Parties submissions
Parties submissions
The Appellant contends that participation in the MR Spin was pursuant to an offer that the gaming payment be waived. They rely on the fact that Mega Reel is not exclusively offered on a free basis and that the reel displays a spin value which is a necessary part of the configuration of the game offered. They point to the fact that the spin value is credited to the Customer’s gaming account prior to participation and then debited when participation begins representing payment for participation but at no cost to the Customer.
HMRC contend that as the MR Spin does not require a payment there is no payment capable of waiver and therefore there can be no offer or waiver, it cannot therefore meet the terms of section 159(4). They consider that the existence of a notional spin value and the recording of the transaction are irrelevant. They submit that the existence of a pay for version of the game is simply a different game.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Evidence and findings of fact
- Mega Reel
- Assessment
- Relevant legislation
- The issues
- Liability issue
- Parties’ submissions
- Discussion
- Statutory context of the relevant provisions of Part 3 Chapter 3
- Parties submissions
- Discussion
- Parties submissions
- HMRC’s submissions
- Discussion
- Validity issue
- Discussion
- Conclusions
![TC09643 - [2025] UKFTT 01117 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png)