If you will take away only a few facts from this text. Then, here they are!
- The Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) in New Zealand is an independent body with only one aim as regards gambling. That aim is to create a positive outlook and change the negative name that has been ascribed to this world.
- Casinos in New Zealand must receive a license before they can commence operation in the country. To do this, there are prerequisites they must satisfy.
- Then, after 15 years, these casinos are required to renew their licenses if they must continue to function. To do this now, it is germane that any of these casinos must satisfy another set of prerequisites to gain this renewal.
- Finally, a major part of these prerequisites demanded from these casinos for the renewal of their licenses is proof of their active involvement in charitable donations. This is one condition that every casino that wants a license must fulfil.
Giving to charity is only one out of the long list of noble deeds carried out by stakeholders in the gambling sector, especially for New Zealand casinos at CasinoDeps.co.nz. It is a major requirement as we mentioned earlier. This is due to the far-reaching impacts of these donations to the advancement of the good course and development of the nation.
Christchurch Casino License Renewal
Christchurch casino is a good case study to exemplify the importance attached to this process by the department of the country that is responsible for enforcing this precept. The Gambling Commission has fixed an amount to be paid by the Christchurch Casino to charities if their license must be renewed.
This casino pioneered what is today a large web of casino operators across the country. They were the earliest casino to receive a 25-year license, as of 1993. Hence, this casino is the first casino to have their license due for renewal likewise. This directive by the Gambling Commission on this casino will set the pace for similar situations for other casinos.
This new guideline for licensing for 15 years now necessitates that the Christchurch Casino must pay nothing below 2.5% of the casino’s annual yields (net profit) or a sum of $250,000 (depending on whichever is bigger), to its charitable trust.
In addition to the agreed percentage payment, there is another agreement for the casino to donate $100,000 per annum to any charity or charities they prefer. Any organization that will receive this payment must not be one related to gambling in any way.
According to reports from a reliable source, this casino had a $16.1 million operating gain in 2017. From this gain, 2.5 percent would be $402,500, which is expected to be paid to their charitable trust.
Required Money Giving To Charity
As a consequence of this move by the commission in the Christchurch casino, other New Zealand casinos are similarly required to make charitable donations between 1% and 2.5%. For instance, Auckland’s SkyCity, which is a way bigger casino establishment, has a specified least payment value to the sum of $500,000 and Queenstown has $100,000 as of its own least value.
To justify this directive, the Gambling Commission was obliged to define the social and economic usefulness of giving or withholding a license, and the degree of support this move possesses in the community.
A lot of reports were presented. And major parts of their highlights were the social and entertainment leisure of gambling and stopping by at the bars and bars around, as well as promotions and charitable giving.
A report from the Christchurch casino, however, asserted that lagging in the renewal of their license would cause 30% to 50% of bettors to switch to supplementary and less governed gambling platforms.
The net economic advantage of the casino comprised 104 full-time equal jobs that sees this casino engage the services of 478 people, “an extra $23m of additional value”, and $6m annually amounting from extra accumulated household revenue.
From the viewpoint of the national scope, the casino according to the reports has been a main driver in the improved gross disposable national income, from the value of $70m to $140m yearly, and remitted about $18m as a direct tax, albeit counterbalanced partly by the toll of tax from firms which sacrifice spending to the casino.
Just like in the case of Christchurch Casino, other casinos must name a total of 15 persons that wield recognizable influence in the running of things concerning the casino with reports from the police to corroborate this, Insolvency and Trustee Service, proof to show that the establishment has an Office and a registration with the Department of Internal Affairs which must always be available.
The reaction that has trailed this direction from the gambling commission has only exceeded a shot of endorsement or disapproval just slightly. It is yet to be seen what unfolds in the years to come.