Shout out to one time friend of the TG board Michael Beychok and former NHC Champ. He just made a post that highlighted the gambling tax issue on twitter minutes ago.

@fairplaygov wrote on X (pointed out by Beychock):

"@SenatorLankford (R-OK) comes out against reversing the gambling loss tax deduction cap of 90%."

"He is on the Finance committee where this originated."

"Oklahoma has 140+ tribal casinos run by 33 tribes, more than any other state."
__________

In what I guess what one would call a subtweet under this one, @LauraEWeiss16 described it also including that the push to reverse this tax hike "has hit a snag." And further Lankford said "It's not an unrealistic change" and "It's a pretty minor change in that tax policy."

_________

A minor snag. LOL. Roman, you are correct, in theory it should all be reported. My tax law class 25 years ago (YIKES where did the time go?) emphasized "any income whatsoever" when considering if something is taxable as step 1 in the analysis. However, almost no one reports their gambling winnings and losses that is a recreational player unless they get hit with a big "signer" as they were called in the old days. That threshold is more difficult to meet now but it could happen. Further, the current Treasury rules don't require the ADW's to report their customer's betting ledgers to them. If they did, handle really would absolutely plummet although on track handle would see a spike upward.

It is interesting. The folks close to Marshall Gramm and I've heard two of them remark since last summer that this tax issue would likely be resolved in 2026 AND it would retroactive. Guess Gramm and his political influence via Dad didn't see the old Lankford snag coming at 'em.
_____________

No one connects this tax hike to the ownership deduction that was part of the Big Beautiful Bill. But the way NTRA celebrated it, they surely worked hard to get that for the game's owners. You have to give up something in politics to get something back. And well, those nasty, degenerate gamblers can make up that difference was the behind the scenes thinking I assume. Again, no one is saying that out loud though.

The Cicero Bears, of course, was in jest. But it has a nice ring to it.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2026 08:34PM by Fairmount1.