Carl Icahn, Stephen Sweeney Go At It Over Atlantic City's Gambling Future - Manassehs Children
single,single-post,postid-5127,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-theme-ver-5.7,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.3.4,vc_responsive

Carl Icahn, Stephen Sweeney Go At It Over Atlantic City’s Gambling Future

05 Mar Carl Icahn, Stephen Sweeney Go At It Over Atlantic City’s Gambling Future

Carl Icahn accuses brand New Jersey State Senate President Stephen Sweeney of selling out Atlantic City by supporting a north Jersey casino.

Business mogul Carl Icahn and New Jersey State Senate President Stephen Sweeney exchanged harsh terms last Friday, with each accusing the other of selling out some portion of Atlantic City for their very own gain. The war of words started after Sweeney participated in protests with union employees from the Trump Taj Mahal, protests of which Icahn proved to be a major target.

As we reported earlier this week, those protests were built to react against a Trump Entertainment want to bust out of a contract and cut pensions and benefits for workers to be able to cut costs and keep the casino open.

The business states that the casino will need to close on November 13 unless many concessions are granted to it, such as the cutbacks in employee benefits and $25 million in aid from the state, along with a tax assessment that is reduced.

Workers Blame Icahn

But Icahn turned out to be a figure that is major the protests. The protesters demonstrated near the Tropicana, that will be owned by a group led by Icahn, and numerous see him as the real threat to the advantages and wages made available from their present positions. In bankruptcy court, Trump Entertainment has required permission to turn over its venue to Icahn by transforming the debt he holds in the company into ownership of the casino. Icahn says he would then be willing to spend another $100 million into the Taj Mahal, but only when his concessions are provided.

Sweeney reacted to this by saying that there had been no way the state would contribute to the transfer that is proposed Icahn, and sharply criticized the investor’s plan for the casino.

‘he wants, he’s closing anyway,’ Sweeney said if he doesn’t get everything. ‘But then he will invest into the property. if he is able to get all this cash from the taxpayers and the workers,’

Sweeney had been just one single of several politicians from both parties that are major criticized Icahn’s proposal at a Boardwalk press conference.

‘You get absolutely nothing you treat workers with respect and dignity,’ Sweeney said from us until.

Icahn Fires Back

But Icahn was prepared to fire right back at Sweeney and other state officials who’ve criticized him while also proposing that gambling enterprises be built in north Jersey.

‘Sweeney is offering out Atlantic City to New that is northern Jersey the one hand, and now he’s telling all these workers in Atlantic City that Carl Icahn is always to blame, when I’m the only one that took a risk with $80 million when no one else would,’ Icahn said. ‘ On the one hand, we are to believe Senator Sweeney is Atlantic City’s defender that is staunchest, yet having said that, exactly the same Senator Sweeney is off in north Jersey making plans to allow gaming outside of the latest York City, a concession which could mean the finish of gaming in Atlantic City.’

Sweeney appears in US District Court on this in an attempt to get a judge to force the concessions he has asked for, as the state and Atlantic City have so far rejected his terms week.

Trump Entertainment can also be hoping that a Delaware bankruptcy court allows it to end the current union contract. The business is accusing the workers’ union of compromising 3,000 jobs at the Taj Mahal in an effort to protect workers at other casinos, as under the union contract, any concessions won at one casino would be allowed at other Atlantic City casinos aswell.

UK Gambling Act Challenge by GBGA Snuffed by London High Court

London’s High Court ruled against a GBGA challenge towards the new British Gambling Act, letting it be implemented next month. (Image:

The UK Gambling Act goes into impact next month after a challenge from the Gibraltar Betting and Gaming Association (GBGA) was rejected by the High Court week that is last. The challenge that is legal currently been successful in delaying the execution of the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act from October 1 to November 1, but the ruling implies that the legislation will be enforced as expected.

‘I am associated with the conclusion that parliament was well within its rights to act since it did,’ said Lord Justice Nicholas Green.

GBGA Does Not Make Its Situation

In his ruling, Green said that the GBGA failed to show that the new regulations would be illegal under the laws of either the UK or europe. He also rejected a alternate plan proposed by the GBGA, a so-called ‘passporting’ plan, that will enable the GBGA to maintain complete licensing control over its operators while agreeing to share data utilizing the British Gambling Commission (UKGC).

The ruling means that all online gambling operators who wish to conduct business with clients in the uk will need to hold a license with the gambling commission here by November 1. This defintely won’t be an issue for most businesses that wanted to remain in the nation, as most believed that they would want to use for a license by October 1.

The real changes will come into play on December 1. That is whenever a point-of-consumption that is new are going to be implemented in the UK on licensed operators. This will mean that all operators will probably pay a 15 % taxation on the revenues derived from British customers, regardless of where they are headquartered or what taxes they may pay in their house nations.

GBGA Still Has Questions

The UKGC ended up being happy with the decision, since the organization not only beat right back the challenge, but was awarded £100,000 ($159,400) to cover for its appropriate costs.

‘We welcome this judgment and will now complete preparations for utilization of the Act on 1 November,’ the UKGC had written in a statement.

Conversely, the GBGA expressed the court to its disappointment’s decision.

‘ Cross-border regulatory regimes require significant co-ordination and co-operation on key appropriate and regulatory issues and the UK already had this with all the Gibraltar industry, regulator and jurisdiction,’ the GBGA said following the ruling. ‘ We maintain this legislation is not within the most readily useful interests of consumers, the industry and the regulator itself and that you can find more effective ways of dealing with the challenges of regulation and competition in this sector.’

The GBGA also said that it may be time for European officials to come up having an overarching framework for online gambling.

‘We remain concerned the united kingdom regulator will discover it hard to hold companies to account in jurisdictions outside the EU where it doesn’t have appropriate powers and common appropriate framework or culture,’ the Association statement said. ‘Given this judgment there is now even greater dependence on an EU legal framework for online gambling if our company is to effectively protect all European consumers, enjoy a common market and avoid each member state deciding alone how to deal with an activity that naturally crosses boundaries.’

The licensing that is new will even require operators to give a legal rationale due to their operations in gray markets where they cannot hold licenses. These requirements have led some operators to select not to ever apply for a UK permit, though the majority of major companies plan to remain in great britain market.

From Here to Eternity: The Massachusetts Casino Journey

The Wynn Resorts casino proposal in Everett is considered the most recent to win a license from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. (Image: Wynn Resorts Holdings)

Massachusetts casino licensing law is back in the news headlines in a big way this week, as the Wynn Everett task won the Greater Boston casino permit after a contentious battle against a Mohegan Sun proposal. That decision, which was reached by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in a vote that is 3-1 sets the phase for Steve Wynn to build his big resort in Everett, on the site of a former Monsanto plant in the outskirts of Boston.

But it is additionally the culmination of more than three years of rules, votes, debates and referendums, most of which combine to write the whole story of Massachusetts’ casino gambling legislation. If you’re unfamiliar with what’s happening in their state, here’s a fast recap of everything you require to get right up to speed.

How It All Started

On November 22, 2011, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed the Expanded Gaming Act. This bill allowed for four gambling that is new to be built into the state: three gambling enterprises and one slots parlor. All of the three casino licenses was linked with a region that is specific one for Western Massachusetts, one for the Greater Boston area, and one for Southeastern Massachusetts. The slots parlor could be built anywhere in the state.

Designers who wished to apply for one of the four licenses were required to go with an application that is extensive, one that included mandatory referendums by local communities where casino proposals were made.

Those referendums ended up being a critical the main licensing process, as several promising jobs neglected to make the approval of voters. Most notably, a plan for a casino at Suffolk Downs in East Boston ended up being scuttled when votes overwhelmingly rejected the proposition, which eventually led compared to that plan being resurrected on the Revere side of the Suffolk Downs racetrack.

Finally, the decision of whether to award licenses and to whom they ought to go was determined by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, a five-member panel that oversaw the licensing process that is entire.

And the Award Goes To…

In belated February, the first license was awarded to Penn National Gaming, which earned the right to build a slots parlor in Plainville. That plan was chosen over a Massachusetts Live! proposal in Leominster and a Raynham Park option that did not prove popular with the commission. Ultimately, the payment voted 3-2 in favor of the Penn National plan over the Leominster alternative.

In June, the payment then approved MGM Resorts International for the Western Massachusetts casino license. The payment voted unanimously in support of awarding the license towards the proposed MGM resort in Springfield, which emerged once the contender that is only the region.

This the gaming commission also awarded the Greater Boston casino license to a Wynn Resorts project in Everett week. The Wynn plan was chosen more than a Mohegan Sun proposal in Revere by a 3-1 vote, with gaming commission Chairman Stephen Crosby recusing himself through the procedure.

Southeastern Massachusetts License Still to Be Decided

Therefore far, few contenders that are serious emerged for the Southeastern Massachusetts casino license, which caused the gaming commission to push back the deadline for applications from September 30, 2014 to December 1 of this year. The location’s schedule was hearts of vegas casino slots already behind the rest of the state because of the possibility that the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe might create a casino in Taunton. Whenever that effort felt through, the spot was opened to designers.

So far, only KG Urban has used to create in the area, though the commission believes that other candidates whom were rejected in the other two elements of the continuing state may take to once again in Southeastern Massachusetts.

Casino Law Repeal Still a Possibility

There is still the chance that most of these venues may never open. There’s been significant opposition to permitting casinos in Massachusetts since the law was first signed, and who has culminated in casino opponents obtaining a question on a statewide ballot this November which will ask voters if they want to repeal the casino law. Current polling shows that such a repeal is not likely, however: one September that is early poll UMass Lowell/7News discovered that 59 per cent of likely voters planed to vote against the repeal effort, with only 36 percent saying they might vote to repeal regulations.

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.