Gioconews Casino – Casino, between reorganization and warnings from the Constitutional Court

If the government crisis allows it, it’s time to reorganize casino law, also listen to the appeal of the Constitutional Court.

Maybe we’ll talk about it again, and it was time, too. That casinos have been without a specific law for decades is nothing new; just remember that the Constitutional Court has called on Parliament to draft an organic law on casinos, and not even to date from 1985 with the statements n. 152/85, n. 291/01 and n. 438/02.
I had the opportunity, who deals with gaming houses on tax, work and social security for technical staff, to read the President’s Decree n.640 of 26.10.1972, where the tax on shows on admission tickets to houses from games.

During the XVII Legislative Assembly, I believe in 2018, in the Senate of the Republic Bill No. 2895 on the establishment of new gaming houses in Italy.
Having the bill n. 1185 of the 16th Legislative Assembly, I list the topics that are often included in the other numerous projects and bills that, it seems to me, in 1992.
Purpose of the Act, establishment of new casinos, establishment and management, general specifications, implementing provisions, dividends from games, central management for control of casinos and special police unit, casinos in activities, common provisions and administrative sanctions. Some projects and / or bills also provided for the opening of casinos on ships.

Allow me to quote a judgment of the Constitutional Court, n. 185 of 2004, in which it appears only the state has the power to create new casinos.
Admittedly, the existing gaming houses were established according to the modalities of the time and with an explicit departure from the rules of the Penal Code on gambling.
The above procedure is also mandatory for any new ones.
I can not understand, most likely, when we enter a field where I am not an expert at all, yes almost completely fasting, why Dpr n. 640/72 allows for a fee upon access to the casino, and for these there are still no organic law that the Supreme Court has advocated for.
The only comprehensibility derived from the existence of the decrees dating back to 1927 has allowed the opening of the casinos that exist in the country today, and perhaps this is the case.

Among the topics covered by the aforementioned bill, in art. 5 “Implementing Regulation” I can only agree with point (e) the procedures for performing check exchanges and prepayments in the gaming house with the recognition of the same, regardless of type. 1933 of the Civil Code, the possibility of exercising the act of recovery of gambling credits.
I add, allow me, the page falls within the area of ​​natural obligations.

At the same time, I recognize the validity of the tax referred to in the aforementioned Presidential Decree 640/72, despite the lack of organic legislation proposed by the Supreme Court, which calls on it to do so.
There are other issues that Parliament and the Senate should take into account when legislating on casinos, which is likely to extend the consultation from any possible point of view.

It is clearly another matter, a topic that can be considered if necessary. Now there is only from Ask yourself if the tax authorities believe, given the times, to privilege the revenue from online gambling (a percentage of the difference between the game and collected plus any taxes to be paid by the concessionaires) and the relative employment or thoughts, even in anticipation of better situations, about possible establishment of new gaming houses without forgetting to immediately draft a law in the sense of , what the Constitutional Court suggests.

I clearly do not have the slightest intention of supporting one or the other solution I see one and only need a sector that seems to me to represent a significant interest in the field of tourism.

Leave a Comment