A 38-5 vote has raised the prospect that the poker tax rules described as a “tax nightmare” could be reversed, while the five members who voted against the wider bill have faced questions from poker players.
Five votes against
Daniel Negreanu criticised the five opposing votes, arguing that people should not have to pay tax when they had not made any income.
“The 5 no votes should be forced to explain their logic here and why they think it’s fair and appropriate for people to pay tax when they didn’t make any income,” Negreanu wrote.
He ended his message with: “Explain yourself.”
Josh Arieh also challenged the lawmakers. “Imagine being ignorant enough to vote ‘no’ on this. Please explain yourself!” he posted.
Digital assets bill was wider issue
The opposition may not have been directed specifically at the poker provisions. Horsford said on VSiN’s Follow the Money show that the measure was included in a broader digital assets tax bill that he had introduced.
“This was part of a larger digital assets tax bill that I also brought forward. I was able to negotiate the inclusion of the FH Act in it, and the issues that some of the members had were around the digital asset tax bill, not necessarily against the Full House Act,” Horsford said.
The vote therefore leaves the Full House Act tied to wider disagreements over digital asset tax policy. For poker players, the immediate significance is that the 38-5 result creates a route toward reversing the rules that have prompted concerns about tax being due despite no net income.
The five opposing members have not been identified in the available details, and no explanation from them is included. The vote has nonetheless triggered a public response from prominent poker figures, with the dispute now focused both on the tax treatment of players and on the broader legislation carrying the Full House Act.
