When a casino confiscates funds, who actually gets the money?

[Questat]

So this is in relation to my first topic created.

When a casino freezes an account for a TOS violation and decides to confiscate the funds, what really happens to that money? Does the casino keep it as part of their income, or are they required to remit it to their regulator or some authority?

Casinos often say “funds are forfeited,” but they rarely explain where it goes after that. If it just stays with the casino, that raises obvious questions about incentives and abuse.

Anyone here know how this works in practice, or have experience with licensed casinos explaining this clearly?

[Odohu]

The is not rocket science, when casino confiscate funds, the money belong to them. It is similar to when government confiscate cryptocurrency of people they says violates the law. German government confiscated Bitcoin worth billions and sold them off taking the money. The US government have the highest Bitcoin confiscation which they used to set up strategic reserve... these are money of other people but because they have the power to seize them, they took possession of those funds. This is exactly what happens in the case of casinos when they notice a violation.

[Agbamoni]

The is not rocket science, when casino confiscate funds, the money belong to them. It is similar to when government confiscate cryptocurrency of people they says violates the law. German government confiscated Bitcoin worth billions and sold them off taking the money. The US government have the highest Bitcoin confiscation which they used to set up strategic reserve... these are people of other people but because they have the power to seize them, they take possession of those funds. This is exactly what happens in the case of casinos.

No, it is not always like that for all casinos. In regard to a crypto casino, what happens to consolidated funds depends on jurisdiction and licensing. In strict jurisdiction and licensing, the regulators confiscate the funds, keeping them pending until a final decision is made on whether the casino takes them or they take the funds. While in lightly regulated casinos, the casinos simply take the funds, which will be recorded under confiscated funds and used for operational purposes.

[mirakal]

The is not rocket science, when casino confiscate funds, the money belong to them.

That’s not really correct though. What if the user’s violation didn’t actually cause any loss to the casino at all, meaning the casino didn’t lose money in the first place. If they still confiscate the funds, that would only make sense if the law specifically requires them to do so.

A good example is money laundering cases, where casinos are required to freeze or confiscate funds in coordination with the government. But in that situation, do casinos actually have the right to keep the money for themselves? No, they don’t.

[aioc]

The is not rocket science, when casino confiscate funds, the money belong to them.

I also believe that's how it works; they are the ones creating the terms, and they can include in their terms that they can retain the funds they confiscated, based on the rights granted to them by their license issuer. This is no different from an exchange; if you send funds below the minimum they accept, they consider it a donation.
Casinos will fight to retain those funds if the gambler resorts to arbitrary measures due to fraud, but if the casinos are credible and want to gain the community's goodwill, they could return the deposit rather than the gambler's profit.

[Charles-Tim]

Legally, if the money is seized because the gambler violates the gambling site terms of service, except money laundering and criminal activities, the gambling site will take the money.

If the money is seized by the government or huge enough and government noticed it is seized because of money laundering or criminal activity, the money will legally belongs to the government.

If the money is seized because of other reasons like seized to be given to the rightful owner, the money will be given to the right owner. The court may be involved in this third case.

[Wiwo]

The is not rocket science, when casino confiscate funds, the money belong to them.

That’s not really correct though. What if the user’s violation didn’t actually cause any loss to the casino at all, meaning the casino didn’t lose money in the first place. If they still confiscate the funds, that would only make sense if the law specifically requires them to do so.

A good example is money laundering cases, where casinos are required to freeze or confiscate funds in coordination with the government. But in that situation, do casinos actually have the right to keep the money for themselves? No, they don’t.

Meaning the government get the money in the end when all court papers concerning the forfeiting of such funds are made, just as the government have the right to take possession of every proceeds of crimes that the main victim's can not be identified.

Confiscated funds outcome have varities there are cases where the casino could keep the money,  let say when the gambler account is blocked for casino abuse like game abuse winnings or bonuses abuse winning all that goes to the casino and not government.

[Oluwa-btc]

Casinos often say “funds are forfeited,” but they rarely explain where it goes after that. If it just stays with the casino, that raises obvious questions about incentives and abuse.

Okay let me get this straight when a casino issue a ban on a user's account the deposit is meant to return back to the users not the casino but in this context usually when a casino confiscate funds the money eventually belongs to them. I've seen situations as this involving one with higher authority and the lower subject, where whbe the subjects defaults in a way their funds are now being hijacked and confiscated so if that be the case some casinos can actually adopt such policies to reprimand some users of illegal acts.

[Orpichukwu]

The casino will indeed be the ones to get the money. I don't think they report it back to any authority unless in a case of money laundering or the seizure is at the request of the authorities; then they will have to report it back to them, but if it's just an issue between the business owners (casino), then authorities don't have a hand in that fund.

[GeorgeJohn]

When a casino freezes an account for a TOS violation and decides to confiscate the funds, what really happens to that money?

if account is freezes it means that the owner of the account will not have access to the account unless it meets the demands of the platform the account were established under...

To cut it short, if account is freeze, the platform the account is been established under have access to the account, so if theirs no litigation after awhile the account is been frozen, the platform will have access to withdraw what's in that account and shut it down totally

Does the casino keep it as part of their income, or are they required to remit it to their regulator or some authority?

If you dont meets up the requirements that means you don't have access to the account and casino will make use of what is in that account as their own...because it don't know were they channel the funds to.

[rbynxx]

So this is in relation to my first topic created.

When a casino freezes an account for a TOS violation and decides to confiscate the funds, what really happens to that money? Does the casino keep it as part of their income, or are they required to remit it to their regulator or some authority?

Casinos often say “funds are forfeited,” but they rarely explain where it goes after that. If it just stays with the casino, that raises obvious questions about incentives and abuse.

Anyone here know how this works in practice, or have experience with licensed casinos explaining this clearly?

I guess it depends on the level of violation but some of the times it is frozen but they'll (casino) get it eventually or the regulators/government. I think they rarely explain most of these violations it because it's on their TOS which most gamblers do not tend to read and they'll eventually when they come across that their account was banned or their balance was forfeited.

[silpersurfer]

The money is ultimately the casino’s. Most do not automatically deposit it with the regulators or any other authority unless there is a specific obligation under their licensing rules or by any legal order to do so, therefore explanations about where does the money go are most of the time very unclear or incomplete.

Issues essentially lie when seizures happen without solid, clear reasons or with flimsy evidence, and merely on grounds of TOS violations. In such cases, it would be very difficult not to look at it as a form of cheating. If the funds go straight to the casino, there is an obvious incentive for them to abuse their own rules against people who win large amounts. Properly licensed casinos should be transparent, give a reasonable justification, and open channels for any disputes through the regulator. Otherwise, without transparency and accountability, those seized funds sound more like an excuse than rule enforcement.

[Russlenat]

I guess it really depends on the type of violation. If it’s something like cheating or bonus abuse, where the casino already paid out and only later found out the player was abusing the system, then it makes sense that the confiscated funds stay with the casino.

But for more serious violations like using the casino for money laundering, which is exactly why KYC exists, those funds usually go to regulators or the relevant government agency. That’s what compliance is about, because if a casino allows it to continue even after there are red flags, they could end up being held responsible for helping the crime happen.

[Agbe]

Well there's nothing complicated about this, when a casino confiscated funds that was taken from a gambler that was probably cheating or broke the rules of the casino the money goes back to the casino. when a gambler wins an amount of money the win is paid out by the casino which means that the casino has the right to withhold wins when gamblers use dubious means to try and claim them. But if this to happen it depends on the level of gamblers offense.

[Mia Chloe]

So this is in relation to my first topic created.
When a casino freezes an account for a TOS violation and decides to confiscate the funds, what really happens to that money? Does the casino keep it as part of their income, or are they required to remit it to their regulator or some authority?
Casinos often say “funds are forfeited,” but they rarely explain where it goes after that. If it just stays with the casino, that raises obvious questions about incentives and abuse.
Anyone here know how this works in practice, or have experience with licensed casinos explaining this clearly?

Well it depends on how serious of a situation it eventually turns out to be. On a regular basis they obviously keep the money but in bigger cases of fraud probably one where stolen funds were moved to the casino to try to kill traces, if the government eventually gets involved then regulatory procedures may not allow them keep it.

There have been cases of entire sites being seized because of similar cases which I think it's part of the reasons some casinos even go as far as blacklisting certain addresses.

[Cryptoprincess101]

Well there's nothing complicated about this, when a casino confiscated funds that was taken from a gambler that was probably cheating or broke the rules of the casino the money goes back to the casino. when a gambler wins an amount of money the win is paid out by the casino which means that the casino has the right to withhold wins when gamblers use dubious means to try and claim them. But if this to happen it depends on the level of gamblers offense.

OP is not talking about a case of cheating, he specifically said KYC violation which means the account might have been registered to launder money which could be the reason why a user might not want to undergo KYC verification. Casinos are very smart because most of them are also very crooked so if they see an account that is not KYC verified and maybe a large sum of money is being deposited, they won't hesitate to ask for KYC because they know that if you don't provide it then they have the right to confiscate the funds and even claim it and since you didn't do any KYC verification, you can't even fight them legally because they can accuse you of laundering money in their platform.

[Cryptomultiplier]

A casino can confiscate funds for different reasons because they are mostly regulated by the government and are governed by policies, hence why the need for KYC requirements and other id verification.
Suspected money laundering or fraud is a number one concern for regulators and any money confiscated on this reason either goes to the government Treasury or cryptocurrency strategic reserve bank or to the victims. While if it was confiscated for reasons of bonus abuse or breaking the rules of terms of agreement, the casino gets it.
That's as far as I know, but a gambler should follow proper channels to know why their funds has been confiscated before letting such an issue slide.

[mirakal]

The is not rocket science, when casino confiscate funds, the money belong to them.

That’s not really correct though. What if the user’s violation didn’t actually cause any loss to the casino at all, meaning the casino didn’t lose money in the first place. If they still confiscate the funds, that would only make sense if the law specifically requires them to do so.

A good example is money laundering cases, where casinos are required to freeze or confiscate funds in coordination with the government. But in that situation, do casinos actually have the right to keep the money for themselves? No, they don’t.

Meaning the government get the money in the end when all court papers concerning the forfeiting of such funds are made, just as the government have the right to take possession of every proceeds of crimes that the main victim's can not be identified.

Every move should be done with proper guidelines and clearly documented on paper, that’s for the protection of both the casino and the government agency involved. Usually this part is straightforward since it’s the government implementing it. Once an account or person is already on a watchlist, court orders tend to come easily, they just need to enforce it properly to catch and handle the case.

[livingfree]

So this is in relation to my first topic created.

When a casino freezes an account for a TOS violation and decides to confiscate the funds, what really happens to that money? Does the casino keep it as part of their income, or are they required to remit it to their regulator or some authority?

I don't think that they're remitting that to the government. They're keeping that for sure and they have a threshold for how long it shouldn't be accessed by the user first before they take over.

Casinos often say “funds are forfeited,” but they rarely explain where it goes after that. If it just stays with the casino, that raises obvious questions about incentives and abuse.

Anyone here know how this works in practice, or have experience with licensed casinos explaining this clearly?

That's the usual thing with the casinos, they're not disclosing anything for any reason if someone has found with that excuse.

[freedomgo]

I don't think that they're remitting that to the government. They're keeping that for sure and they have a threshold for how long it shouldn't be accessed by the user first before they take over.

Once the funds are already confiscated, there’s basically no chance for the gambler to recover them, since the casino will always say the action was based on a TOS violation. The real question now isn’t whether they can confiscate it, because that part is already done, but whether the casino is actually allowed to keep the funds, or if they’re supposed to forward them to the relevant government agency or regulator instead.