Section 10 — Finance Act 2003: Amusement machines not operated by coins or tokens
Text of the provision Official document
Amusement machines not operated by coins or tokens 10 1 In section 21 of the Betting and Gaming Duties Act 1981 (amusement machine licences), for subsections (3B) to (3D) (meaning of “fifty-penny machine”) substitute— 3B For the purposes of this section an amusement machine is a “ fifty-penny machine ” if, and only if—
a where it is a machine on which a game can be played solo, the cost for each time the game is played on it solo—
i does not exceed 50p, or ii where the machine provides differing numbers of games in different circumstances, cannot exceed 50p;
and b where it is a machine on which a game can be played by more than one person at a time, the cost per player for each time the game is played on it simultaneously by more than one player—
i does not exceed 50p, or ii where the machine provides differing numbers of games in different circumstances, cannot exceed 50p. .
2 In section 25(1) of that Act (definition of “amusement machine”), in paragraph (c) for “coin or token” substitute “ coin, token or other thing ” .
3 In section 26(2) of that Act (interpretation), for the definitions of “two-penny machine”, “five-penny machine” and “ten-penny machine” substitute— “ two-penny machine ” means an amusement machine in relation to which the cost for each time a game is played on it—
a does not exceed 2p, or b where the machine provides differing numbers of games in different circumstances, cannot exceed 2p, and “ five-penny machine ” and “ ten-penny machine ” have a corresponding meaning; .
4 In the following provisions of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (c. 23)—
a the definition of “gaming machine” in section 23(4),
and b Note (3) (definition of “gaming machine”) to Group 4 of Schedule 9, for “coin or token” substitute “ coin, token or other thing ” .
Official source: legislation.gov.uk
Search case law on this topic
See judgments from UK courts and tribunals with a plain-English summary and legal holding.
Explore case law →