The American Bankers' Association outlined their issues with UIGEA on their website. Despite repeated requests from members of Congress, Internet gaming sites, and the financial industry itself-the group saddled with the unfunded mandate to manage this situation-neither UIGEA nor the rules written to implement it contain a definition of unlawful Internet gambling.
Banks asked for this to be clarified. They also asked for a list of sites forbidden to make or receive payments under UIGEA. But the government was not forthcoming, leaving banks in an position analogous to someone who says, "I don't know what art is, but I know what I like."
Banks have a bit of time on their side, and are hoping the law will change by the December 1, 2009 due date when they are expected to fully comply with UIGEA.
Most of the responsibility for banks occurs when accounts are opened. New commercial accounts must be investigated to ensure that they do not represent illegal online gambling. Internet gambling sites operating legally bear the burden of proving to banks they are within the law. That, however, will be difficult at best to do, and may prove impossible with the multitude of state and federal laws that sometimes appear to conflict with one another.
Horse racing, specifically exempt in the UIGEA, is still viewed by the Department of Justice as operating outside the law when it comes to online wagers. At least that's the way DoJ reads the Wire Act. It's probably wrong, but that will not stop their misinterpretation-at least not until there's a clear court decision to clarify things.
UIGEA is a law most people and involved organizations don't seem to want. There's no agreement on what it covers, no procedures that are clearly understood regarding enforcement, and it lacks clear and easily understood definitions to guide its administration and enforcement. Perhaps it's time to shuffle up and offer a new deal that would please bankers, much of congress, many law enforcement agencies, and poker players too.
