questions were raised on the reopening of online gambling companies despite the national health emergency.
Drilon said he would “raise the propriety of resuming POGOs’ operations, including the identities of those granted licenses” at the committee hearings, which last focused on money laundering allegedly involving couriers who hand-carried cash linked to Pogos. “While BPOs and Pogos share one extraneous similarity, which is their offshoring nature, POGOs primarily do so because they are allegedly unable to practice their betting or gambling functions in their respective shores,” he said in a statement.
He said that under Category 4 of IATF-EID Resolution No. 30 on April 30, gambling and betting were disallowed under both ECQ or GCQ. Drilon wanted the identities of licensed Pogos disclosed to the public. “Why do we love them so much?” he asked in a radio interview. “It seems like they are being favored and we are willing to risk everything just so we can have Pogos operate.”“Are the political backers of Pogos so strong that they can even skirt COVID-19 pandemic regulations?” he said.
But for Untal the differences are clear. BPOs operate in the country to utilize local talent, giving direct and indirect jobs to millions of Filipinos. Pogos, on the other hand, largely hire foreigners, he said.
POGO must be registered to BPO company owned by Mr. Harry Roque?