The Treasury is currently consulting over plans to replace the existing structure of online gambling duties, which is comprised of three bands, to a catch-all Remote Betting and Gaming Duty.
At present, there is a 15 per cent duty, but there are grave concerns that the government-induced changes could see it brought into line with the rate of tax on games of chance, such as online casino and slot machines, which is six per cent higher.
Economic analysis commissioned by the British Horseracing Authority showed that the sport could lose £66m in income through the levy, media rights and sponsorship because bookmakers would be likely to respond by offering inferior-value prices and reduce budgets for such things as marketing and advertising.
Horse racing is a sport that is part of the very fabric of British culture. Its two codes, Flat and National Hunt, have been supported by monarchs and other royals for centuries. It also courted Sir Keir Starmer, who last September became the first serving prime minister since Sir Winston Churchill to attend the St Leger. Now, similar to one of the PM’s current political allies, it has had a change of heart and is taking a more combative approach.
Racing draws in more spectators annually than every other sport in the nation, except football. It provides jobs for more than 85,000 people. If the betting tax levied on the sport is raised, it’s been estimated that 2,752 of those jobs will be lost in the first year alone, and this could become an ever-decreasing cycle.
As a show of strength and to underline the gravity of their concerns, the whole of the industry has committed to a one-day strike on 10 September, when racing is scheduled to take place at Carlisle, Kempton Park, Lingfield Park and Uttoxeter.
For an industry that has so often taken a “softly, softly” approach to such matters and wanted to keep respective governments onside, it’s akin to throwing away the painstakingly prepared form book and, instead, tossing a coin. Will the “heads” count in the sport be forced to reduce, or will ministers turn “tails” and elect to preserve the status quo?
James Hutchinson, the managing director at Ripon racecourse, is clear on why the sport is right to take such action: “It’s important that we get across this message that the current proposals for this betting duty tax will have an enormous effect on British racing and the income into British racing, and therefore the amount of money that it raises in terms of levy and the return, therefore, to racecourses and the return of prize money to owners and trainers.
“From our point of view, as a small independent racecourse, we need to be seen to be a strong industry that can support all of its constituent parts. This potential change is going to put many of those at risk, and that’s not something we want to see.
“I’m in support of the action that’s being taken because by doing so we will hopefully be getting across an extremely strong message to government that we feel very strongly about this and the industry is prepared to go to those sort of lengths to show what it means and the effect it could have if the changes take place.”
Isn’t this, however, racing people expecting the sport to be treated as a special case purely because of its history? Hutchinson disagrees.
“I don’t think it’s necessarily a special case other than the fact that it has huge heritage. It’s been an important part of the culture and the colour of the nation.
“Over five million people go racing every year, and to introduce this huge increase could have a major negative impact on the industry. It could affect the amount of racing, the number of people going racing, and it would be a huge loss to the country.
“I don’t think there’s any other sporting industry that could be as dramatically affected by the sort of change that the government is proposing.”
Those involved in the sport are clear about the financial damage that could be inflicted and are similarly unified in their action, although all four tracks that miss out on racing on that date have been offered an alternative fixture on the calendar by the BHA, by way of compensation for those individual events.
The government must act in the best interests of a sport that has given the nation great service since before there was a prime minister. It should get this stewards’ enquiry overturned before the provisional result stands, scrap any plans to increase its tax burden, and leave this piece of the fabric of our society unfrayed.
