers have a lot of money they can do anything including cheating the casino with fake data.

Money launderers or people who want to do something with the money they get from the proceeds of their crime can solve the KYC problem, which is the obligation of a member on gambling sites or on exchange sites, or other sites. They are very familiar with KYC and also have sources that can provide valid data for KYC. This case reminds me of credit card crimes many years ago where a hacker who has valid credit card data will sell to people who need it and it is they who use their credit card to buy the things they want.

With today's technological advances, money launderers or people committing other crimes can continue their business and maybe even get bigger. They can seek and get what they want, so it keeps them from getting into trouble unless they get caught by the government or regulators.

[qwertyup23]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

This is interesting- so they can circumvent the requirement of wagering your whole balance before you can cash out/withdraw their funds in the gambling website? Hmm, maybe gambling websites and ushers can provide or at least monitor the amount of money being transferred from one account to another vs the amount they betted.

Though this may be the case, I do think that this is a grey area that needs to be discussed. Money laundering is something that has been consistently done and people are looking for alternatives and ways to circumvent the law and continue it.

[tusandii]

With today's technological advances, money launderers or people committing other crimes can continue their business and maybe even get bigger. They can seek and get what they want, so it keeps them from getting into trouble unless they get caught by the government or regulators.

Precisely with the development of more advanced technology, the government or law enforcement can trace sources of funds and money laundering activities more quickly.
Nowadays there are not a few tools that are used to be able to hack all forms of money circulation activities and that is why many money laundering cases can be solved and the perpetrators arrested.
Even in my country there are several cases of corruption that use crypto as a place to destroy evidence and in the end the law enforcement authorities can track and find all assets resulting from corruption to be used as evidence of the crime.

[Negotiation]

There are methods to fight against money laundering and there are KYC, and AML rules on many gambling platforms for obvious reasons. If the gambler uses wagering methods to launder money, it is easily detectable by the system after withdrawing big amounts. So I doubt it is a good idea to use gambling sites for this purpose. There are other methods they use mostly NFT industry, AFAIK. Just my 2 cents.

Amidst all these technical things money laundering still continues through the gambling industry. There are gambling sites in which the insiders help with it for a big commission. This is very rare to find, apart from that we were able to see huge deposits that are converted to gambling chips and used. Later the same gets withdrawn, which is the common form practised all around. Whatever the restrictions, people continue to find loopholes and get into these kind of activities.

I agree but apart from these it is very difficult to fight money laundering in online gambling. For this reason, many organizations have taken the initiative to amend the law to stop online gambling and consider gambling as a money laundering offense but it has not been possible. Many people hide their information in online gambling, so even if there are restrictions, it is not in reality. The main reason for entering into this kind of activity is that greed works in them they get more money for deposits and interest rates.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

There are methods to fight against money laundering and there are KYC, and AML rules on many gambling platforms for obvious reasons. If the gambler uses wagering methods to launder money, it is easily detectable by the system after withdrawing big amounts. So I doubt it is a good idea to use gambling sites for this purpose. There are other methods they use mostly NFT industry, AFAIK. Just my 2 cents.

Amidst all these technical things money laundering still continues through the gambling industry. There are gambling sites in which the insiders help with it for a big commission. This is very rare to find, apart from that we were able to see huge deposits that are converted to gambling chips and used. Later the same gets withdrawn, which is the common form practised all around. Whatever the restrictions, people continue to find loopholes and get into these kind of activities.

if the site is strict in complying with the regulations regarding AML+KYC, they can easily catch a gambler who is using the site for money laundering purposes. they can actually see the large deposits and the games history of the person and their withdrawal frequencies. that is, if the site cares for their compliance, but if not, people can easily get away with it.

Except it's a casino that does not have a wager requirement in place to go with kyc and any other type of necessarily verifications, then such casinos may likely be harboring launderias without even knowing.
I say this because, this days, kyc verification alone is no longer enough to be able to catch  those using the casino as a means to launder money., many supposed gamblers today use fake ID for verification, some use id's belonging to other people they may or may not know. So one of the most effective way of discouraging launders or scaring them away from from your casino is through the wager requirement, even though this feature most times end up hurting innocent gamblers.

[Rating Place]

It's not possible to do because of the amount of money someone would have to bet at 1.01. A person would need to bet $1,000,000 to launder $10,000. No one is going to do that and if a person tries to cashout $1,010,000 there is going to be KYC.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

It's not possible to do because of the amount of money someone would have to bet at 1.01. A person would need to bet $1,000,000 to launder $10,000. No one is going to do that and if a person tries to cashout $1,010,000 there is going to be KYC.

Well, the kyc thing aside, let's assume the casino in question do not trust in kyc like myself..
You already said it all when you said a person will need to bet $1m to launder $10k, no body in their right frame of mind will do such, that is risk a whole $1m dollars just to win $10,000 dollars, which they know that their chances of winning or losing it 50/50 percent, the chances of losing that money might even be higher from the chances of winning depending on the odds of the game.

Only one time have I come across a discussion on this forum on someone who wagered $1.4million dollar on a game with an odd of 1.01+, to make an extra $11k + if he wins, but unfortunately, he lost the game as well as the money to the casino, this tells how risky it is to take such risk.

[3kpk3]

It's not possible to do because of the amount of money someone would have to bet at 1.01. A person would need to bet $1,000,000 to launder $10,000. No one is going to do that and if a person tries to cashout $1,010,000 there is going to be KYC.

Money launderers come up with creative ways all the time to launder their funds. For example, they can simply launder small amounts again and again despite losing some funds to due to the house edge factor in order to bypass what you mentioned.

Only one time have I come across a discussion on this forum on someone who wagered $1.4million dollar on a game with an odd of 1.01+, to make an extra $11k + if he wins, but unfortunately, he lost the game as well as the money to the casino, this tells how risky it is to take such risk.

I remember that story since it happened very recently. It wasn't 1.01 odds actually. The actual odds were even lower than 1.01 which makes this loss even more worse.

He was most probably a whale based on my research.

[darkangel11]

It depends whom you ask, though.
I would say that in this instance cryptocurrency is actually money because it serves as medium to transmit value and without a third party.

OK. Does it mean that we can use anything as money, as long as that item transfers value? Let's say I agree to drive my neighbor to the mechanic and back and he pays me with fuel. We agree that he gives me dishwasher tablets, does that count as money? The tablets transferred value from him to me without a third party.

If me and my friend both have accounts in an RPG game like WoW or EVE and we use game credits to pay each other, does that count as money? If I pay him for weed by sending him credits in game, did I, according to the law, buy illegal goods, or did I barter for it?

Both bitcoin and game currencies aren't officially recognized anywhere in the world as a legal form of payment, apart from El Salvador and Central African Republic, if I'm not wrong.

The fact a third party is not within the equation is the reason why the regulation on casinos and exchanges is getting tighter each day that comes and goes. With traditional FIAT casinos (specially those which only operate online) there is a higher risk the authorities would reach and freeze the money the criminals intend to clean up.  There comes the preference of criminals for cash, noone can tell either a bill is "clean" or not just by looking at it.

Even if we see Bitcoin and altcoins, not as money, but casino chips; they are still assets and hence can be laundered.

So, all assets can be laundered... Are you aware that real estate is an asset? How can you launder a building?

[piebeyb]

It's not possible to do because of the amount of money someone would have to bet at 1.01. A person would need to bet $1,000,000 to launder $10,000. No one is going to do that and if a person tries to cashout $1,010,000 there is going to be KYC.

Money launderers come up with creative ways all the time to launder their funds. For example, they can simply launder small amounts again and again despite losing some funds to due to the house edge factor in order to bypass what you mentioned.

Whoever they are will definitely find loopholes but remember there is always a risk when doing things that are actually prohibited by the casino so money can be frozen if you don't complete KYC or for example provide proof of the results of the funds themselves, so don't ever try to find loopholes for that even though there are people who did it his way, but not a few also caught red-handed.

Casinos always have rules that must be respected by their customers, so it's best to obey those rules without having to look for loopholes to do something that has been banned, money laundering is an act that is not good, maybe I will give a little advice to anyone not to do that because our money can be frozen at any time by the casino. I'm sure the system in the casino will detect that.

[Hispo]

There are methods to fight against money laundering and there are KYC, and AML rules on many gambling platforms for obvious reasons. If the gambler uses wagering methods to launder money, it is easily detectable by the system after withdrawing big amounts. So I doubt it is a good idea to use gambling sites for this purpose. There are other methods they use mostly NFT industry, AFAIK. Just my 2 cents.

Now you mention it, I have read around the internet from people who did not think in a very favorable way about the NFTs, that the whole ecosystem of non fungible tokens was surging because it was being used to launder assets. To me it did not make much sense back then, because I assumed it was all about speculation and just people getting to excited on this new use of the blockchain of Ethereum and other altcoins.

However, I know understand how it would work. Climinals get altcoins for cash and then they buy NFTs which have absurd prices, they speculate a bit with them, perhaps even getting some profit out of it. Once they are done, they move back the value to altcoins and back to money, in the eyes of an outsider, the money came from NFT speculation and not from illicit activities.

[iv4n]

It's not possible to do because of the amount of money someone would have to bet at 1.01. A person would need to bet $1,000,000 to launder $10,000. No one is going to do that and if a person tries to cashout $1,010,000 there is going to be KYC.

I think it's easy to spot an abuser... especially over a long period of time. Simply by checking all the relevant factors, deposits/withdrawals, and on-site bets. And casinos probably have some "special techniques" for catching people in their trying to cheat the system.

This can be a "loophole", but people who engage in this stuff risk their accounts and the money they have on the site. Probably the same people come here to complain when they get busted.

[Hispo]

It depends whom you ask, though.
I would say that in this instance cryptocurrency is actually money because it serves as medium to transmit value and without a third party.

OK. Does it mean that we can use anything as money, as long as that item transfers value? Let's say I agree to drive my neighbor to the mechanic and back and he pays me with fuel. We agree that he gives me dishwasher tablets, does that count as money? The tablets transferred value from him to me without a third party.

If me and my friend both have accounts in an RPG game like WoW or EVE and we use game credits to pay each other, does that count as money? If I pay him for weed by sending him credits in game, did I, according to the law, buy illegal goods, or did I barter for it?

Both bitcoin and game currencies aren't officially recognized anywhere in the world as a legal form of payment, apart from El Salvador and Central African Republic, if I'm not wrong.

The fact a third party is not within the equation is the reason why the regulation on casinos and exchanges is getting tighter each day that comes and goes. With traditional FIAT casinos (specially those which only operate online) there is a higher risk the authorities would reach and freeze the money the criminals intend to clean up.  There comes the preference of criminals for cash, noone can tell either a bill is "clean" or not just by looking at it.

Even if we see Bitcoin and altcoins, not as money, but casino chips; they are still assets and hence can be laundered.

So, all assets can be laundered... Are you aware that real estate is an asset? How can you launder a building?

That is why I said it depends whom you ask whether Bitcoin is money or not.
To many Bitcoin is an asset trying to be money, to others is money which has become an asset. Before FIAT and banknote was invented gold and silver were money (golden and silver coins).

Also, when we talk about assets as houses, real state or even goods like cars and similar ones which do not have so much liquidity as Bitcoin does, I am pretty sure that criminals have used real state to launder money, the illicit asset itself is not the property but the property can be used as a tool to store value which was already laundered.

Again, it depends whom you ask. We could further dive into this topic but I am afraid we would be derailing a lil bit too much this thread.

[Bushdark]

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

I always wonder, if the casino really cares about AML policies and want to comply with regulations and if they really want to prevent illigal activities such as money laundry then why they don't enforce kyc on registration before making any deposit. By doing this, no user will complain about being cheated.
The wagering requirement is a totally different matter. It's main purpose is to make the customer lose as much as possible and there is nothing wrong about that, BTW. Just my opinion.

If all casinos start enforcing KYC on there customers then many if them will lose customers because many of the people that are gambling frequently on casinos might not even be up to the age that are expected to gamble why others might decided to leave gambling because they are not ready to exposed there identities to online casinos. KYC is a tools the government can use to fight casinos which will make them to lose the kind of traffics they've been having on a daily basis. There are lost of underaged gamblers that are making use of different non KYC casinos because there is no restrictions to there gambling activities.

[Mahanton]

It's not possible to do because of the amount of money someone would have to bet at 1.01. A person would need to bet $1,000,000 to launder $10,000. No one is going to do that and if a person tries to cashout $1,010,000 there is going to be KYC.

I think it's easy to spot an abuser... especially over a long period of time. Simply by checking all the relevant factors, deposits/withdrawals, and on-site bets. And casinos probably have some "special techniques" for catching people in their trying to cheat the system.

This can be a "loophole", but people who engage in this stuff risk their accounts and the money they have on the site. Probably the same people come here to complain when they get busted.

Casinos arent really that blind on checking out whenever they have noticed some unusual or suspicious kind of activity on a certain individual or user on which it would be normal that they would really be strict when it comes to this because this would really be costing them big on the time that they would really be able to have those legal issues if ever they wont really be able to resolved it out.Its true that it would be impossible that they cant really be able to spot an abuser or something that really just using the platform to wash off their coins but come to mind that if a certain huge depositor would really be making up some wagering then i highly doubt that
they would be stopped midway considering that house do always win at the end and having the chance that would be busting up that huge balance in trying out to reach out that wager threshold for them to make withdrawal and this is something that they might be observing but on the time that they have seen that was their main motive then this is the time that they would really be requiring those further kyc thing.

[ethereumhunter]

Precisely with the development of more advanced technology, the government or law enforcement can trace sources of funds and money laundering activities more quickly.
Nowadays there are not a few tools that are used to be able to hack all forms of money circulation activities and that is why many money laundering cases can be solved and the perpetrators arrested.
Even in my country there are several cases of corruption that use crypto as a place to destroy evidence and in the end the law enforcement authorities can track and find all assets resulting from corruption to be used as evidence of the crime.

Indeed, the government can trace the sources of funds and money laundering activities. However, it may still be difficult for them to do so because money launderers also have advanced technology to hide how they carry out money laundering. We also have to think that these money launderers can use advanced technology well because, with that much money, they can even buy the technologies they need. And if the government catches any money launderers, they may not know any other way so the government can track them down and catch them.

[tusandii]

-snip-

Indeed, the government can trace the sources of funds and money laundering activities. However, it may still be difficult for them to do so because money launderers also have advanced technology to hide how they carry out money laundering. We also have to think that these money launderers can use advanced technology well because, with that much money, they can even buy the technologies they need. And if the government catches any money launderers, they may not know any other way so the government can track them down and catch them.

Have you forgotten that the security system in government and law enforcement also has a team that is truly skilled in hacking, so no matter how sophisticated the technology used by the criminals, it doesn't take long for them to be identified or tracked.
So far, almost every country has a hacker team to help with all activities related to software, making it difficult for them to get away with crimes committed in the crypto and gambling industries.

[arwin100]

-snip-

Indeed, the government can trace the sources of funds and money laundering activities. However, it may still be difficult for them to do so because money launderers also have advanced technology to hide how they carry out money laundering. We also have to think that these money launderers can use advanced technology well because, with that much money, they can even buy the technologies they need. And if the government catches any money launderers, they may not know any other way so the government can track them down and catch them.

Have you forgotten that the security system in government and law enforcement also has a team that is truly skilled in hacking, so no matter how sophisticated the technology used by the criminals, it doesn't take long for them to be identified or tracked.
So far, almost every country has a hacker team to help with all activities related to software, making it difficult for them to get away with crimes committed in the crypto and gambling industries.

For now those criminals can escape on the crimes they commit especially when they didn't disclose their identities and use some existing methods to hide the track of their crimes. This is why Kyc together with other requirements imposed on casino also with the other financial platforms so that they will not be used on money laundering scheme and if they got used they can easily track the identity of the criminals. Money laundering still happen in crypto space since those criminals still see that that crypto still a good instrument for them to easily get rich.

[summonerrk]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Maybe I'm wrong, but it turns out that under such conditions it will FIRST be necessary to win one, even any (very small) victory.
So that the bet need to play a winning one. And it's not easy anymore. After all, in almost any game your chances will be 50-50 percent. This means that at this stage half of the players will not be able to withdraw, and will have to play on. Then they will have to double the bet and play again. And here again half of the players will be able to withdraw money. But half will be forced to play again.  It really turns out that many people will be able to withdraw money easily, even if not immediately, but most likely by the fourth rate. So the condition is really easy to fulfill.

Apparently, casinos are trying to attract users in this way, sacrificing the initial revenue from users.

[danadc]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Maybe I'm wrong, but it turns out that under such conditions it will FIRST be necessary to win one, even any (very small) victory.
So that the bet need to play a winning one. And it's not easy anymore. After all, in almost any game your chances will be 50-50 percent. This means that at this stage half of the players will not be able to withdraw, and will have to play on. Then they will have to double the bet and play again. And here again half of the players will be able to withdraw money. But half will be forced to play again.  It really turns out that many people will be able to withdraw money easily, even if not immediately, but most likely by the fourth rate. So the condition is really easy to fulfill.

Apparently, casinos are trying to attract users in this way, sacrificing the initial revenue from users.

What I have seen is that the players do not have those possibilities, you speak of 50-50, I think it could be 60-40, due to the house advantage and it is very difficult for us to do something about it, the washing thing of money you can put a lot of money in a casino account, but the only way that could not be blamed for money laundering is for the player to bet that money in its entirety because if he makes small bets and then decides to withdraw everything It is very suspicious, I would see it that way, and in a casino where they have security for everything, they will surely detect it , that is something that cannot be denied.

[ethereumhunter]

Have you forgotten that the security system in government and law enforcement also has a team that is truly skilled in hacking, so no matter how sophisticated the technology used by the criminals, it doesn't take long for them to be identified or tracked.
So far, almost every country has a hacker team to help with all activities related to software, making it difficult for them to get away with crimes committed in the crypto and gambling industries.

Yes, I remember that. But the thing is, it's not just government teams and law enforcement that have a good security system. The hackers or people who want to break the rules also have a good security system. If so, it would depend on the people running the system and the morale of each person. And if we talk about morals, how many people used to follow the system but because of offers of corruption or big rewards, they immediately joined the other side. Maybe this cyber war will continue and the country's security hacker team will track down all the people doing illegal things to reduce the amount of illegal activities in their country but to wipe them out completely, that is impossible. One can be eradicated, but if more appear, how to eradicate them?

[btc_angela]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I wouldn't say it's a loophole though, for gambling sites, this could just be a way to know that gamblers are really putting their money to play that's it. They might not think of it as coming to some criminal activities or it is tainted.

If you satisfy the gambling sites, then you are free to do whatever you want. But as far as I know, you really need to wager that big money and lost it to them before you can withdraw. Which means you need to deposit more.

[piebeyb]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I wouldn't say it's a loophole though, for gambling sites, this could just be a way to know that gamblers are really putting their money to play that's it. They might not think of it as coming to some criminal activities or it is tainted.

If you satisfy the gambling sites, then you are free to do whatever you want. But as far as I know, you really need to wager that big money and lost it to them before you can withdraw. Which means you need to deposit more.

I think only stupid people want to launder money through gambling sites, I'm not sure either that every deposit that is deposited at the casino in large amounts will be easily withdrawn again, of course there will be many risks of losing that money. that's why I sometimes wonder why they do it in such a ridiculous way by bypassing gambling sites. even though it is clear that it is easily detected by the system

Not thinking about such people about the huge risk they face even though there are many other ways compared to bypassing the gambling platform is the same as giving money to the gambling platform and depositing it for them. moreover the very complicated requirements of the gambling platform when withdrawing money must meet the requirements which are at high risk of losing everything.

[delfastTions]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I wouldn't say it's a loophole though, for gambling sites, this could just be a way to know that gamblers are really putting their money to play that's it. They might not think of it as coming to some criminal activities or it is tainted.

If you satisfy the gambling sites, then you are free to do whatever you want. But as far as I know, you really need to wager that big money and lost it to them before you can withdraw. Which means you need to deposit more.

I think only stupid people want to launder money through gambling sites, I'm not sure either that every deposit that is deposited at the casino in large amounts will be easily withdrawn again, of course there will be many risks of losing that money. that's why I sometimes wonder why they do it in such a ridiculous way by bypassing gambling sites. even though it is clear that it is easily detected by the system

Not thinking about such people about the huge risk they face even though there are many other ways compared to bypassing the gambling platform is the same as giving money to the gambling platform and depositing it for them. moreover the very complicated requirements of the gambling platform when withdrawing money must meet the requirements which are at high risk of losing everything.

In fact, you have to be not a very smart person to generally come up with such ways of legalizing your income, in order to somehow “win” money in a casino in a cunning way and thus turn it into money legally received by such a person. 
I can hardly imagine that after sending some serious large amount to a deposit and playing a little in a casino, perhaps even losing a little, such a person will begin to transfer the deposit to his account and this will be enough for his money to be legalized.  All such financial transactions are simply tracked and verified.  And in any case, the question remains from where the original transactions were sent to deposit at the casino. 
This data in the case of cryptocurrencies can obviously still be identified as the original money obtained by criminal means.  So it’s generally not clear why such stupid money laundering schemes are needed. 
I am sure that these methods are almost never used by anyone.  And I hope all the major well-known casinos prohibit such operations on their sites.  For them, it is obvious that it is much better to be law-abiding than to engage in dubious transactions.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

-snip-

Indeed, the government can trace the sources of funds and money laundering activities. However, it may still be difficult for them to do so because money launderers also have advanced technology to hide how they carry out money laundering. We also have to think that these money launderers can use advanced technology well because, with that much money, they can even buy the technologies they need. And if the government catches any money launderers, they may not know any other way so the government can track them down and catch them.

Have you forgotten that the security system in government and law enforcement also has a team that is truly skilled in hacking, so no matter how sophisticated the technology used by the criminals, it doesn't take long for them to be identified or tracked.
So far, almost every country has a hacker team to help with all activities related to software, making it difficult for them to get away with crimes committed in the crypto and gambling industries.

For now those criminals can escape on the crimes they commit especially when they didn't disclose their identities and use some existing methods to hide the track of their crimes. This is why Kyc together with other requirements imposed on casino also with the other financial platforms so that they will not be used on money laundering scheme and if they got used they can easily track the identity of the criminals. Money laundering still happen in crypto space since those criminals still see that that crypto still a good instrument for them to easily get rich.

    -    I agree with what you said, and I feel that even now there are still many bad people doing that, we just don't really know who they are. And that is what always hinders any government of the country from stopping and finding the people behind it.

I then remembered that I read something here in the forum that a new movie that Tom Cruise will make, Mission Impossible, where his Villain here used cryptocurrency, not Bitcoin, the transaction worth 100M$ was used in the movie. Something that is also good to watch for sure.

[pakhitheboss]

For now those criminals can escape on the crimes they commit especially when they didn't disclose their identities and use some existing methods to hide the track of their crimes. This is why Kyc together with other requirements imposed on casino also with the other financial platforms so that they will not be used on money laundering scheme and if they got used they can easily track the identity of the criminals. Money laundering still happen in crypto space since those criminals still see that that crypto still a good instrument for them to easily get rich.

They are criminals and they know how to work around KYC norms and I am pretty sure they might have already discovered a loophole. Money laundering is a global issue and it becomes especially threatening when the money laundered is used for terrorist activities. With cryptocurrency which is privacy focused it is not easy to track the money and through the mixer, you can also make Bitcoin untraceable. If the government was so successful in tracing they would not have stopped both fiat and crypto money laundering by now.

[LUCKMCFLY]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Hmm this makes a bit of sense but I think the best way to say this is, it will increase your chance of winning more but it won't kill the chances of losing money, instead of thinking of how much you will make using this technique think about how much you will lose using this method.

The chances of losing is still available and it will be even more painful if you lose this money because you are betting on low odds, I have tried this with a brother who is a football fan, even the lowest of odds doesn't bring wins most times, to me I see not much difference.

That point is interesting, because obviously in craps games you can put a multiplier of that type, and you know, on one occasion when I was playing a lot I made a very big bet and I lost it, obviously I used the martingale and I lost it again, and I repeated the martingale and I won it, but the profits are very minimal, but the risk is still high, I don't know what internal configuration this game has and it can be configured so that one decreases the chances of winning more, but from experience I did it myself, but in the case If I had put the entire balance, I would have lost it, so there was no point in doing it again, but that is the consequence.

Whenever the martingale is used, it is one of the problems that arises for us as players, I say a problem because it is a way of losing money quickly, so when we see it from that point of view it is the biggest problem, because without a balance you cannot play unless it is in demo mode, although it is not just the same, when we have all these premises, if we have our money there to use strategies that are not so reckless, our money may last a little longer and we have more opportunities to win. continue playing or play another game, these things are normal, sometimes we can play daods, then we get tired and we can think of a roulette wheel, so those options are what we should see.

Money in a casino will always be a way for us to have fun, even though the safest thing is to lose playing, we must take care of it, it is not known when there is a good touch of luck we have to withdraw, we must not stop thinking about these things.

[paxmao]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

To be honest, most people who need to "do the laundry" do accept that it carries some cost and that they will not recover 100% of their initial funds. It is simpler and more profitable to go and do some "chipmixing" and that usually will make the funds nearly impossible to track in crypto, which is usually more than enough for most purposes. For large quantities, other schemes are devised with property and real state.

[blockman]

A gambler may still be able to find some loophole but casinos are no dumb when it's all about with these matters. They'll be having those triggering alerts if an account/user is doing something off the coast and that's why there's always those complaints that we're seeing posted here about their delay of withdrawals. The blame goes to the casino where they're gambling but in the first place, they are aware that money laundering is prohibited in most of them because they're being regulated by the country where they're operating.

[Bitinity]

I am sure that these methods are almost never used by anyone.  And I hope all the major well-known casinos prohibit such operations on their sites. 

That's why there is a wagering requirement for deposit (1x-2x) in most casinos. This term is implemented to avoid such money laundering attempt. As what the main idea of this topic which is related to the chance for money launderers to do their laundry in casino by using high odds strategy while playing, this strategy will not help the launderer to avoid the risk of losing all the deposited money. Once again I have to say that betting with high odds is not a loophole in stopping money laundering because there is a big risk.

[arwin100]

I am sure that these methods are almost never used by anyone.  And I hope all the major well-known casinos prohibit such operations on their sites. 

That's why there is a wagering requirement for deposit (1x-2x) in most casinos. This term is implemented to avoid such money laundering attempt. As what the main idea of this topic which is related to the chance for money launderers to do their laundry in casino by using high odds strategy while playing, this strategy will not help the launderer to avoid the risk of losing all the deposited money. Once again I have to say that betting with high odds is not a loophole in stopping money laundering because there is a big risk.

If no KYC involve and only have wagering requirements involve maybe this can be easily exploit by money launderer since they could still wager the required amount then proceed to withdraw the funds stolen from somewhere. There's nothing impossible if there huge money involve so criminals could still get away with it, unlike if they implement KYC which required other necessary details like providing selfie then provably this could stop this activity from any casino.

[maydna]

A gambler may still be able to find some loophole but casinos are no dumb when it's all about with these matters. They'll be having those triggering alerts if an account/user is doing something off the coast and that's why there's always those complaints that we're seeing posted here about their delay of withdrawals. The blame goes to the casino where they're gambling but in the first place, they are aware that money laundering is prohibited in most of them because they're being regulated by the country where they're operating.

The casinos must know it somehow because the casinos own the business. In having a gambling business, the casino must have had special ways to deal with these fraudulent gamblers and be able to find out which gamblers did it. Perhaps it takes time because it depends on the security team's work from the casino, but on average, it doesn't take long for them to find it. Gamblers who commit money laundering with the excuse of using big money must be prepared for all the risks, and if they decide to continue using gambling, it means they are ready for all the risks.

[Bitinity]

-----

-----

If no KYC involve and only have wagering requirements involve maybe this can be easily exploit by money launderer since they could still wager the required amount then proceed to withdraw the funds stolen from somewhere. There's nothing impossible if there huge money involve so criminals could still get away with it, unlike if they implement KYC which required other necessary details like providing selfie then provably this could stop this activity from any casino.

As long as I know, money launderer is smart people who will not take the risk to lose their money by wagering it in casino especially if it is about huge amount of money. Even if there is no KYC, money launderer will not be that stupid to launder their money in casino imo. Lets say money launderer is fine with KYC, they will not choose casino due to the big risk. They can split their money into several exchanges, trade it few times (as trading will be safer than gambling).

[LUCKMCFLY]

As long the chance isnt 0% then there's always a chance on losing up your entire bankroll or money in an instant.Its true that no one on their right minds would really be having that kind of wagering just to pull out

their laundered money.Its the most bad idea on doing so, although when we do speak about the odds then its really that less risk because of the odds but in overall if you dont want to blown up your money then
its better not to do so. Money launderers wouldnt really be so dumb on doing such thing which they do know that it is way too risky. They would rather be making use of Mixers
than on making up bets on 99% chance of winning or less which it cant really make out assurance that you would be able to get out without busting your balance.
They wont really be that so easily making out such decision if they do know that they cant really take out an advantage which its a common approach.

Imagine they deposited their money to a scam casino website like 1xbit and get scammed. There are some shady casinos as well which trigger KYC whenever a player makes a large amount of deposit. It's super easy to use mixers these days. But, have to choose a reliable platform like Yomix. If it's a small amount of money, I don't think any platform cares about it. But, casinos might trigger KYC if they notice some suspicious betting pattern from a particular user.

However, I have seen a wallet like freewallet.org which scams their user by asking for a KYC which is not possible to pass anyway. The only reliable way is using a mixer. Sometimes mixers get seized as well. So, have to be careful about that as well.

If they deposit their money to the scam casino, it is their risk because there is a possibility they will be fooled and lose all the money. And that is a loss for them because they cannot carry out their plans to wash their money. Maybe they can make money laundering through other places and not in gambling because they can risk losing money if they don't get a suitable casino.

Yes, the mixer will also be their choice in washing the money because it looks like it will be safer for them to avoid tracking from the government or regulator. But they will look for comfortable places to wash their money, and washing money is not new to playing in the business because they must have had places they have often used to wash their money.

In any casino, alarms always go off when there are large deposits, and if it is a fraudulent casino, then they make it easy for the casino, because now things are different, because there is money and if it is a lot, then a fraudulent casino is not going to matter to them. the accusations of fraud that they make because that is the way things are when it comes to money , now if a Person or whoever decides to make or deposit money to launder money in a casino, make it clear that they must send documentation and nothing more, if they he does a blatant and obvious Investigation that they are going to get to where he is and resides then it Would be a rookie felon mistake.

We when we are in a casino we can see that Things when we make normal Deposits , that is to say 500-900usd can be seen well , and the casino is seeing what a player's style of play is like , obviously if they need to make a withdrawal then they have What to follow the rules, otherwise if the casino does not request any type of KYC or something, then it continues to operate normally , however, it is also necessary to highlight that if a person makes larger deposits , the casino will try to see this more Carefully Due to what is called "money laundering" , it is for this reason that over time a player can become more reliable for the casino, however, a casino must always follow up on its clients and demand the documents that are necessary until good , It seems that everything is in confidence, and there are no associated problems.

[TimeTeller]

A gambler may still be able to find some loophole but casinos are no dumb when it's all about with these matters. They'll be having those triggering alerts if an account/user is doing something off the coast and that's why there's always those complaints that we're seeing posted here about their delay of withdrawals. The blame goes to the casino where they're gambling but in the first place, they are aware that money laundering is prohibited in most of them because they're being regulated by the country where they're operating.

The casinos must know it somehow because the casinos own the business. In having a gambling business, the casino must have had special ways to deal with these fraudulent gamblers and be able to find out which gamblers did it. Perhaps it takes time because it depends on the security team's work from the casino, but on average, it doesn't take long for them to find it. Gamblers who commit money laundering with the excuse of using big money must be prepared for all the risks, and if they decide to continue using gambling, it means they are ready for all the risks.

It won't take long because they can easily see the deposit amounts of their gamblers.
Now, for most high rollers, casinos are requiring to undergo KYC depending on how strict the casino is complying with the regulations.
If the casino doesn't care as some won't bother as long as they are earning from it, but usually issues arise when the player wins big.
And that will be the subject of investigation and they will dig more about the transactions of that player.
But if you are a high roller, always best to think that the casino would ask your credentials, whether you are winning or losing so you will not be caught in the middle with your funds frozen.

[Mahanton]

A gambler may still be able to find some loophole but casinos are no dumb when it's all about with these matters. They'll be having those triggering alerts if an account/user is doing something off the coast and that's why there's always those complaints that we're seeing posted here about their delay of withdrawals. The blame goes to the casino where they're gambling but in the first place, they are aware that money laundering is prohibited in most of them because they're being regulated by the country where they're operating.

The casinos must know it somehow because the casinos own the business. In having a gambling business, the casino must have had special ways to deal with these fraudulent gamblers and be able to find out which gamblers did it. Perhaps it takes time because it depends on the security team's work from the casino, but on average, it doesn't take long for them to find it. Gamblers who commit money laundering with the excuse of using big money must be prepared for all the risks, and if they decide to continue using gambling, it means they are ready for all the risks.

It won't take long because they can easily see the deposit amounts of their gamblers.
Now, for most high rollers, casinos are requiring to undergo KYC depending on how strict the casino is complying with the regulations.
If the casino doesn't care as some won't bother as long as they are earning from it, but usually issues arise when the player wins big.
And that will be the subject of investigation and they will dig more about the transactions of that player.
But if you are a high roller, always best to think that the casino would ask your credentials, whether you are winning or losing so you will not be caught in the middle with your funds frozen.

If you are a big wagerer then expect those things that would really happen into you, considering that these platforms are regulated now or abiding government rules and regulations which
it would really be just that normal that they would really be abiding those laws and would be applying it out on those people or gamblers who had been using up their platform.On the time that you do
able to hit up those deposit threshold or even on withdrawals then expect that you would be experiencing such verification but as long you are dealing with sites that are reputable and known
then i would say that there's no much to be worried on but i cant really blame out people on not to have such thing on the time that we are talking huge money on here on which it is
something that cant really be ignored.

Speaking about loop hole about moneylaundering then no one on their right minds that those launderers would really be making out this kind of option.It is really just that way too risky.
Why they cant just make use of mixers instead?

[Fivestar4everMVP]

A gambler may still be able to find some loophole but casinos are no dumb when it's all about with these matters. They'll be having those triggering alerts if an account/user is doing something off the coast and that's why there's always those complaints that we're seeing posted here about their delay of withdrawals. The blame goes to the casino where they're gambling but in the first place, they are aware that money laundering is prohibited in most of them because they're being regulated by the country where they're operating.

The casinos must know it somehow because the casinos own the business. In having a gambling business, the casino must have had special ways to deal with these fraudulent gamblers and be able to find out which gamblers did it. Perhaps it takes time because it depends on the security team's work from the casino, but on average, it doesn't take long for them to find it. Gamblers who commit money laundering with the excuse of using big money must be prepared for all the risks, and if they decide to continue using gambling, it means they are ready for all the risks.

It won't take long because they can easily see the deposit amounts of their gamblers.
Now, for most high rollers, casinos are requiring to undergo KYC depending on how strict the casino is complying with the regulations.
If the casino doesn't care as some won't bother as long as they are earning from it, but usually issues arise when the player wins big.
And that will be the subject of investigation and they will dig more about the transactions of that player.
But if you are a high roller, always best to think that the casino would ask your credentials, whether you are winning or losing so you will not be caught in the middle with your funds frozen.

You are right, casinos know every bit of what there customers are does or are doing, a proof to this is, think and tell if someone has ever cheated in a casino game, and won as a result of cheating, then he or she placed a withdrawal request, and the casino processed the withdrawal request without questioning the user through either asking them to pass kyc verification or in any other form?, there have been none I know of.
So indeed, casinos know everything that goes on around their platform, if a casino allows a supposed gambler to use their platform to launder money, and the casino kept quiet about it, know it that the casino benefitted huge from that act and that is why they kept quiet, in such a situation, when the wrath of the law come in force, such casino will go in for it most especially if they can not provide the personal data of the said user who carried out the operatin.

[Wiwo]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily bypass this wagering requirement?

Ops you should not that gambling games are unpredictable and no matter how low the odds are it does not determine the winning ratio of the games,  in fact, sometimes,  casinos try to play tricks on gamblers by obviously giving the low odds to the weak team and giving a very high odds for the stronger team,  this could easily mislead the gamblers into selecting the wrong team if he follows the odds.

So for such no matter how sensible the alleged money launderer is, there is still a tendency that he will lose the money if he wagered the total balance trying to meet to 1x wager requirements on all deposits.

[tusandii]

Have you forgotten that the security system in government and law enforcement also has a team that is truly skilled in hacking, so no matter how sophisticated the technology used by the criminals, it doesn't take long for them to be identified or tracked.
So far, almost every country has a hacker team to help with all activities related to software, making it difficult for them to get away with crimes committed in the crypto and gambling industries.

Yes, I remember that. But the thing is, it's not just government teams and law enforcement that have a good security system. The hackers or people who want to break the rules also have a good security system. If so, it would depend on the people running the system and the morale of each person. And if we talk about morals, how many people used to follow the system but because of offers of corruption or big rewards, they immediately joined the other side. Maybe this cyber war will continue and the country's security hacker team will track down all the people doing illegal things to reduce the amount of illegal activities in their country but to wipe them out completely, that is impossible. One can be eradicated, but if more appear, how to eradicate them?

Even so, a criminal cannot do much when he has to be confronted with orders or law enforcement.
Maybe criminals can use hackers to help but the hacker network owned by the government is also reliable enough that they can even track and fight the hackers used by some of these criminals.
I'm sure that corruption or embezzlement of funds within the government system occurs in any country and the only country with the lowest corruption cases, in my opinion, is only North Korea.

[Kakmakr]

I usually configure "Dice" to give me a 98% win chance to wager a lot more, but I still lose just over $10 for every $1000 wagered. So I lose about 1.1% of my own money, when I wager at 98% win chance.

Now the goal of any money launderer are not to lose any money whilst they are doing it... and 1.1% of $1 000 000 = $11 000! So, it adds up if you are laundering drug money of several million Dollars every week.

It is easier to setup "fake" businesses and to launder money through the Fiat Banking system.... than doing it through a online Casino, where the risk and security are so much higher. 

[piebeyb]

I usually configure "Dice" to give me a 98% win chance to wager a lot more, but I still lose just over $10 for every $1000 wagered. So I lose about 1.1% of my own money, when I wager at 98% win chance.

Now the goal of any money launderer are not to lose any money whilst they are doing it... and 1.1% of $1 000 000 = $11 000! So, it adds up if you are laundering drug money of several million Dollars every week.

It is easier to setup "fake" businesses and to launder money through the Fiat Banking system.... than doing it through a online Casino, where the risk and security are so much higher. 

Only a fool wants to launder his money in the casino because I'm sure it will be detrimental too and lose a few percent of money, if he launders big money losing 0.1% is big enough, I think besides you try it too there must be other big losses you've ever had tried it by others as well, even though there is a loophole in the casino I'm sure people won't try it.

I also believe that people who launder money will not be possible in the casino even though there are opportunities and loopholes, surely in the way you think of also setting up a fake business and laundering money or trying to launder money in other ways, after all there are many ways to launder money without having to leave to the casino and use that platform. 

[Blitzboy]

I usually configure "Dice" to give me a 98% win chance to wager a lot more, but I still lose just over $10 for every $1000 wagered. So I lose about 1.1% of my own money, when I wager at 98% win chance.

Now the goal of any money launderer are not to lose any money whilst they are doing it... and 1.1% of $1 000 000 = $11 000! So, it adds up if you are laundering drug money of several million Dollars every week.

It is easier to setup "fake" businesses and to launder money through the Fiat Banking system.... than doing it through a online Casino, where the risk and security are so much higher. 

Sure, losing 1.1% of your wager at a 98% win chance may seem minimal, but remember the house always has an edge! The more you play, the more the numbers catch up. As for money laundering, that's a murky pond you'd best avoid.

Funny you mentioned setting up "fake" businesses - that sounds like a plot from a crime drama series. Still, you're right; the Fiat Banking system does make it easier to camouflage illicit activities. Not advocating for it, just saying. And if your money is clean, you wouldnt need to go through this, would you?

Remember, online casinos are there for entertainment, not a laundromat for dirty money. Be a sport, play fair, and keep your nose clean.

[knowngunman]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Does low odds guarantee winning? Capital NO! The loophole can not be completely absent as far as technology is advancing. The bookies here will allow you to deposit up to a maximum amount but will not required you to wager all the amount before you can withdraw. It depends on how active the account is before that suspicious deposit. Some will allow you to withdraw the remaining balance after wagering with 10% of the total deposit. In this case, if the amount is very huge, one can sacrifice the ten percent. It might win or lose. KYC is however mandatory before you can withdraw.

[Wapfika]

I usually configure "Dice" to give me a 98% win chance to wager a lot more, but I still lose just over $10 for every $1000 wagered. So I lose about 1.1% of my own money, when I wager at 98% win chance.

Now the goal of any money launderer are not to lose any money whilst they are doing it... and 1.1% of $1 000 000 = $11 000! So, it adds up if you are laundering drug money of several million Dollars every week.

Casino usually offer VIP rewards for players such as rakeback that will cover some of this loses plus the tournament prize in case there is since the volume of this sample will guarantee a place on any tournament. I think no one will realyy do this just to gamble since it’s very obvious for the casino to detect a laundering with this method since this is just pure safe bet without the goal of winning any huge amount that is proportion to his total bankroll.

It is easier to setup "fake" businesses and to launder money through the Fiat Banking system.... than doing it through a online Casino, where the risk and security are so much higher. 

This is very easy to track since fiat transaction on the business is audited. Crypto is the best option to launder imho.

[coin-investor]

Remember, online casinos are there for entertainment, not a laundromat for dirty money. Be a sport, play fair, and keep your nose clean.

Even if there are mixers and other methods to anonymize your coins, casinos will never take down their anti-money laundering policy because some people have different views on online casinos, others view it as an entertainment portal, others as investment platforms, and others to wash their dirty money, and so far casinos are good in checking money coming into their platform.

People will have to learn and accept the fact that you cannot use casinos now to launder your money, especially the big casinos they do not want to be a platform for money laundering because they will be taken down by authorities if casinos become a platform for this.   

[Viscore]

It is easier to setup "fake" businesses and to launder money through the Fiat Banking system.... than doing it through a online Casino, where the risk and security are so much higher. 

This is very easy to track since fiat transaction on the business is audited. Crypto is the best option to launder imho.

When we involve the fiat banking system, money laundering can be easily tracked, as banks are required to report suspicious transactions on clients' bank accounts to the AMLC (Anti-Money Laundering Council), and they will conduct an investigation on such matters. That's why crypto gambling is very popular, as it allows gambling anonymously. However, the government is aware that this can become a haven for money launderers, so they are ensuring that casinos will be required to have a license before they can start to operate.

[ethereumhunter]

Even so, a criminal cannot do much when he has to be confronted with orders or law enforcement.
Maybe criminals can use hackers to help but the hacker network owned by the government is also reliable enough that they can even track and fight the hackers used by some of these criminals.
I'm sure that corruption or embezzlement of funds within the government system occurs in any country and the only country with the lowest corruption cases, in my opinion, is only North Korea.

Maybe in other countries, it is not easy to eradicate corruption because it has occurred from the lowest level to the highest so when there are corruption operations, they will go to places where they cannot or are difficult to detect. Moreover, many high-ranking government members are involved in corruption cases but unfortunately, they are not proven to have committed corruption. And those people have probably run illegal businesses from casinos, and drug factories, abuse government policies and pretended they are immune from the law and can't be caught. The cyber war is also ongoing until now and each of them puts out their best ability to avoid attacks from the enemy. And the ones who have nothing to hold on to will fall victim to it so those at the top of the chain remain untouched.

[Wiwo]

It is easier to setup "fake" businesses and to launder money through the Fiat Banking system.... than doing it through a online Casino, where the risk and security are so much higher. 

This is very easy to track since fiat transaction on the business is audited. Crypto is the best option to launder imho.

When we involve the fiat banking system, money laundering can be easily tracked, as banks are required to report suspicious transactions on clients' bank accounts to the AMLC (Anti-Money Laundering Council), and they will conduct an investigation on such matters. That's why crypto gambling is very popular, as it allows gambling anonymously. However, the government is aware that this can become a haven for money launderers, so they are ensuring that casinos will be required to have a license before they can start to operate.

The thing is that money launderers already know the risk of using casinos to carry out their money laundering act since they will be subject to x number of wagering as a requirement to prevent that act,  so for that they rather make use of coin mixing service,  that way all that their need is to pay small fees and get the coin mixed up.

So I think the idea to avoid casinos becoming a venture for money laundering is the main reason why there is demand for that x wager and sometime KYC requirements on suspicious accounts.

[lixer]

It won't take long because they can easily see the deposit amounts of their gamblers.
Now, for most high rollers, casinos are requiring to undergo KYC depending on how strict the casino is complying with the regulations.
If the casino doesn't care as some won't bother as long as they are earning from it, but usually issues arise when the player wins big.
And that will be the subject of investigation and they will dig more about the transactions of that player.
But if you are a high roller, always best to think that the casino would ask your credentials, whether you are winning or losing so you will not be caught in the middle with your funds frozen.

You are right, casinos know every bit of what there customers are does or are doing, a proof to this is, think and tell if someone has ever cheated in a casino game, and won as a result of cheating, then he or she placed a withdrawal request, and the casino processed the withdrawal request without questioning the user through either asking them to pass kyc verification or in any other form?, there have been none I know of.
So indeed, casinos know everything that goes on around their platform, if a casino allows a supposed gambler to use their platform to launder money, and the casino kept quiet about it, know it that the casino benefitted huge from that act and that is why they kept quiet, in such a situation, when the wrath of the law come in force, such casino will go in for it most especially if they can not provide the personal data of the said user who carried out the operatin.

If we are talking about online casinos, then there is literally no way one can cheat a casino unless they have some error or a bug in their system that gives a player an advantage in which case the player might not be punishable if caught but they might take back what has been won by the player, but, cheating is not possible in an online casino, tell me how can one cheat when the options and everything they have are just what the casino is providing itself?

The only way a player might be able to cheat a casino is when they are offering some bonus and a player tries to claim the bonus with multiple accounts using different IP addresses and everything, but even in such cases, you can't call that cheating, it can be called abuse of the bonus but not cheating.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

It won't take long because they can easily see the deposit amounts of their gamblers.
Now, for most high rollers, casinos are requiring to undergo KYC depending on how strict the casino is complying with the regulations.
If the casino doesn't care as some won't bother as long as they are earning from it, but usually issues arise when the player wins big.
And that will be the subject of investigation and they will dig more about the transactions of that player.
But if you are a high roller, always best to think that the casino would ask your credentials, whether you are winning or losing so you will not be caught in the middle with your funds frozen.

You are right, casinos know every bit of what there customers are does or are doing, a proof to this is, think and tell if someone has ever cheated in a casino game, and won as a result of cheating, then he or she placed a withdrawal request, and the casino processed the withdrawal request without questioning the user through either asking them to pass kyc verification or in any other form?, there have been none I know of.
So indeed, casinos know everything that goes on around their platform, if a casino allows a supposed gambler to use their platform to launder money, and the casino kept quiet about it, know it that the casino benefitted huge from that act and that is why they kept quiet, in such a situation, when the wrath of the law come in force, such casino will go in for it most especially if they can not provide the personal data of the said user who carried out the operatin.

If we are talking about online casinos, then there is literally no way one can cheat a casino unless they have some error or a bug in their system that gives a player an advantage in which case the player might not be punishable if caught but they might take back what has been won by the player, but, cheating is not possible in an online casino, tell me how can one cheat when the options and everything they have are just what the casino is providing itself?

The only way a player might be able to cheat a casino is when they are offering some bonus and a player tries to claim the bonus with multiple accounts using different IP addresses and everything, but even in such cases, you can't call that cheating, it can be called abuse of the bonus but not cheating.

Well, you are right, but how about if a player discovers a bug in the online casino's system first before the casino and then decides to exploit it, that is use it to his or her own advantage, isn't that cheating as well, and wont the casino punish such a user when they get to find out?

On the issue of players abusing a bonus, yeah, that I completely agree is not cheating, and I wont call it abuse also, I will rather refer to that as the player being smart, yeah, a casino launching a bonus should already know that if they don't put measures in place to deter participants from claiming multiple times, players will definitely want to claim multiple times, and in such situation, I do not blame the players but the casino for doing one part of a promotion and neglecting the most important part which i can refer to as security.

[danadc]

If we are talking about online casinos, then there is literally no way one can cheat a casino unless they have some error or a bug in their system that gives a player an advantage in which case the player might not be punishable if caught but they might take back what has been won by the player, but, cheating is not possible in an online casino, tell me how can one cheat when the options and everything they have are just what the casino is providing itself?

The only way a player might be able to cheat a casino is when they are offering some bonus and a player tries to claim the bonus with multiple accounts using different IP addresses and everything, but even in such cases, you can't call that cheating, it can be called abuse of the bonus but not cheating.

Yes, you are right when it comes to casinos to see when a weakness in the system can compromise the game of the players and make them win, but this is due to an error, or a bug that is so common in games, but I have I have seen here in the forum that there are cases where this has happened and people who manage to do something and withdraw sometimes have their withdrawal suspended, and this does not seem appropriate to me, because if the person won and is going to withdraw, that person did not know that he was failing, that lends itself to misunderstandings, it is best for the casino to assume that they have lost and for the person to withdraw , but there are casinos that are not like that, the bad thing is that if the player makes a mistake, the casino does not forgive or return the money. money , those are the dilemmas of life.

[Oilacris]

It won't take long because they can easily see the deposit amounts of their gamblers.
Now, for most high rollers, casinos are requiring to undergo KYC depending on how strict the casino is complying with the regulations.
If the casino doesn't care as some won't bother as long as they are earning from it, but usually issues arise when the player wins big.
And that will be the subject of investigation and they will dig more about the transactions of that player.
But if you are a high roller, always best to think that the casino would ask your credentials, whether you are winning or losing so you will not be caught in the middle with your funds frozen.

You are right, casinos know every bit of what there customers are does or are doing, a proof to this is, think and tell if someone has ever cheated in a casino game, and won as a result of cheating, then he or she placed a withdrawal request, and the casino processed the withdrawal request without questioning the user through either asking them to pass kyc verification or in any other form?, there have been none I know of.
So indeed, casinos know everything that goes on around their platform, if a casino allows a supposed gambler to use their platform to launder money, and the casino kept quiet about it, know it that the casino benefitted huge from that act and that is why they kept quiet, in such a situation, when the wrath of the law come in force, such casino will go in for it most especially if they can not provide the personal data of the said user who carried out the operatin.

If we are talking about online casinos, then there is literally no way one can cheat a casino unless they have some error or a bug in their system that gives a player an advantage in which case the player might not be punishable if caught but they might take back what has been won by the player, but, cheating is not possible in an online casino, tell me how can one cheat when the options and everything they have are just what the casino is providing itself?

The only way a player might be able to cheat a casino is when they are offering some bonus and a player tries to claim the bonus with multiple accounts using different IP addresses and everything, but even in such cases, you can't call that cheating, it can be called abuse of the bonus but not cheating.

Well, you are right, but how about if a player discovers a bug in the online casino's system first before the casino and then decides to exploit it, that is use it to his or her own advantage, isn't that cheating as well, and wont the casino punish such a user when they get to find out?

On the issue of players abusing a bonus, yeah, that I completely agree is not cheating, and I wont call it abuse also, I will rather refer to that as the player being smart, yeah, a casino launching a bonus should already know that if they don't put measures in place to deter participants from claiming multiple times, players will definitely want to claim multiple times, and in such situation, I do not blame the players but the casino for doing one part of a promotion and neglecting the most important part which i can refer to as security.

When launching a promotion then it would really be just normal that casino or the platform should really be mindful in terms of security and those measures for it to be that able to avoid those possible
abuse or exploits with those bonuses and promotions on which it would really be causing up that possible expense or would really be negative in revenue because not all possible exploits could really be seen through and there might be those players who do able to exploit without being noticed but of course it would be depending because once there's an exploit then it would pertain about those huge
withdrawals on which it would really be ring out the bell that there's something happening behind but it would be depending if the team would really be keen when it comes to those probabilties.

Money laundering is really that very common on gambling site but the methods and ways on how to clean up those dirty coins would be imposing such risks on that players side on which it would
really be not that ideal most of the time. Wagering with low odds but against with the house edge? You are really taking some suicide for longer runs.

[tusandii]

Even so, a criminal cannot do much when he has to be confronted with orders or law enforcement.
Maybe criminals can use hackers to help but the hacker network owned by the government is also reliable enough that they can even track and fight the hackers used by some of these criminals.
I'm sure that corruption or embezzlement of funds within the government system occurs in any country and the only country with the lowest corruption cases, in my opinion, is only North Korea.

Maybe in other countries, it is not easy to eradicate corruption because it has occurred from the lowest level to the highest so when there are corruption operations, they will go to places where they cannot or are difficult to detect. Moreover, many high-ranking government members are involved in corruption cases but unfortunately, they are not proven to have committed corruption. And those people have probably run illegal businesses from casinos, and drug factories, abuse government policies and pretended they are immune from the law and can't be caught. The cyber war is also ongoing until now and each of them puts out their best ability to avoid attacks from the enemy. And the ones who have nothing to hold on to will fall victim to it so those at the top of the chain remain untouched.

Yes, in the government system, indeed corruption has been embedded from the bottom to the top and they are connected to each other which can protect a little from the acts of corruption that are carried out.
Even though not all government people commit acts of corruption, most of them have entered the circle of corrupt officials.

Usually some of them take a fair share in illegal business and of course when there are people who have the power to enter into illegal business it can run more smoothly without fear of problems occurring.
People like this will look for crypto exchange platforms or gambling sites that are still free so that they can easily rotate money so that they cannot be tracked by the authorities.

[noormcs5]

A gambler may still be able to find some loophole but casinos are no dumb when it's all about with these matters. They'll be having those triggering alerts if an account/user is doing something off the coast and that's why there's always those complaints that we're seeing posted here about their delay of withdrawals. The blame goes to the casino where they're gambling but in the first place, they are aware that money laundering is prohibited in most of them because they're being regulated by the country where they're operating.

The casinos must know it somehow because the casinos own the business. In having a gambling business, the casino must have had special ways to deal with these fraudulent gamblers and be able to find out which gamblers did it. Perhaps it takes time because it depends on the security team's work from the casino, but on average, it doesn't take long for them to find it. Gamblers who commit money laundering with the excuse of using big money must be prepared for all the risks, and if they decide to continue using gambling, it means they are ready for all the risks.

It won't take long because they can easily see the deposit amounts of their gamblers.
Now, for most high rollers, casinos are requiring to undergo KYC depending on how strict the casino is complying with the regulations.
If the casino doesn't care as some won't bother as long as they are earning from it, but usually issues arise when the player wins big.
And that will be the subject of investigation and they will dig more about the transactions of that player.
But if you are a high roller, always best to think that the casino would ask your credentials, whether you are winning or losing so you will not be caught in the middle with your funds frozen.

You have talked about two different things here. First if a person deposits small amount of money and he win a big amount through gambling then of course the casino will go through the KYC process of that gambler but I don't think that he is likely a money launder because a money launder motive will be to deposit big amount and withdrawal the same.

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

[Bitinity]

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

It will rise a flag if the person repeat the same thing again and again because the system in the casino may detect it as an unusual thing. Clever criminal will not do it repeatedly in the same place, they will do it in various different casinos. As I said previously before in this thread, a clever criminal who want to launder their money will not use casinos as the place to launder the money unless they are also willing to take the risk of losing all the deposited money.

[avp2306]

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

It will rise a flag if the person repeat the same thing again and again because the system in the casino may detect it as an unusual thing. Clever criminal will not do it repeatedly in the same place, they will do it in various different casinos. As I said previously before in this thread, a clever criminal who want to launder their money will not use casinos as the place to launder the money unless they are also willing to take the risk of losing all the deposited money.

And I do believe that no criminal do their thing on same place because they can get easily busted if they do that. Those criminals are so smart to know what will be their next best action to do that's the reason why we see them escape so easily. Also I guess they are not using a casino now since KYC is already implemented and mostly they use mixers to cover up their foot tracks then escape from those authorities who want to track them.

[slaman29]

Loophole exists but casinos already know this and watch all accounts for this. Trust me, if you think you're smart and you thought of something that noone else did yet, you are so wrong.

BTW real money launderers use real cash and chips at real casinos. Crypto is much harder.

Another btw forgive me for saying but I think OP is just one of many people who doesn't really gamble, hence the notion of this loophole can work.

[ethereumhunter]

Yes, in the government system, indeed corruption has been embedded from the bottom to the top and they are connected to each other which can protect a little from the acts of corruption that are carried out.
Even though not all government people commit acts of corruption, most of them have entered the circle of corrupt officials.

Usually some of them take a fair share in illegal business and of course when there are people who have the power to enter into illegal business it can run more smoothly without fear of problems occurring.
People like this will look for crypto exchange platforms or gambling sites that are still free so that they can easily rotate money so that they cannot be tracked by the authorities.

And it seems that it has happened because of the increase in users using crypto so I think they have also taken part in using crypto for illegal business. And those corrupt government officials also use crypto because they can freely carry out their illegal business without being found out by government officials carrying out their duties. But I think there must be a way to trace where the laundered money is being used and even if they use crypto, other government officials should be able to trace the actual whereabouts of the money and catch those corrupt officials. Thus, they can still be punished by the government so hopefully, it can reduce the number of people who do money laundering or other illegal businesses.

[Lanatsa]

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

It will rise a flag if the person repeat the same thing again and again because the system in the casino may detect it as an unusual thing. Clever criminal will not do it repeatedly in the same place, they will do it in various different casinos. As I said previously before in this thread, a clever criminal who want to launder their money will not use casinos as the place to launder the money unless they are also willing to take the risk of losing all the deposited money.

And I do believe that no criminal do their thing on same place because they can get easily busted if they do that. Those criminals are so smart to know what will be their next best action to do that's the reason why we see them escape so easily. Also I guess they are not using a casino now since KYC is already implemented and mostly they use mixers to cover up their foot tracks then escape from those authorities who want to track them.

True, they wont really be that so dumb on trying to wash out those tarnished coins via doing gambling knowing about the risks that they would be taking then they cant really just afford on doing so.
Aside from the house edge then they would be normally be trying out to deal with KYC since we are talking with huge amounts of money to be laundered here, so it would really be just normal that it would really be
ringing up the bell by the team or with the platform.

If someone would be pushing up with this kind of option then they are really just basically putting up themselves on big trouble.There are lots of things that could messed up on their main plans on washing off those coins. Its true and would be definitely be the best way on washing those coins is through mixers. Putting up huge money on centralized platforms and regulated ones is a no go. Im aint saying or supporting
those money launderers but they arent really that dumb ones to make such step which they would know that they would be fucked up.

[Shinpako09]

A launderer is often carrying a big amount. Now who's gonna risk such a big amount to launder? considering it's not his own money, an organization to be exact, and will the organization allow to use such a very risky tactic? Not to mention there is kyc and the probability of the site asking for more information if they found you suspicious. An organization will choose to do it under the table or do the usual thing they are doing.

[Gozie51]

BTW real money launderers use real cash and chips at real casinos. Crypto is much harder.

Another btw forgive me for saying but I think OP is just one of many people who doesn't really gamble, hence the notion of this loophole can work.

I'm thinking, is there a way that casino deposit conditions and processes can be bypassed for any launderer? Or will that be possible with casino owner and launderer. Because like you mentioned, it will be difficult to launder money through casino especially with KYC. Till date, government officials who launder money still do it with cash because of the personal relationship existing with the bankers who can easily bypass protocol for them .

[tusandii]

Yes, in the government system, indeed corruption has been embedded from the bottom to the top and they are connected to each other which can protect a little from the acts of corruption that are carried out.
Even though not all government people commit acts of corruption, most of them have entered the circle of corrupt officials.

Usually some of them take a fair share in illegal business and of course when there are people who have the power to enter into illegal business it can run more smoothly without fear of problems occurring.
People like this will look for crypto exchange platforms or gambling sites that are still free so that they can easily rotate money so that they cannot be tracked by the authorities.

And it seems that it has happened because of the increase in users using crypto so I think they have also taken part in using crypto for illegal business. And those corrupt government officials also use crypto because they can freely carry out their illegal business without being found out by government officials carrying out their duties. But I think there must be a way to trace where the laundered money is being used and even if they use crypto, other government officials should be able to trace the actual whereabouts of the money and catch those corrupt officials. Thus, they can still be punished by the government so hopefully, it can reduce the number of people who do money laundering or other illegal businesses.

It's a shame that the government, which should be responsible for the progress of society and the state, is even involved in running illegal businesses just to get some money for personal gain.
Cryptocurrency is developing very rapidly nowadays and with cryptocurrency everyone can use it as an investment or trading tool so they can have an additional source of income but some irresponsible people even misuse crypto which makes many people think badly of the cryptocurrency industry.
If crypto trading platforms and gambling sites always suppress money laundering crimes then I believe cases of corruption and so on can be reduced because they have no place to do money laundering so that they are not traced if it is money generated from corruption or from illegal business.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

It will rise a flag if the person repeat the same thing again and again because the system in the casino may detect it as an unusual thing. Clever criminal will not do it repeatedly in the same place, they will do it in various different casinos. As I said previously before in this thread, a clever criminal who want to launder their money will not use casinos as the place to launder the money unless they are also willing to take the risk of losing all the deposited money.

You are right with your last statement,  in-fact, that even has made me to start wondering where this whole idea of money launders using online gambling casinos to launder money came from, that is, i am wondering where the assumption or believe came from, cus for me, if lets assume i was into crime and wants to launder money, there are many crypto exchanges for example where users can withdraw up to 2 bitcoin per day comfortably without kyc, i could selectively use those type of exchanges instead of casino where as little as $5000 withdrawal could trigger the kyc system and ruin the whole show for me.
I could chose up to 5 or 6 or even more of those exchanges where i could withdraw up to 2 bitcoins without kyc depending on how much i want to launder, and sign up on those exchanges with different email addresses.

[ethereumhunter]

It's a shame that the government, which should be responsible for the progress of society and the state, is even involved in running illegal businesses just to get some money for personal gain.
Cryptocurrency is developing very rapidly nowadays and with cryptocurrency everyone can use it as an investment or trading tool so they can have an additional source of income but some irresponsible people even misuse crypto which makes many people think badly of the cryptocurrency industry.
If crypto trading platforms and gambling sites always suppress money laundering crimes then I believe cases of corruption and so on can be reduced because they have no place to do money laundering so that they are not traced if it is money generated from corruption or from illegal business.

That's because everyone wants more money and has to use illegal methods even though they already get a large monthly salary. Entrepreneurs also take part with the government. Even employees also join.

People who use crypto to misuse crypto make crypto bad in society because people think that how can they use crypto as an investment or trade that can be a source of additional income if crypto is only used by people who run illegal businesses. But they are wrong because it depends on each person and crypto is neutral. Crypto trading platforms and gambling sites can help find people who are carrying out money laundering. This corruption case must be prevented first and it must investigate each person suspected by the government.

[SamReomo]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

I don't think that the money launderers will have any luck by doing such actions because in online gimbling anything can happen and if a gambler is wagering everything he/she owns then the chances of getting a loss bet is 100%, and I'm quite sure that anyone who gambles regularly know that there is no sure winning thing in the gambling world. Even if a gambler has 99%  of winning but still that 1% is more than enough to make a gambler lose a bet, and if someone is putting the whole capital as a bet then that gambler can face such 1% losses.

It again depends on the luck of a gambler because if a gambler is a lucky person than his/her chances to win and pass wagering requirement without any worries, but if a gambler is unlucky then then of course he/she can lose even with just 1% probability of losing. I would always advice everyone to be careful while gambling because putting 100% of your capital is very risky and with a single loss bet you lose everything.

[noormcs5]

It's a shame that the government, which should be responsible for the progress of society and the state, is even involved in running illegal businesses just to get some money for personal gain.
Cryptocurrency is developing very rapidly nowadays and with cryptocurrency everyone can use it as an investment or trading tool so they can have an additional source of income but some irresponsible people even misuse crypto which makes many people think badly of the cryptocurrency industry.
If crypto trading platforms and gambling sites always suppress money laundering crimes then I believe cases of corruption and so on can be reduced because they have no place to do money laundering so that they are not traced if it is money generated from corruption or from illegal business.

That's because everyone wants more money and has to use illegal methods even though they already get a large monthly salary. Entrepreneurs also take part with the government. Even employees also join.

People who use crypto to misuse crypto make crypto bad in society because people think that how can they use crypto as an investment or trade that can be a source of additional income if crypto is only used by people who run illegal businesses. But they are wrong because it depends on each person and crypto is neutral. Crypto trading platforms and gambling sites can help find people who are carrying out money laundering. This corruption case must be prevented first and it must investigate each person suspected by the government.

Corruption is one thing which may happen at the government level (if the government is corrupt) or at an individual level if some individual wants to use some illegal means like money laundering etc but in both cases the gambling sites need to play their part to stop any illegal use of the platform.

I understand that if the government is involved, it will be difficult for the gambling casino to react but they should try to stop any illegal act they witness, as they are the ones who know exactly how much is being deposited and withdrawn from the casino and the purpose also become clear if anyone is depositing and withdrawing right after the minimum wagering requirements.

[slaman29]

BTW real money launderers use real cash and chips at real casinos. Crypto is much harder.

Another btw forgive me for saying but I think OP is just one of many people who doesn't really gamble, hence the notion of this loophole can work.

I'm thinking, is there a way that casino deposit conditions and processes can be bypassed for any launderer? Or will that be possible with casino owner and launderer. Because like you mentioned, it will be difficult to launder money through casino especially with KYC. Till date, government officials who launder money still do it with cash because of the personal relationship existing with the bankers who can easily bypass protocol for them .

Yes, in real casinos. Gangs they distribute cash to runners. Whose job is to gamble all day, even lose some. Then cash out the chips. Clean money.

Crypto casino much more difficult as betting patterns like OP suggested is immediately given the red flag. Its not even about KYC here but just systems that automatically check for cleaning patterns.

[Viscore]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Would launderers really do that? Risking money for 1.01 odds, although there's a high chance of winning, that is not the right way to do it due to the high risk involved. Detecting money launderers is hard in crypto, so I don't see the sense of betting on 1.01 odds just to mix or launder the funds. Besides, it's crypto; what they will withdraw is crypto as well. It would only be determined once it's cashed out to fiat, at which point the gambling sites are no longer involved, and the exchanges come into play.

There's a reason why some gambling sites still promote anonymous gambling while no exchanges do the same—exchanges are more regulated compared to gambling sites.

[Slow death]

A launderer is often carrying a big amount. Now who's gonna risk such a big amount to launder? considering it's not his own money, an organization to be exact, and will the organization allow to use such a very risky tactic? Not to mention there is kyc and the probability of the site asking for more information if they found you suspicious. An organization will choose to do it under the table or do the usual thing they are doing.

And that's what I've been saying, criminals don't risk stealing a little money, especially scammers in the crypto world, just see that they steal hundreds of bitcoins, so when you look at the price of bitcoin, anyone realizes that they steal a lot of money , and as you said and I have said this too, no scammers would put 10 bitcoins in a casino to launder, the scammers are not dumb enough to make these mistakes, they know that there are mixers that they can use and it will be more practical and safe for their case

in mixer scammers can quickly hide their tracks even if they have stolen a lot of coins and in mixer they do not run the risk of being asked for kyc, while in casinos there is a requirement of 2X or more of the deposit amount to be able to withdraw, who the hell would be stupid to steal 10 btc and put it in the casino and have to risk playing all 10 btc to be able to withdraw? obviously scammers wouldn't do that and I've been saying that. I don't see any sense for governments to be forcing kyc in casinos when casinos can implement requirements to play 2x the deposit amount for withdrawal

[Mr. Magkaisa]

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

It will rise a flag if the person repeat the same thing again and again because the system in the casino may detect it as an unusual thing. Clever criminal will not do it repeatedly in the same place, they will do it in various different casinos. As I said previously before in this thread, a clever criminal who want to launder their money will not use casinos as the place to launder the money unless they are also willing to take the risk of losing all the deposited money.

And I do believe that no criminal do their thing on same place because they can get easily busted if they do that. Those criminals are so smart to know what will be their next best action to do that's the reason why we see them escape so easily. Also I guess they are not using a casino now since KYC is already implemented and mostly they use mixers to cover up their foot tracks then escape from those authorities who want to track them.

        -     Professional criminals often do that. And there is no such thing as a criminal in these times. Also, the only people who often commit money laundering are those who do or are used to doing illegal things.

And probably others are still going through this in the crypto space just so that the authorities don't care about the transfer of from money  to a good way through bitcoin mixing.

[slapper]

A launderer is often carrying a big amount. Now who's gonna risk such a big amount to launder? considering it's not his own money, an organization to be exact, and will the organization allow to use such a very risky tactic? Not to mention there is kyc and the probability of the site asking for more information if they found you suspicious. An organization will choose to do it under the table or do the usual thing they are doing.

And that's what I've been saying, criminals don't risk stealing a little money, especially scammers in the crypto world, just see that they steal hundreds of bitcoins, so when you look at the price of bitcoin, anyone realizes that they steal a lot of money , and as you said and I have said this too, no scammers would put 10 bitcoins in a casino to launder, the scammers are not dumb enough to make these mistakes, they know that there are mixers that they can use and it will be more practical and safe for their case

in mixer scammers can quickly hide their tracks even if they have stolen a lot of coins and in mixer they do not run the risk of being asked for kyc, while in casinos there is a requirement of 2X or more of the deposit amount to be able to withdraw, who the hell would be stupid to steal 10 btc and put it in the casino and have to risk playing all 10 btc to be able to withdraw? obviously scammers wouldn't do that and I've been saying that. I don't see any sense for governments to be forcing kyc in casinos when casinos can implement requirements to play 2x the deposit amount for withdrawal

I beg to differ on your point that scammers wouldn't use casinos for laundering purposes. Although mixers provide a seemingly efficient way to conceal illicit funds, they're not without their risks. With the rise of blockchain analysis, the veil of anonymity mixers offer could be thinning

Casinos, on the other hand, might provide a less obvious, albeit riskier, option for laundering. The threat of KYC might be mitigated by casinos with lax enforcement. The requirement to play through deposits could also be seen as the cost of doing business, rather than a deterrent. Imposing KYC in casinos could act as another layer of security to keep these digital spaces safe

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

It will rise a flag if the person repeat the same thing again and again because the system in the casino may detect it as an unusual thing. Clever criminal will not do it repeatedly in the same place, they will do it in various different casinos. As I said previously before in this thread, a clever criminal who want to launder their money will not use casinos as the place to launder the money unless they are also willing to take the risk of losing all the deposited money.

And I do believe that no criminal do their thing on same place because they can get easily busted if they do that. Those criminals are so smart to know what will be their next best action to do that's the reason why we see them escape so easily. Also I guess they are not using a casino now since KYC is already implemented and mostly they use mixers to cover up their foot tracks then escape from those authorities who want to track them.

        -     Professional criminals often do that. And there is no such thing as a criminal in these times. Also, the only people who often commit money laundering are those who do or are used to doing illegal things.

And probably others are still going through this in the crypto space just so that the authorities don't care about the transfer of from money  to a good way through bitcoin mixing.

First, Money laundering is a crime for several reasons, and I will mention just two which I remember at the moment.

1. Every country has a maximum amount of their currency that can leave the shores of that country into another country through one individual, so when the amount being transferred to another country by one individual is above that maximum set by the country's government, that is then considered as money laundering and its an offence that is punishable by law.

2. Secondly, through money laundering like i explained it above, which also goes through illegal channels, because moving such money like i explained above can not be done through legal means, so such money can be used by criminals and drug and human traffickers for various degrees of illegal purchase of firearms and funding of various criminal activities..

So yeah , those who are into laundering money are mostly those who are into crimes and all that.

[ethereumhunter]

Corruption is one thing which may happen at the government level (if the government is corrupt) or at an individual level if some individual wants to use some illegal means like money laundering etc but in both cases the gambling sites need to play their part to stop any illegal use of the platform.

I understand that if the government is involved, it will be difficult for the gambling casino to react but they should try to stop any illegal act they witness, as they are the ones who know exactly how much is being deposited and withdrawn from the casino and the purpose also become clear if anyone is depositing and withdrawing right after the minimum wagering requirements.

Corruption is already everywhere, but at the government level, it will be found even more because they relate to the regulations they make. And money launderers or those who carry out illegal activities will try to approach government officials and make attractive offers to them so they can help get their activities done. This has happened many times but it seems that there is no seriousness from government officials to eradicate it or because it has been happening for too long so it is difficult to find the root of the problem.

Government officials who are honest, firm, and willing to take action to clean up illegal activities in their agencies are needed. And this also requires more effort because they may be faced with their own friends who have been doing corruption for a long time. If they do not have the support of the people or their superiors, these government officials will not be able to work optimally because of pressure from corrupt officials so they cannot move freely in investigating these corruption cases.

[arwin100]

A launderer is often carrying a big amount. Now who's gonna risk such a big amount to launder? considering it's not his own money, an organization to be exact, and will the organization allow to use such a very risky tactic? Not to mention there is kyc and the probability of the site asking for more information if they found you suspicious. An organization will choose to do it under the table or do the usual thing they are doing.

And that's what I've been saying, criminals don't risk stealing a little money, especially scammers in the crypto world, just see that they steal hundreds of bitcoins, so when you look at the price of bitcoin, anyone realizes that they steal a lot of money , and as you said and I have said this too, no scammers would put 10 bitcoins in a casino to launder, the scammers are not dumb enough to make these mistakes, they know that there are mixers that they can use and it will be more practical and safe for their case

in mixer scammers can quickly hide their tracks even if they have stolen a lot of coins and in mixer they do not run the risk of being asked for kyc, while in casinos there is a requirement of 2X or more of the deposit amount to be able to withdraw, who the hell would be stupid to steal 10 btc and put it in the casino and have to risk playing all 10 btc to be able to withdraw? obviously scammers wouldn't do that and I've been saying that. I don't see any sense for governments to be forcing kyc in casinos when casinos can implement requirements to play 2x the deposit amount for withdrawal

I beg to differ on your point that scammers wouldn't use casinos for laundering purposes. Although mixers provide a seemingly efficient way to conceal illicit funds, they're not without their risks. With the rise of blockchain analysis, the veil of anonymity mixers offer could be thinning

Casinos, on the other hand, might provide a less obvious, albeit riskier, option for laundering. The threat of KYC might be mitigated by casinos with lax enforcement. The requirement to play through deposits could also be seen as the cost of doing business, rather than a deterrent. Imposing KYC in casinos could act as another layer of security to keep these digital spaces safe

Maybe there are still criminals using casino as their scape route but since KYC has been done maybe they will not put any huge amount since maybe the will be flagged for suspicious activities. Also we can also consider that there are stolen identity on cyber space and maybe some other criminals use this to make their plans succeed that's the reason why we should not give our identities anywhere since most likely this will be use on this cases.

Mixers now are the common platform they use since they can assure their security and they can clean up their mess so they can't be track by anyone.

[QueenVera]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

The wagering requirements and Kyc procedures are different means that gambling platforms use to ensure safe betting against money laundering, the thing is that @noormcs5 there is no high percent successful strategy as such and it would come as a surprise for you to know that odds like that might even end up being more difficult to win than the ones you feel are risky, I've come across a game in sports betting where a team with a good success rate and has a lower of 1.05 lost against a team with a high and risky odd of about 5.08, though sometimes the lower odds stand a good chance of winning but the success rate from it is not very sure thats why experts says gambling is a game of luck and skills, no matter how skillfull you're sometimes you need luck to win a bet.
 Moreover this money lauderers know that the risk behind putting their money on gambling platforms and won't want to pass through the stress of these wagering requirements or kyc processes before withdrawal, they know chance of losing their stolen money is high and would seek other alternatives instead of going through those stressful processes

[noormcs5]

Moreover this money lauderers know that the risk behind putting their money on gambling platforms and won't want to pass through the stress of these wagering requirements or kyc processes before withdrawal, they know chance of losing their stolen money is high and would seek other alternatives instead of going through those stressful processes

I understand that going through the gambling process and then fulfilling the wagering requirements can be a headache in itself but then what are the other ways of whiting the black money without any stress? I guess the other ways are even more difficult because exchanges have a lot more strict KYC policies and they would not let you withdraw if they saw anything suspicious about your account.

[Hispo]

Moreover this money lauderers know that the risk behind putting their money on gambling platforms and won't want to pass through the stress of these wagering requirements or kyc processes before withdrawal, they know chance of losing their stolen money is high and would seek other alternatives instead of going through those stressful processes

I understand that going through the gambling process and then fulfilling the wagering requirements can be a headache in itself but then what are the other ways of whiting the black money without any stress? I guess the other ways are even more difficult because exchanges have a lot more strict KYC policies and they would not let you withdraw if they saw anything suspicious about your account.

It is a misconception that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency are a landscape where money laundering is widespread. In fact, I would dare to say most of laundering still occurs with FIAT instead of Bitcoin and other alternative coins.

Cash continues to be the number one option for criminals and physical casinos are more appealing to them, since they have less chances of getting busted and their money being seized.

Ironically, even though this ecosystem is about total control on one's money, it is more transparent than the old tradicional one.

[mak013]

Corruption is one thing which may happen at the government level (if the government is corrupt) or at an individual level if some individual wants to use some illegal means like money laundering etc but in both cases the gambling sites need to play their part to stop any illegal use of the platform.

I understand that if the government is involved, it will be difficult for the gambling casino to react but they should try to stop any illegal act they witness, as they are the ones who know exactly how much is being deposited and withdrawn from the casino and the purpose also become clear if anyone is depositing and withdrawing right after the minimum wagering requirements.

I think that it is possible only in some fantasy world. In real business there are standard commissions for laundering, why the casino must be the exception? After such withdrawals someone in casino is usually paid for this operation. Without check and taxes. And with crypto it becomes easy to hide such operations.

[maydna]

Moreover this money lauderers know that the risk behind putting their money on gambling platforms and won't want to pass through the stress of these wagering requirements or kyc processes before withdrawal, they know chance of losing their stolen money is high and would seek other alternatives instead of going through those stressful processes

I understand that going through the gambling process and then fulfilling the wagering requirements can be a headache in itself but then what are the other ways of whiting the black money without any stress? I guess the other ways are even more difficult because exchanges have a lot more strict KYC policies and they would not let you withdraw if they saw anything suspicious about your account.

Perhaps, the money launderers already know that casinos are now tightening their rules by asking their users to do KYC, including those who use big money to gamble. Casinos want to protect their business from the illegal activities carried out by these money launderers, so they feel compelled to implement KYC on big gamblers.

Well, perhaps it makes some big gamblers who have nothing to do with illegal activities feel uncomfortable, but they have to follow the rules of the casino. Meanwhile, money launderers feel their movements have become increasingly limited with KYC. And there is a possibility that they will ask someone else to do KYC so they can use the verified account freely.

[fullhdpixel]

Corruption is one thing which may happen at the government level (if the government is corrupt) or at an individual level if some individual wants to use some illegal means like money laundering etc but in both cases the gambling sites need to play their part to stop any illegal use of the platform.

I understand that if the government is involved, it will be difficult for the gambling casino to react but they should try to stop any illegal act they witness, as they are the ones who know exactly how much is being deposited and withdrawn from the casino and the purpose also become clear if anyone is depositing and withdrawing right after the minimum wagering requirements.

I think that it is possible only in some fantasy world. In real business there are standard commissions for laundering, why the casino must be the exception? After such withdrawals someone in casino is usually paid for this operation. Without check and taxes. And with crypto it becomes easy to hide such operations.

It used to be easy to hide such operations with crypto in the past, it might be easy now as well but if you are using a platform such as a casino, you won't be able to easily hide such operations since they will ask you for KYC verification if you try to make a big deposit or withdrawal unless you are using a casino that isn't licensed which is the only case you might not be asked for verification but in such platforms, there is always the chance of your money getting stuck and them not allowing you withdraw it.

Even if the casino is paid for the operation, they wouldn't allow this if they have a license because the authorities will ask them and if they are found guilty of allowing such operations, the authorities will get their services closed which is not what they would want to happen to their businesses for sure.

[khaled0111]

Well, perhaps it makes some big gamblers who have nothing to do with illegal activities feel uncomfortable, but they have to follow the rules of the casino.

As far as I know, high rollers or big gamblers play exclusively on trusted casinos and they don't mind verifying their identity there as this can help in protecting their accounts and money. Those who will feel inconfortable are those who value their privacy regardless of how much they gamble.

Meanwhile, money launderers feel their movements have become increasingly limited with KYC. And there is a possibility that they will ask someone else to do KYC so they can use the verified account freely.

Most of them do this. They pay someone else to pass kyc for them or they use fake/bought documents. But casinos owners are spending a lot of money to improve their security and anti-cheating systems to help them spot abusers.

[Wiwo]

Moreover this money lauderers know that the risk behind putting their money on gambling platforms and won't want to pass through the stress of these wagering requirements or KYC processes before withdrawal, they know the chance of losing their stolen money is high and would seek other alternatives instead of going through those stressful processes

I understand that going through the gambling process and then fulfilling the wagering requirements can be a headache in itself but then what are the other ways of whiting the black money without any stress? I guess the other ways are even more difficult because exchanges have a lot more strict KYC policies and they would not let you withdraw if they saw anything suspicious about your account.

You are right mate,  most money launderers like corrupt politicians and drug Barron's won't consider casinos as a good and reliable way to mix their money,  and as a matter of fact,  they are open to better options that,  since with casinos,  they risk losing part or all the money in trying to meet some of the compliance such as wagering which has been mentioned severally in this thread.

So for that,  we have to start categorically with that wagering requirement as an AML requirement I favour the casino more because in most cases those gamblers that try to meet that requirements end up spending extra money through they losing in trying to meet the wagering requirement and by that,  the casino gain more.

So a leader will rather pay a small fee to have his coins mixed using a Bitcoin mixer instead of the high risk of gambling in a casino which has a lot of conditions that could hardly be met.

[Mahanton]

Corruption is one thing which may happen at the government level (if the government is corrupt) or at an individual level if some individual wants to use some illegal means like money laundering etc but in both cases the gambling sites need to play their part to stop any illegal use of the platform.

I understand that if the government is involved, it will be difficult for the gambling casino to react but they should try to stop any illegal act they witness, as they are the ones who know exactly how much is being deposited and withdrawn from the casino and the purpose also become clear if anyone is depositing and withdrawing right after the minimum wagering requirements.

I think that it is possible only in some fantasy world. In real business there are standard commissions for laundering, why the casino must be the exception? After such withdrawals someone in casino is usually paid for this operation. Without check and taxes. And with crypto it becomes easy to hide such operations.

It used to be easy to hide such operations with crypto in the past, it might be easy now as well but if you are using a platform such as a casino, you won't be able to easily hide such operations since they will ask you for KYC verification if you try to make a big deposit or withdrawal unless you are using a casino that isn't licensed which is the only case you might not be asked for verification but in such platforms, there is always the chance of your money getting stuck and them not allowing you withdraw it.

Even if the casino is paid for the operation, they wouldn't allow this if they have a license because the authorities will ask them and if they are found guilty of allowing such operations, the authorities will get their services closed which is not what they would want to happen to their businesses for sure.

Would really be just that normal that those platforms or companies that do make out some huge revenue or incoming or outgoing transactions would really be under on governments laws and regulations on which means that
whenever you do tend to make out some huge deposit and withdrawal then it would really be that normal that it would really be ringing up the bell and asking out for some verification which its not something new.
There might be still some platforms who do offer no kyc but most of the time they would really be requiring.This is why to those who do deposit up big then they would really be that forced on having that verification
and on the time that you would be able to comply out then you would be busted up if ever those funds are tend to launder out or trying out to clean. Trying to make it via wagering?
You are putting yourself on big trouble knowing that it would really be something risky and something that would might bust up all the money or funds you do have.

[tusandii]

Perhaps, the money launderers already know that casinos are now tightening their rules by asking their users to do KYC, including those who use big money to gamble. Casinos want to protect their business from the illegal activities carried out by these money launderers, so they feel compelled to implement KYC on big gamblers.

Well, perhaps it makes some big gamblers who have nothing to do with illegal activities feel uncomfortable, but they have to follow the rules of the casino. Meanwhile, money launderers feel their movements have become increasingly limited with KYC. And there is a possibility that they will ask someone else to do KYC so they can use the verified account freely.

Some of the most popular casinos that have large bankrolls have implemented a KYC verification system for all customers who make transactions with large amounts of money so that criminals or perpetrators of illegal acts such as corruptors or embezzlers who want to launder money in order to eliminate evidence have had difficulties and of course have succeeded more on tap.
But it's true what you said that some of them may buy someone's personal data to complete KYC verification and of course that way the perpetrators of these illegal actions can still carry out their actions.
Every casino must find another way that can make it more difficult for money launderers and that way each casino can avoid problems regarding money laundering.

[maydna]

~snip~

As far as I know, high rollers or big gamblers play exclusively on trusted casinos and they don't mind verifying their identity there as this can help in protecting their accounts and money. Those who will feel inconfortable are those who value their privacy regardless of how much they gamble.

That's obvious. Big gamblers always choose trusted casinos to play gambling. They don't want to get into any petty trouble, so they will make sure the casino is trustworthy. And they will also verify the trusted casino because they know that the casino can maintain their privacy. We also have to follow what they are doing if we don't want to run into fraud and other problems.

~snip~

Most of them do this. They pay someone else to pass kyc for them or they use fake/bought documents. But casinos owners are spending a lot of money to improve their security and anti-cheating systems to help them spot abusers.

If that's the case, they can easily find people willing to help them verify their gambling accounts with fake/purchased documents. They have a lot of money, so money is not a problem. This is why casinos are always careful in verifying gamblers' accounts. Sometimes, it takes longer to check everything before they can provide verification marks on gamblers' accounts.

~snip~

Some of the most popular casinos that have large bankrolls have implemented a KYC verification system for all customers who make transactions with large amounts of money so that criminals or perpetrators of illegal acts such as corruptors or embezzlers who want to launder money in order to eliminate evidence have had difficulties and of course have succeeded more on tap.
But it's true what you said that some of them may buy someone's personal data to complete KYC verification and of course that way the perpetrators of these illegal actions can still carry out their actions.
Every casino must find another way that can make it more difficult for money launderers and that way each casino can avoid problems regarding money laundering.

But corruptors or money launderers can easily verify their accounts so that it doesn't limit their movements in their illegal activities. We also can never predict what path will be taken by the perpetrators of illegal activities because they have more ways of carrying out their illegal activities. It seems like the casino is still trying hard to arrest the money launderers for carrying out their illegal activities in their casino, and I don't think the casino will ever tell the public about what they did to the money launderers.

[mak013]

Corruption is one thing which may happen at the government level (if the government is corrupt) or at an individual level if some individual wants to use some illegal means like money laundering etc but in both cases the gambling sites need to play their part to stop any illegal use of the platform.

I understand that if the government is involved, it will be difficult for the gambling casino to react but they should try to stop any illegal act they witness, as they are the ones who know exactly how much is being deposited and withdrawn from the casino and the purpose also become clear if anyone is depositing and withdrawing right after the minimum wagering requirements.

I think that it is possible only in some fantasy world. In real business there are standard commissions for laundering, why the casino must be the exception? After such withdrawals someone in casino is usually paid for this operation. Without check and taxes. And with crypto it becomes easy to hide such operations.

It used to be easy to hide such operations with crypto in the past, it might be easy now as well but if you are using a platform such as a casino, you won't be able to easily hide such operations since they will ask you for KYC verification if you try to make a big deposit or withdrawal unless you are using a casino that isn't licensed which is the only case you might not be asked for verification but in such platforms, there is always the chance of your money getting stuck and them not allowing you withdraw it.

Even if the casino is paid for the operation, they wouldn't allow this if they have a license because the authorities will ask them and if they are found guilty of allowing such operations, the authorities will get their services closed which is not what they would want to happen to their businesses for sure.

Do you really think that in offline casino would be easier to launder money? I`m sure that they have all problem you talk about and several others more. But they don`t stop laundering. Why do you think that in online casino can be the another way? It is business, not clean, but anyway it is business. With serious money and serious men. And they don`t care about problems you talk.

[Bitcoin_people]

Secondly a clever criminal may deposits small amount of money at once and then withdraw them after wagering them and not deposit high amount of money  in order to avoid the notice of the gambling house. They may repeat this process again and again

It will rise a flag if the person repeat the same thing again and again because the system in the casino may detect it as an unusual thing. Clever criminal will not do it repeatedly in the same place, they will do it in various different casinos. As I said previously before in this thread, a clever criminal who want to launder their money will not use casinos as the place to launder the money unless they are also willing to take the risk of losing all the deposited money.

And I do believe that no criminal do their thing on same place because they can get easily busted if they do that. Those criminals are so smart to know what will be their next best action to do that's the reason why we see them escape so easily. Also I guess they are not using a casino now since KYC is already implemented and mostly they use mixers to cover up their foot tracks then escape from those authorities who want to track them.

        -     Professional criminals often do that. And there is no such thing as a criminal in these times. Also, the only people who often commit money laundering are those who do or are used to doing illegal things.

And probably others are still going through this in the crypto space just so that the authorities don't care about the transfer of from money  to a good way through bitcoin mixing.

It is true that professional money launderers are always smart enough to escape easily before they are caught. However, most of the casino platforms currently mandate KYC to verify customers where criminals do not deposit money to hide their identity. But there are still many platforms that can withdraw money without it, but KYC is mandatory for those who want to launder extra money. Because money laundering is currently causing problems on casino platforms and those criminals are less likely to use casino platforms because they will be caught. So now criminals are doing money laundering by using various mixing, they are withdrawing a lot of money from here very easily. Money laundering is not only done by the criminals who do it but also by spreading the extra money they use these mixings so that no one can suspect them and catch them.

[wiss19]

I understand that going through the gambling process and then fulfilling the wagering requirements can be a headache in itself but then what are the other ways of whiting the black money without any stress? I guess the other ways are even more difficult because exchanges have a lot more strict KYC policies and they would not let you withdraw if they saw anything suspicious about your account.

You are right mate,  most money launderers like corrupt politicians and drug Barron's won't consider casinos as a good and reliable way to mix their money,  and as a matter of fact,  they are open to better options that,  since with casinos,  they risk losing part or all the money in trying to meet some of the compliance such as wagering which has been mentioned severally in this thread.

So for that,  we have to start categorically with that wagering requirement as an AML requirement I favour the casino more because in most cases those gamblers that try to meet that requirements end up spending extra money through they losing in trying to meet the wagering requirement and by that,  the casino gain more.

So a leader will rather pay a small fee to have his coins mixed using a Bitcoin mixer instead of the high risk of gambling in a casino which has a lot of conditions that could hardly be met.

Well, cases of money laundering nowadays have completely vanished from cryptocurrency casinos after they've announced KYC and AML rules and also added wagering requirements so that a user can't just make a deposit, play a few games and then withdraw the funds right after that. Now with wagering requirements, a gambler needs to meet a wagering requirement of at least 1x of the deposit which isn't easy to achieve knowing you might lose a big chunk of it.

Back in the days when cryptocurrency casinos were newly launched and when there wasn't any KYC verification or very high wagering requirements, money launderers used to use that opportunity and that is the reason why KYC and AML rules were then imposed on all cryptocurrency casinos operating under a license.

[Wiwo]

Well, cases of money laundering nowadays have completely vanished from cryptocurrency casinos after they've announced KYC and AML rules and also added wagering requirements so that a user can't just make a deposit, play a few games and then withdraw the funds right after that. Now with wagering requirements, a gambler needs to meet a wagering requirement of at least 1x of the deposit which isn't easy to achieve knowing you might lose a big chunk of it.

Back in the days when cryptocurrency casinos were newly launched and when there wasn't any KYC verification or very high wagering requirements, money launderers used to use that opportunity and that is the reason why KYC and AML rules were then imposed on all cryptocurrency casinos operating under a license.

We can't say that cases of money laundering have totally been eradicated from casinos this is so because not all casinos have that KYC in place and as a matter of fact those that have KYC don't enforce it in most cases and this is why some few of her cases of money laundering can still be present on some casinos.

But ultimately,  most of the casinos that already have wagering requirements in place don't help the AML law in any way and if the customer loses any launder-led money or then goes to the casino,  so only KYC is what benefits law enforcement agency in this situation.

[Blitzboy]

Well, cases of money laundering nowadays have completely vanished from cryptocurrency casinos after they've announced KYC and AML rules and also added wagering requirements so that a user can't just make a deposit, play a few games and then withdraw the funds right after that. Now with wagering requirements, a gambler needs to meet a wagering requirement of at least 1x of the deposit which isn't easy to achieve knowing you might lose a big chunk of it.

Back in the days when cryptocurrency casinos were newly launched and when there wasn't any KYC verification or very high wagering requirements, money launderers used to use that opportunity and that is the reason why KYC and AML rules were then imposed on all cryptocurrency casinos operating under a license.

We can't say that cases of money laundering have totally been eradicated from casinos this is so because not all casinos have that KYC in place and as a matter of fact those that have KYC don't enforce it in most cases and this is why some few of her cases of money laundering can still be present on some casinos.

But ultimately,  most of the casinos that already have wagering requirements in place don't help the AML law in any way and if the customer loses any launder-led money or then goes to the casino,  so only KYC is what benefits law enforcement agency in this situation.

The issue is, and Im just putting this out there, KYC may exist, but as you mentioned, it is not always enforced, correct? However, let us consider the casinos with wagering requirements. However, it does not necessarily assist with AML

Now, Im not saying you're incorrect or anything, but its not just KYC that we need to consider. I mean, perhaps, perhaps, there should be more, you know, regulations? Maybe more supervision, even if it's beginning to feel excessive? A mere thought, but food for contemplation

[LUCKMCFLY]

Well, cases of money laundering nowadays have completely vanished from cryptocurrency casinos after they've announced KYC and AML rules and also added wagering requirements so that a user can't just make a deposit, play a few games and then withdraw the funds right after that. Now with wagering requirements, a gambler needs to meet a wagering requirement of at least 1x of the deposit which isn't easy to achieve knowing you might lose a big chunk of it.

Back in the days when cryptocurrency casinos were newly launched and when there wasn't any KYC verification or very high wagering requirements, money launderers used to use that opportunity and that is the reason why KYC and AML rules were then imposed on all cryptocurrency casinos operating under a license.

We can't say that cases of money laundering have totally been eradicated from casinos this is so because not all casinos have that KYC in place and as a matter of fact those that have KYC don't enforce it in most cases and this is why some few of her cases of money laundering can still be present on some casinos.

But ultimately,  most of the casinos that already have wagering requirements in place don't help the AML law in any way and if the customer loses any launder-led money or then goes to the casino,  so only KYC is what benefits law enforcement agency in this situation.

Well, money laundering in casinos is not a big business for criminals currently, as they have already said, the KYC issue is something that does not leave them alone, also in some cases, when certain criteria are not met, they do not let you withdraw the money, also if they make the mistake of submitting to take a bonus, it is something different. because they have to do many things to be able to establish themselves well and not have to go through what we go through at some point, and when there are big money options things become more delicate, because some things are not so easy, something like deposit and then withdraw, that is something that can no longer be done.

In addition to the laws, the licenses in the casinos are many factors that can be established as something that until something is fulfilled in particular, since withdrawal is not allowed, also the KYC in this case are very well reviewed, because it is a lot of money, And if a request for withdrawal is given at once, then it is reviewed with even more care.

So currently, when money is laundered, other things are done, 'for example, a very common one is that they buy latest model cars and they arrive in the country and then they are sold in some way or through raffles, that is something that Currently people are living near where I live, and the cars are eventually very nice and then the government buys the cars and then from there they give power to one of the trusted ones and they put it up as raffles, that's one way, another is through another type of merchandise, the other way is to pass the money directly by planes or charter flights, now it is not like that for casinos, maybe in casinos they do, but they are eventually very new to those who do this type of things, plus the fact that you have to comply with KYC is no longer a business.

Personally, there are always more shameless ways to launder money, now things are very different, the police and all government entities, well, they let themselves be bought, they give them a large amount of money and pass it on, that not only It is happening in third world countries, I am sure that in all the countries of the world there is this type of corruption.

[Fortify]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Gambling sites are very aware of the possibilities and casinos have been traditionally targets for this activity, so it definitely does not go unnoticed by anyone. Money laundering with bitcoin is actually not generally possible in the way you're describing, as the actual wallets are disconnected from the balances when bets are taking place. The casino will often have control of the player wallet, even pooling lots of them together, but keep track of balances that the player is allowed to withdraw by a different mechanism. If a player deposits money, it doesn't move back and forth between wallets when under control of the casino, but rather it might be "balanced" or have funds paid to the casino at the end of the day, otherwise it would go out the same route it came in.

[Hamphser]

As we know that most gambling sites will require you to gamble and wager your whole balance once, before you can cash out or withdraw from the gambling site and they take this measure so people do not do money laundering whereby deposit and withdraw without gambling.

Now the point here is that on the gambling site, there are many easy winning bets with odds like 1.01x etc. If the money lauder is sensible he can easily be wagering the whole amount by placing a few bets where the odds are very low and the winning chances are 99%.

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Gambling sites are very aware of the possibilities and casinos have been traditionally targets for this activity, so it definitely does not go unnoticed by anyone. Money laundering with bitcoin is actually not generally possible in the way you're describing, as the actual wallets are disconnected from the balances when bets are taking place. The casino will often have control of the player wallet, even pooling lots of them together, but keep track of balances that the player is allowed to withdraw by a different mechanism. If a player deposits money, it doesn't move back and forth between wallets when under control of the casino, but rather it might be "balanced" or have funds paid to the casino at the end of the day, otherwise it would go out the same route it came in.

Plus they are centralized or heavily regulated on which means that in speaking of money laundering then it could really be that plausible and this is why they would really be mandated or would be asking out such

rules so that they would really be able to avoid out that possible money laundering and this is where wagering requirement or conditions been applied on deposits so that people wont really be able to pull off easily on the time that they would really be tending to make use of gambling site as mediums for them to launder money. This is why those people wouldnt really be putting that option on making gambling sites to be their
ways of method on laundering money since we know that they are really that been regulated and you wont really be just only be putting up the risks on wagering or losing those funds but also you are really that
having the chance of being locked up specially if theres a sudden huge amount of deposits into your account that you do tend to launder which it would really be adding to those probabilities.

[BitcoinPanther]

Moreover this money lauderers know that the risk behind putting their money on gambling platforms and won't want to pass through the stress of these wagering requirements or kyc processes before withdrawal, they know chance of losing their stolen money is high and would seek other alternatives instead of going through those stressful processes

I understand that going through the gambling process and then fulfilling the wagering requirements can be a headache in itself but then what are the other ways of whiting the black money without any stress? I guess the other ways are even more difficult because exchanges have a lot more strict KYC policies and they would not let you withdraw if they saw anything suspicious about your account.

It is a misconception that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency are a landscape where money laundering is widespread. In fact, I would dare to say most of laundering still occurs with FIAT instead of Bitcoin and other alternative coins.

Cash continues to be the number one option for criminals and physical casinos are more appealing to them, since they have less chances of getting busted and their money being seized.

Ironically, even though this ecosystem is about total control on one's money, it is more transparent than the old tradicional one.

Despite the truth that money laundering is far greater in fiat currency, the emergence of cryptocurrency and crypto casino gives these money launderer more options to launder money.  We cannot deny the fact that cryptocurrency is being exploited to launder money and most of them pass through the crypto casino to wash the traces of the transaction.

Wagering though slightly help to keep away money some launderer but it does not really stop the culprit to use crypto casino to launder money.

[Hispo]

Moreover this money lauderers know that the risk behind putting their money on gambling platforms and won't want to pass through the stress of these wagering requirements or kyc processes before withdrawal, they know chance of losing their stolen money is high and would seek other alternatives instead of going through those stressful processes

I understand that going through the gambling process and then fulfilling the wagering requirements can be a headache in itself but then what are the other ways of whiting the black money without any stress? I guess the other ways are even more difficult because exchanges have a lot more strict KYC policies and they would not let you withdraw if they saw anything suspicious about your account.

It is a misconception that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency are a landscape where money laundering is widespread. In fact, I would dare to say most of laundering still occurs with FIAT instead of Bitcoin and other alternative coins.

Cash continues to be the number one option for criminals and physical casinos are more appealing to them, since they have less chances of getting busted and their money being seized.

Ironically, even though this ecosystem is about total control on one's money, it is more transparent than the old tradicional one.

Despite the truth that money laundering is far greater in fiat currency, the emergence of cryptocurrency and crypto casino gives these money launderer more options to launder money.  We cannot deny the fact that cryptocurrency is being exploited to launder money and most of them pass through the crypto casino to wash the traces of the transaction.

Wagering though slightly help to keep away money some launderer but it does not really stop the culprit to use crypto casino to launder money.

I am not denying that cryptocurrency can be used or is being used to launder money and assets, but I personally think if a criminal wanted to launder important amounts of money, then they would not dare to deposit an important percentage of it in a crypto casino, because they may have their money easily seized by operators. On the other hand, it is less likely they would catch the attention in a brick and mortar casino, specially if it is a big one accused to carter whales or passing tourists.

Even though, I like the concept of privacy as a human right. I know there is a good reason some of the biggest online casinos which are properly registered cannot afford to accept/support privacy enhancing coins like Monero. The laundering talking point to me is also amplified by the stigma Bitcoin received in the early days.  

[danadc]

Despite the truth that money laundering is far greater in fiat currency, the emergence of cryptocurrency and crypto casino gives these money launderer more options to launder money.  We cannot deny the fact that cryptocurrency is being exploited to launder money and most of them pass through the crypto casino to wash the traces of the transaction.

Wagering though slightly help to keep away money some launderer but it does not really stop the culprit to use crypto casino to launder money.

Of all these things when talking about money laundering, it is not possible to act because as many have said, KYC alone is the biggest deterrent to those who try to do it and those who try it would be very foolish, and they cannot Camouflage themselves to be able to do it. things inside the casino and then play and withdraw, I don't know if a player can withdraw little by little what they want or will give them enough time to investigate it, because if a person makes a large deposit and plays a little and then wants to withdraw a little bit of money I don't know if they leave it or submit to a great demand kyc, so these things are what must be seen to think that it is money laundering , I currently doubt it.

[Westinhome]

Of all these things when talking about money laundering, it is not possible to act because as many have said, KYC alone is the biggest deterrent to those who try to do it and those who try it would be very foolish, and they cannot Camouflage themselves to be able to do it. things inside the casino and then play and withdraw, I don't know if a player can withdraw little by little what they want or will give them enough time to investigate it, because if a person makes a large deposit and plays a little and then wants to withdraw a little bit of money I don't know if they leave it or submit to a great demand kyc, so these things are what must be seen to think that it is money laundering , I currently doubt it.

Money laundering was the cancer to the economy of many countries,it was the biggest national issue to the developing countries.The Money laundering doesn’t affect the developed countries because it’s like the earth warm to the big economy.Money laundering mostly affected the developing or under developing countries.The casino plays huge role in the money laundering,the good casino doesn’t require any black money to run.But the casino was doesn’t have good bank balance will join the hand with the money laundering elements and spoil the good economy of the country.Being a gambler,it’s our responsibility to report such casino in the market.

[serjent05]

Of all these things when talking about money laundering, it is not possible to act because as many have said, KYC alone is the biggest deterrent to those who try to do it and those who try it would be very foolish, and they cannot Camouflage themselves to be able to do it. things inside the casino and then play and withdraw, I don't know if a player can withdraw little by little what they want or will give them enough time to investigate it, because if a person makes a large deposit and plays a little and then wants to withdraw a little bit of money I don't know if they leave it or submit to a great demand kyc, so these things are what must be seen to think that it is money laundering , I currently doubt it.

As far as I know KYC especially the deeper level of KYC can highly prevent money laundering since the depositors will be asked about the source of funds and need different legal documents to verify the validity of the client that he is not involved in money laundering.  

About the withdrawal, each casino has its own preference and security method.  I believe their action will be different. but one thing is for sure, these casinos have a threshold before they trigger AML investigation.  I believe the wagering requirement is just the 1st layer of security against Money Laundering and the next layer if the player is suspected is the AML in a higher level where the source of funds is asked.

[khaled0111]

Of all these things when talking about money laundering, it is not possible to act because as many have said, KYC alone is the biggest deterrent to those who try to do it and those who try it would be very foolish, and they cannot Camouflage themselves to be able to do it. things inside the casino and then play and withdraw, I don't know if a player can withdraw little by little what they want or will give them enough time to investigate it, because if a person makes a large deposit and plays a little and then wants to withdraw a little bit of money I don't know if they leave it or submit to a great demand kyc, so these things are what must be seen to think that it is money laundering , I currently doubt it.

I doubt thus would work. If you make a huge deposit or win a huge amount of money you are mostly likely going to be asked to pass kyc even if you don't withdraw the whole amount and only make small withdrawals every now and then. Casino owners are smart and you can't fool them like this. Better stay safe and don't get involved in illegal activities in first place.

[Quidat]

Of all these things when talking about money laundering, it is not possible to act because as many have said, KYC alone is the biggest deterrent to those who try to do it and those who try it would be very foolish, and they cannot Camouflage themselves to be able to do it. things inside the casino and then play and withdraw, I don't know if a player can withdraw little by little what they want or will give them enough time to investigate it, because if a person makes a large deposit and plays a little and then wants to withdraw a little bit of money I don't know if they leave it or submit to a great demand kyc, so these things are what must be seen to think that it is money laundering , I currently doubt it.

I doubt thus would work. If you make a huge deposit or win a huge amount of money you are mostly likely going to be asked to pass kyc even if you don't withdraw the whole amount and only make small withdrawals every now and then. Casino owners are smart and you can't fool them like this. Better stay safe and don't get involved in illegal activities in first place.

No one with those money launderers would be out of their mind on using up casinos to wash out their coins via tending to make huge deposits and pulling it out after wards. Its true that casino owners
wont really be that so dumb on what are the probabilities for them to be used with those launderers and come to think that these businesses are really that regulated on which means that it would really be normal that they would really be needing to follow up some laws and regulations for them to avoid and fight off against money laundering.  Whenever there is really that a huge deposit then for sure casino owners or the team would already be having that kind of focus on you or getting that spotlight in regarding with your activity, if ever you have lots it all then its fine by them since its an advantage but on the time that you are snipping out big amount of winning or profits then this is where they would really be starting on taking such step and for you who do have plans on laundering money will definitely be having that huge headache because you cant be so sure whether they would be releasing those funds or not. There's still lots of things need to be considered out.

[LUCKMCFLY]

Of all these things when talking about money laundering, it is not possible to act because as many have said, KYC alone is the biggest deterrent to those who try to do it and those who try it would be very foolish, and they cannot Camouflage themselves to be able to do it. things inside the casino and then play and withdraw, I don't know if a player can withdraw little by little what they want or will give them enough time to investigate it, because if a person makes a large deposit and plays a little and then wants to withdraw a little bit of money I don't know if they leave it or submit to a great demand kyc, so these things are what must be seen to think that it is money laundering , I currently doubt it.

I doubt thus would work. If you make a huge deposit or win a huge amount of money you are mostly likely going to be asked to pass kyc even if you don't withdraw the whole amount and only make small withdrawals every now and then. Casino owners are smart and you can't fool them like this. Better stay safe and don't get involved in illegal activities in first place.

No one with those money launderers would be out of their mind on using up casinos to wash out their coins via tending to make huge deposits and pulling it out after wards. Its true that casino owners
wont really be that so dumb on what are the probabilities for them to be used with those launderers and come to think that these businesses are really that regulated on which means that it would really be normal that they would really be needing to follow up some laws and regulations for them to avoid and fight off against money laundering.  Whenever there is really that a huge deposit then for sure casino owners or the team would already be having that kind of focus on you or getting that spotlight in regarding with your activity, if ever you have lots it all then its fine by them since its an advantage but on the time that you are snipping out big amount of winning or profits then this is where they would really be starting on taking such step and for you who do have plans on laundering money will definitely be having that huge headache because you cant be so sure whether they would be releasing those funds or not. There's still lots of things need to be considered out.

Currently, casinos do many things so that people can provide KYC and remain calm, even if it is a very small player, at the time of making a withdrawal they will always request their KYC request before laughing, and that is something that they always do. They are going to do, in fact, as I had said in previous comments, in threads similar to this one, all only casinos before making their deposit should request the KYC and get that intense, and not ask for them in the withdrawal, because that does bother, it doesn't and there is a worse thing that one needs to request a withdrawal to be made at once and that they do not come out that the KYC must be complied with, it is something that bothers a lot, because there are some casinos that generally when the KYC is sent to them, it takes a long time to give it the go-ahead, and then for whatever reason they start to say that the coupon doesn't work for them, that they have to send it again and the intensity begins, and this makes some players despair and start playing with their winnings, ending up losing everything , then the scenario would be very different if they request the KYC before making the deposit, because the longer they take to approve it, because the desire to deposit in that casino passes and the players do not deposit and it is one less client, they should do that instead. in no time they will approve that KYC.

I wonder if many Casinos would do that or would be willing to do that , because if they Want to collect and avoid money laundering and say no to the alleged money laundering, they should do it that way , which is much Better , that's how it is They come from many reasons, misunderstandings on the part of the players and misunderstandings on the part of the casino, in the case of other people, the fact that they have a lot of money then will not make them want to deposit it in a casino, because if they are going to use it launder money, I would be one who would not put the money there, I prefer to put it in an exchange where I can trade, so these things are what casinos should see, that players or non-players are not all, they will not put a lot of money, Because if they start to do all that type of investigation, it's worse than a bank, because what's missing is that they ask for the origin of funds , and in Crypto all that is.

[khaled0111]

I wonder if many Casinos would do that or would be willing to do that , because if they Want to collect and avoid money laundering and say no to the alleged money laundering, they should do it that way , which is much Better , that's how it is They come from many reasons, misunderstandings on the part of the players and misunderstandings on the part of the casino,

Some crypto casinos do that. They are not that many but the request their customers to verify their identities upon registration and before making their very first deposit.
Personally, I appreciate that but, to be honest, we have to admit that not all casinos can do it as it's not good for their business. They know that many customers will just close the browser's tab and move to another casino if they are forced to pass kyc upon registration.
As I said, it's understandable but whether it's ethical or not, that's another matter.

[Mahanton]

I wonder if many Casinos would do that or would be willing to do that , because if they Want to collect and avoid money laundering and say no to the alleged money laundering, they should do it that way , which is much Better , that's how it is They come from many reasons, misunderstandings on the part of the players and misunderstandings on the part of the casino,

Some crypto casinos do that. They are not that many but the request their customers to verify their identities upon registration and before making their very first deposit.
Personally, I appreciate that but, to be honest, we have to admit that not all casinos can do it as it's not good for their business. They know that many customers will just close the browser's tab and move to another casino if they are forced to pass kyc upon registration.
As I said, it's understandable but whether it's ethical or not, that's another matter.

Can you point out which casinos are asking for some KYC on the time that you do make out deposit specially crypto casino based?

So far i havent able to encounter such casino that would be initially asking out for some verification because this is usually be done on fiat based casinos which its their standard but not something
on the time that you do deal with crypto based casinos.Yes, they could ask out on the time that you had violated something against their terms and conditions on which it is really that a common concept or situation that we do able to see. Money laundering thing is always been that a main issue in regarding with these companies or industry on which that whenever we do hit that kind of threshold or whatever violation then they would
really be tend to ask out for verification.Yes, it do sucks but we dont have not choice.

Wagering your laundered money? It is seems that this one wont really be that something ideal for launderer to do because gambling do always mean about losing money
and house do always win in the end.

[slapper]

~snip~

Currently, casinos do many things so that people can provide KYC and remain calm, even if it is a very small player, at the time of making a withdrawal they will always request their KYC request before laughing, and that is something that they always do. They are going to do, in fact, as I had said in previous comments, in threads similar to this one, all only casinos before making their deposit should request the KYC and get that intense, and not ask for them in the withdrawal, because that does bother, it doesn't and there is a worse thing that one needs to request a withdrawal to be made at once and that they do not come out that the KYC must be complied with, it is something that bothers a lot, because there are some casinos that generally when the KYC is sent to them, it takes a long time to give it the go-ahead, and then for whatever reason they start to say that the coupon doesn't work for them, that they have to send it again and the intensity begins, and this makes some players despair and start playing with their winnings, ending up losing everything , then the scenario would be very different if they request the KYC before making the deposit, because the longer they take to approve it, because the desire to deposit in that casino passes and the players do not deposit and it is one less client, they should do that instead. in no time they will approve that KYC.

I wonder if many Casinos would do that or would be willing to do that , because if they Want to collect and avoid money laundering and say no to the alleged money laundering, they should do it that way , which is much Better , that's how it is They come from many reasons, misunderstandings on the part of the players and misunderstandings on the part of the casino, in the case of other people, the fact that they have a lot of money then will not make them want to deposit it in a casino, because if they are going to use it launder money, I would be one who would not put the money there, I prefer to put it in an exchange where I can trade, so these things are what casinos should see, that players or non-players are not all, they will not put a lot of money, Because if they start to do all that type of investigation, it's worse than a bank, because what's missing is that they ask for the origin of funds , and in Crypto all that is.

Just like any other business, casinos have to follow rules. Don't kid yourself: they're not organizations, they're businesses that try to make as much money as possible. They'll ask for KYC when you take money because it gives them a chance. A way to keep your money; a chance to gamble away your gains. It's a sneaky way to get business, believe me. They only care about themselves, not about you

And about the idea of doing KYC before making a deposit, do you think casinos would give up possible customers willingly? Nah! Also, the situation is complicated. If they are too strict, they will turn away whales, or people who spend a lot of money. If they're not careful, they could break the law. Your "solution" might make sense, but it doesn't work for everyone, you know. Even putting aside the question of whether it's legal, it hurts the casinos' business plan

[LUCKMCFLY]

~snip~

Currently, casinos do many things so that people can provide KYC and remain calm, even if it is a very small player, at the time of making a withdrawal they will always request their KYC request before laughing, and that is something that they always do. They are going to do, in fact, as I had said in previous comments, in threads similar to this one, all only casinos before making their deposit should request the KYC and get that intense, and not ask for them in the withdrawal, because that does bother, it doesn't and there is a worse thing that one needs to request a withdrawal to be made at once and that they do not come out that the KYC must be complied with, it is something that bothers a lot, because there are some casinos that generally when the KYC is sent to them, it takes a long time to give it the go-ahead, and then for whatever reason they start to say that the coupon doesn't work for them, that they have to send it again and the intensity begins, and this makes some players despair and start playing with their winnings, ending up losing everything , then the scenario would be very different if they request the KYC before making the deposit, because the longer they take to approve it, because the desire to deposit in that casino passes and the players do not deposit and it is one less client, they should do that instead. in no time they will approve that KYC.

I wonder if many Casinos would do that or would be willing to do that , because if they Want to collect and avoid money laundering and say no to the alleged money laundering, they should do it that way , which is much Better , that's how it is They come from many reasons, misunderstandings on the part of the players and misunderstandings on the part of the casino, in the case of other people, the fact that they have a lot of money then will not make them want to deposit it in a casino, because if they are going to use it launder money, I would be one who would not put the money there, I prefer to put it in an exchange where I can trade, so these things are what casinos should see, that players or non-players are not all, they will not put a lot of money, Because if they start to do all that type of investigation, it's worse than a bank, because what's missing is that they ask for the origin of funds , and in Crypto all that is.

Just like any other business, casinos have to follow rules. Don't kid yourself: they're not organizations, they're businesses that try to make as much money as possible. They'll ask for KYC when you take money because it gives them a chance. A way to keep your money; a chance to gamble away your gains. It's a sneaky way to get business, believe me. They only care about themselves, not about you

And about the idea of doing KYC before making a deposit, do you think casinos would give up possible customers willingly? Nah! Also, the situation is complicated. If they are too strict, they will turn away whales, or people who spend a lot of money. If they're not careful, they could break the law. Your "solution" might make sense, but it doesn't work for everyone, you know. Even putting aside the question of whether it's legal, it hurts the casinos' business plan

Well, many have said what it is, for me the ideal is for a crypto casino to ask for the KYC at the time of the deposit, what happens is that sometimes with so many notices from the casinos that are especially the new ones, which say, deposit, I deposited like a million times, because that is something that overwhelms me, but what they have said is honestly true, if a casino says that to make a deposit you have to comply with the KYC it is something that is scary and any player closes the tab, but At the end of it all, if we start to think carefully, it is better this way, because if you comply with KYC that will give rise to everything going well from then on, both for the deposit and for the withdrawal, on the other hand, as they do with the Withdrawal, the person has already lost, the money is inside the casino and only to remove it they have to comply with that annoying condition, so some casinos do the possibiole for demanding the KYC very successfully, and as I said before, some players They play games and what they do is lose money, which I don't see well.

If the casino then requested the KYC and it happens, there is no waiting, there is nothing, and that would force the KYC to be immediate, something like the brokers when they are going to register, that does not last even 3 minutes to do such process, so if it were a KYC like that, but that would allow you to be free, without the need to do more things, everything would be better, and cooler, but there are players who join, of course we can't put all the casinos like that in that bag , I take out my own stake.com, which the KYC and its entire process is really quite fast, so I don't see any problem there, on the other hand there are casinos that are very fast and don't have a problem, but of course, they are old casinos, which have a huge infrastructure, which have great staff who are obviously very experienced, who have gone through processes of all kinds and here the experience and trust of the site are measured, I think that is what can be most evident when it comes to being in a good casino.

[Kakmakr]

A money laundering syndicate will not use this method to launder their money, because they will lose too much money in the process. Let's take Stake.com for instance.... you can put Dice on a 98% win change and still spend $100 for every $10 000 wagered.... and then you will trigger their money laundering matrix if you have a pattern of just wagering and withdrawing the proceeds. 

It is more profitable for them to use "front" companies with cooked books and then pushing those fake profits through the traditional Banking system, like they did in the past. 

[iv4n]

A money laundering syndicate will not use this method to launder their money, because they will lose too much money in the process. Let's take Stake.com for instance.... you can put Dice on a 98% win change and still spend $100 for every $10 000 wagered.... and then you will trigger their money laundering matrix if you have a pattern of just wagering and withdrawing the proceeds. 

It is more profitable for them to use "front" companies with cooked books and then pushing those fake profits through the traditional Banking system, like they did in the past. 

Singapore Police Bust Gambling Ring, Seize Millions in Crypto and Assets - https://www.btcgosu.com/blog/news/singapore-police-bust-gambling-ring-seize-millions-in-crypto-and-assets/

This significant breakthrough has been underscored by the seizure of a staggering $735 million worth of assets.
The confiscated properties, totaling 94, spanned various regions, along with 55 vehicles and an impressive assortment of cryptocurrency holdings.

Money laundering is never never-ending story. And when people launder money they will pay some percent of the total amount for sure. More or less probably depends on the safety and security of the process itself. Those who want more security will have to pay a little more for it, like in everything else.

[danadc]

I wonder something, can money be laundered at this point in life in an asino? I don't see the way, the site will have to have complicity with the people that is being made, because money laundering is now very difficult to do, with all the control that there is with the kyc and with all the requirements that the casino has to make withdrawals, I don't see the possibility that they can do something like this, the only way is that the casino owners are in complicity to do it, the criminals look for casinos to play and spend money, but I don't see that they use it to launder the money, because it is a delicate process and it implies danger for your money, criminals do not take those risks.

[Fatunad]

A money laundering syndicate will not use this method to launder their money, because they will lose too much money in the process. Let's take Stake.com for instance.... you can put Dice on a 98% win change and still spend $100 for every $10 000 wagered.... and then you will trigger their money laundering matrix if you have a pattern of just wagering and withdrawing the proceeds.  

It is more profitable for them to use "front" companies with cooked books and then pushing those fake profits through the traditional Banking system, like they did in the past.  

The worst, they might lose it all because we know on how gambling works and how risky it is on the time you do play with your funds whether its a laundered money or a legit or legal one it doesnt really matter.
I agree on what you had stated there which on the time that they are seeing that you are doing something or those patterns then that would be ringing up the bell.

I wonder something, can money be laundered at this point in life in an asino? I don't see the way, the site will have to have complicity with the people that is being made, because money laundering is now very difficult to do, with all the control that there is with the kyc and with all the requirements that the casino has to make withdrawals, I don't see the possibility that they can do something like this, the only way is that the casino owners are in complicity to do it, the criminals look for casinos to play and spend money, but I don't see that they use it to launder the money, because it is a delicate process and it implies danger for your money, criminals do not take those risks.

Each of them or all of them does have that kind of threshold and since these places are centralized then it would really be that going along with those basic behavior like having that
kyc on the time that you do able to hit those lines. If you do tend to launder money which it do talks about huge amounts then you do know on what they gonna do next
which is asking out that verification and this is something that you dont like.Right?

[tjtonmoy]

So does this mean that there is a loophole here and the money launderers can easily by pass this wagering requirement?

Let's just say that one time a money launderer does that and gets away with it. Place a bet with a 99% winning chance and win that bet to wager his whole fund. And he does that in a way that the betting platform is unable to detect him. That could be a one-time job. Because the next time this suspicious activity will be detected. Thus, those money launderer will not be able to do it again.

Gambling platforms have many safety features and pattern-identifying algorithm that helps them prevent such actions. They may limit betting numbers on how many times you can bet and with what amount. Also if such activity is found with any accounts, they might revoke or restrict that account from withdrawing any funds. These measures prevent those platforms from using as a money loundering platform.