Topic: Loophole in stopping Money Laundering through Wagering - page 8. (Read 1678 times)

It's not really a loophole, because you still have to bet your whole balance a lot of times (maybe 100x times at 1.01 odds) to fulfil the requirements. There more requirements than just betting your full balance only once, some websites have minimum odds of 1.5 to bet on and other require you to fill up a bar of risked money where you would need a lot of bets if you only stick to low risk bets. It's been a while since I got a new bonus, so I am not too familiar what the industry norm is right now on clearing the withdraw restrictions. For me it was always combi bets that I used to combine multiple low risk bets to make one higher risk bet to clear bonuses. The problem with placing all your money many times on these low-risk bets is that there is no guarantee it's going to work. Only missed bet where the favourite plays a draw and not a win, is enough for you to lose all your money. It's a huge downside risk that I would rather avoid, because its more likely that in 100 games something will go wrong.

But most users are not very honest so that the casino freezes more users' money trying to launder money through the casino, many cases that I often encounter on this forum also the casino will ask for an explanation of where the funds are used also ask the user to verify to validate that the user clean.

This also prevents the casino from being involved in money laundering cases and is considered to support criminal acts being subject to legal sanctions, but not many casinos want to return user money and only freeze the winnings, it is rarely found, if the user does not meet the requirements requested by the casino then the account will be suspended also the money will be confiscated by the casino.

I think this is why we have KYC verifications and wagering requirements when entering in a casino and multiplying hundreds thousand dollars just like that.

If you check deposit bonuses or promos then they will always have wagering requirement so that means you will have to multiply your money to specific times and then you would be eligible for the withdrawal limits or else your money is stuck on the casino. This is one of the fraud protection practice.

The second that id wel known to all of us, KYC at different levels. Many of them have segregated the KYC levels according to the money that is being wagered.

This is refresher actually, this is discussed many times in different threads.

This may not really be a way of money laundering, but who knows there may be many players who are doing this. Before I deposit in a casino I think several times whether I can eventually withdraw my funds from this casino without any hassle. Casinos are also getting tougher by the day to catch those who engage in such activities.

Now if a gambler deposits his funds in a bad casino with the intention of money laundering, and if that casino freezes his funds with any excuse, then it becomes a nightmare for that gambler. So I also think this can't be a good way, and if the gambler gambles with his funds for the purpose of mixing then there will still be a risk of losing the funds.

I believe reputable casinos tends to return the deposit amount of the player if they failed to show the source of funds and just nullify the winning amount.  Unless the casino is aiming for the deposited fund, then they will just ignore all the documents submitted and pretend that it does not comply with their requirements.  In this kind of event, the intention of the player to wash the trace of their funds resulted in a disaster where they fund are confiscated by the casino platform.

If they deposit their money to the scam casino, it is their risk because there is a possibility they will be fooled and lose all the money. And that is a loss for them because they cannot carry out their plans to wash their money. Maybe they can make money laundering through other places and not in gambling because they can risk losing money if they don't get a suitable casino.

Yes, the mixer will also be their choice in washing the money because it looks like it will be safer for them to avoid tracking from the government or regulator. But they will look for comfortable places to wash their money, and washing money is not new to playing in the business because they must have had places they have often used to wash their money.

Once the casino asks for the source of funds and the user can't provide detailed info, that's when the casino is going to really suspect something and freeze the amount.

But I'm not really sure about the wagering requirement that one user has to lose it all. That's a mess up, I would certainly avoid that one even if I deposit a small amount all the time.
Depositing and then playing a bit and then withdrawing the funds seem not a good way to launder, ain't that a very obvious dumb way and the casino will indeed suspect.

Many casinos now force gamblers to do KYC. So when a gambler's complete details are with the casino, there is not much for that gambler to do. At any time the casino can freeze the funds if they believe the gambler is involved in money laundering.

And this is why one should not gamble in casinos where KYC is mandatory, as this increases the risk of a gambler even if he is not involved in activities such as money laundering.

in addition to all the points you mentioned, there is a great point that we must not forget: when thieves steal money and need to launder the money, in most cases it is large amounts of money something like millions of dollars, they don't they are going to put millions of dollars in a casino where they can be asked for kyc and thieves are in a hurry, they need to clear their tracks early because the police will be chasing them, so time is something very important for thieves and they cannot afford it of leaving a lot of money in their wallets, which is why the best and only option for them is to use the mixers

if they used the casinos they would have to deposit small amounts of money and still risk losing everything in the casino and being tracked by the police, that's why using the mixer to launder a lot of money quickly is the option they used. I don't see why the governments keep putting pressure on the casinos knowing this logic that I mentioned, for example the casinos could adopt the 2x system for withdrawals, with that people would have to play in the casino until they managed to win up to the amount they deposited to withdraw and not needed kyc and would have to fear money laundering

Suey there isn't anything as sure bet but am sure your aware of that and a 0.1% risk is still a huge risk. This becomes the case and easily realisable when you've got your huge stake on the line.

It could be so disappointing watching such games as you would be so focused on not allowing anything to go wrong with the prediction because, it could always go wrong.

Yeah, money laundering is possible and it's something that is hoped to be avoided but, its often based on the agency following up the case to pursue it yo a point of truth. Your deposit becomes the first means to any traces.

compared to other systems, recycling money in this way is something more or less "cheap", but compared to other systems you can easily lose everything, provide a KYC and you can always get controls by the casino/gambling platform: show me the origin of the funds.... in a certain way, dealing with such entities is difficult enough for honest people....

That's you should not play on a casino that has KYC requirements if you don't have a valid documents to verify your identity. Bank account statements is just a requirement on extreme cases for user that has a problematic Identity Card that is currently live on country that restrict gambling. Not all casino use KYC to restrict user to withdraw but they are just using it if they find something shady on someone account that is close behavior for a money launderer such us frequently withdraw and deposit after few profit in the casino.

Even if the casino did not require KYC verification as the user signs up for an account, I am sure that as soon as the new user started to deposit huge amounts of money and started to wager some of it, a member of the casino staff would notice and ask the user to go through the proper verification and even go as far as ask for proof of the origin of the money (if it is an amount big enough), in that case the person would lose their money which intended to launder. In the end, casinos are not the criminal paradise some conservative people claim. It is in their best interest to keep criminals away, so they can operate uninterrupted by regulators and the law.

How is that a loophole? The person who is going to launder money is already risking something. There  is still that 1% chance that he is going to lose his money. Do you really think he is going to take that chance? And don't forget, each bet has some sort of limit. You can't wager millions in a single bet. As far as I know, you will need to contact the casino if you wish to place such huge bet. I am sure they will start asking you questions before they let you place the bet. There are also security measures in the casino that can detect suspicious betting. And then most casinos require KYC. So casino isn't really a best place for someone random to launder his money.

Maybe you have to understand first with the 1x wager requirement, what is meant by the 1x wager requirement is not to make 1x bet and after that the player can immediately make a withdrawal, but what is meant is 1x rollover of the deposit amount that the player made, and also whether there is certainty win at gambling even for the odds that you mentioned the chance to lose is still there and this has often been experienced by gamblers, and if I'm not mistaken usually the wagering requirement that is carried out on sports bets will have a minimum odds that will be calculated for example the minimum is @1.50, and the wager requirement is not only to prevent money laundering but also because casinos are not exchanges or online wallets so naturally they apply wager requirements.

Imagine they deposited their money to a scam casino website like 1xbit and get scammed. There are some shady casinos as well which trigger KYC whenever a player makes a large amount of deposit. It's super easy to use mixers these days. But, have to choose a reliable platform like Yomix. If it's a small amount of money, I don't think any platform cares about it. But, casinos might trigger KYC if they notice some suspicious betting pattern from a particular user.

However, I have seen a wallet like freewallet.org which scams their user by asking for a KYC which is not possible to pass anyway. The only reliable way is using a mixer. Sometimes mixers get seized as well. So, have to be careful about that as well.

Even though there is a 1.01 chance, that also doesn't guarantee a win, and of course you understand that it's not easy to deceive gambling sites just because there is a 1.01 chance, which you feel can give 99% a win.
If you only rely on the 1.01 odds to bet as a whole and do it actively, there will be suspicions from the casino and of course there will be some obstacles that occur.

I'm not sure that could be a loophole for money laundering, moreover risking very large amounts of money so of course the dealer cannot easily give a win even with only 1.01.
Moreover, if there is a casino account with a large amount of money transactions, there must be KYC requested which will make it difficult for someone to commit money laundering.

As long the chance isnt 0% then there's always a chance on losing up your entire bankroll or money in an instant.Its true that no one on their right minds would really be having that kind of wagering just to pull out

their laundered money.Its the most bad idea on doing so, although when we do speak about the odds then its really that less risk because of the odds but in overall if you dont want to blown up your money then
its better not to do so. Money launderers wouldnt really be so dumb on doing such thing which they do know that it is way too risky. They would rather be making use of Mixers
than on making up bets on 99% chance of winning or less which it cant really make out assurance that you would be able to get out without busting your balance.
They wont really be that so easily making out such decision if they do know that they cant really take out an advantage which its a common approach.

Some people have used it unfortunately,they are unique and rare and are sport bettors,they place the maximum amount which the casino allows them to bet and place really low odds which the majority of the time they come true,I am talking about 1.10 and 1.15 odds which we can find in Tennis much more easily than in soccer.

I can say that the fact that they want to launder money through casinos it means they are not sweat money and as such they can afford to play it on blackjack,roulette or slot machines trying to go as fast as possible through wagering,they have got nothing to lose as they have non sweated money.

I do not doubt that the security of a casino is like this and has that type of security, in fact there is a lot of talk about money laundering through the casino, but I do not understand how they do it and why, most casinos all ask for KYC, And a criminal or someone who wants to launder money knows about this option, why does he do it? I don't know, but most of the time money laundering is not done through casinos, and unless they are online casinos, most money laundering is done in other ways, and with fiat money, it's very difficult. find criminals who do. , also a criminal knows and understands that when he puts his money on another platform, the money is no longer in control and domain of him, but in control of the platform, which generates panic.

Personally, currently, those who launder money the most are corrupt government entities and they do not do so, they have other much safer options and they launder large amounts of money, so money laundering via casino is actually for novice criminals.

A person who really wants to do without the origin of their funds can use a mixer, it is the most sound, and what is safest for it, for this reason we can mainly think that money laundering, although it is very possible, is unreliable It's not safe, current criminals have some knowledge, and I swear they have to learn, so I don't see it as an option.