THE BETTING TAX IN SOUTH AFRICA [To the Editor of
the SPECTATOR.] Sin,—In the Union of South Africa the taxation of betting is in the hands of the various Provincial Councils. The Cape Provincial Council made a provision for the tax under Ordi- nance No. 8 of 1921, called "The Betting Regulation and Taxation Ordinance," and has since derived a considerable amount of revenue from this source. This Ordinance provides for the establishment, in four large centres of the Cape Pro- vince, of Tattersalls Committees to control, regulate and adjudicate upon betting on racing in "authorized places known as Tattersalls Rooms," in each centre. Each Corn- mittee consists of seven members, three of whom are nomi- nated by the Administrator of the Province, two by Tatter- SLIM Club, and the remaining two by any duly constituted racing clubs established in that centre. The Committee, through its Secretary, exercises control over all licensed book- makers, and is responsible to the Provincial Administration for the collection of the tax.
The tax is one of five per cent, on winnings. This percentage is deducted by the bookmaker from the amount of each winning bet exeluding any amount deposited as a stake. For example, if a 'punter" has made a successful cash bet of £1 on a five to one chance, he receives from the bookmaker in return for his ticket the sum of 15 15., being his stake of XI, plus his winnings of 15, less five per cent. tax on his winnings. If the bet had been on credit the amount paid out would be, of course, only £.4 15s., being 15 less tax. The bookmaker, in turn, is responsible for the eventual payment of this tax to the Tattersalls Committee. The operation of the tax will therefore be seen to be simplicity itself as far as the public is concerned, and generally each individual is sufficiently gratified at having won to prevent the deduction of the tax from being regarded by him as irksome or onerous. The bookmaker also pays five per cent. on his own winnings, and for the purposes of the tax this percentage is calculated in two ways, namely (a) on his winnings on any race upon which he has laid bets in Tattersalls Rooms, and (h) on his winnings upon a race-course at any particular meeting. He is not permitted to deduct expenses from the total of these winnings. The Secretary of Tattersalls has power to examine each book- maker's books at any time, and stringent regulations are laid down to assist the Secretary in the collection of the tax and to insure that there is no evasion. Forms are provided whereon the bookmaker has to show a return of his winnings as in (a) and (b) above, and he has to attest on oath the truth of his return. Additional taxes are levied upon the bookmaker in respect to licences. Before he can carry on business he must pay to the Revenue a registration fee of 15 5s., and a licence of /2 2s. for every race meeting at which he stands. Further, an annual licence of 150 is payable in respect to the right of a bookmaker to carry on his business in Tattersalls Rooms.
Each Province of the Union has similar legislation. Thus it will be seen that bookmakers in South Africa are compelled to contribute substantially to the Revenue. They are unani- mous in their condemnation of the Betting Ordinances ; but the members of the public, on the other hand, recognize in general the soundness of the tax. Neither party to a bet having the right, to invoke the aid of the Courts should pay- ment not be forthcoming, it cannot be said that legal recogni- tion and encouragement have been given to betting as a result of the tax. On the contrary, the effect of the measure is definitely repressive, since the practice of betting, while compelled to render material assistance to the State, receives no help in return. This fact alone should commend the tax to those who oppose it on conscientious grounds. It must be recognized that the habit of betting on horse-racing is so widespread and deeply ingrained that no moralizing will eradicate it. This may be deplorable, but it is true. It passes comprehension, therefore, how anyone, whose living is not derived from betting, can oppose a measure which, while turning this practice to the very material benefit of the State, tends, at the same time, to discourage it.—! am Sir, &c., II. S. WAKEFIELD. East London, South Africa.
Previous page
