Quote (TR0LL @ Dec 23 2010 10:44am)
from what i've seen the only raffles from store/companies are for employees and it involves sales
the rest of the "raffles" ive seen have an age limit of 21(legal gambling age in america) so even though they are called a raffle, it's legally gambling
a raffle is pretty much gambling but replacing monetary gain/loss
with a gain of an item, but no loss of monetary value(the money spent "BUYING" the raffle ticket is always a donation towards something, in my experience at least)
and no, non-monetary value vs. irl items such as the donor forum isn't the same as using a legal form of currency,
it's more like bartering, say for example fish vs. cattle
also a side note, people cannot buy irl trade items with boughten or "gambled" fg
he isn't receiving money for donating fg though, he's simply receiving the status of a donor, it's kind of like selling girl scout cookies
Quote
from what i've seen the only raffles from store/companies are for employees and it involves sales
the rest of the "raffles" ive seen have an age limit of 21(legal gambling age in america)
Oh I've definitely seen various different types of raffles over the years which weren't specific to emplyees of the business/organization. There may have been age limits on them, I don't recall, but I personally don't think age is the primary issue in this case, or at least not the sole issue. Although it still happens on a large scale due to enforcement difficulties, in actuality internet gambling is effectively illegal in the united states as a result of laws which prohibit financial transactions by and/or with online gambling businesses.
Quote
a raffle is pretty much gambling but replacing monetary gain/loss
with a gain of an item
Yes, but items still hold monetary value though. The I.R.S. places a monetary value on items, and requires that taxes be paid on acauired items according this monetary value. If you win a car in a raffle, you're still required to pay taxes on the value of that car.
Quote
and no, non-monetary value vs. irl items such as the donor forum isn't the same as using a legal form of currency
I'm aware that this is true in a practical sense, but legally, according to gambling as pertains to this situations specifically, that's likely not the case.
Quote
it's more like bartering, say for example fish vs. cattle
Yes, but even trades such as this are subject to tax laws, suggesting that it is still legally viewed as a monetary gain. Legal definitions are very seldom synonymous with definitions you'd find in an actual dictionary. They are two seperate things.
There are no taxes specifically on money. Tax law always indicate that what's being taxed are things like "income," "inheritance," etc etc, all of which can come in the form of many other things besides actual currency. Again, if you have a house that I want, and we make a deal that I will trade a certain number of years of labor for the house, I will still be responsible to pay taxes on the equivilent monitary value of the house. When you see people trading items, and trading labor for items and not paying taxes on what they recieve, that's not because they're pretected by some special law, it's just that they are getting away with it because it's difficult to enforce.
Quote
also a side note, people cannot buy irl trade items with boughten or "gambled" fg
I understand that, but there's no actual legal significance to this. That's a rule that Paul has established for unrelated issues, and are not necessarily going to be sufficient according to gambling law. Numerous times in the past people have tried to use loopholes like this to get around certain laws, and they're on to it, and as a result legal definitions are always being modified. They don't always go out of their way to make these changes known to the public either, as it's the publics responsibility to keep themselves current on laws.
Quote
he isn't receiving money for donating fg though, he's simply receiving the status of a donor
I'm more specifically referring to when people pay other people fg for them to do a cash donation in their name. Again, according to the way Paul has it worded in is rules, I may never be receiving actual legal currency in this process, but it may be seen differently than this from the perspective of authorities and according to their laws. Again, it's hard to say without reading through the entire law.
Again, I'm just basing my estimation of the situation on observations I've made throughout the years, and not on any specific knowledge I have of the specific law governing this. But as we've both already agreed, Paul is smart, and there's a very good reason why he has decided not to "officially" support gambling, but yet still allow it to occur, and I'm betting that it's based on legal advice he's received.