I feel like he's one of the last people you'd suspect of being involved with drugs. Adelson is already a major player in a spectacularly lucrative industry, so it'd be pretty insane to go into hardcore felonies when his legal business might actually have better margins.

The Venetian cleared >$300 million after costs in 2014. It'd be a pretty bizarro-world decision to jeopardize that for more money.

> The Venetian cleared >$300 million after costs in 2014. It'd be a pretty bizarro-world decision to jeopardize that for more money.

They also had to pay $50 million dollars the previous year to the government as a settlement for money laundering, and has been in hot water for allegedly paying bribes to secure casinos in China[1]. Their business isn't exactly squeaky clean as it is.

[1]:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/business/in-filing-casino-...

Absolutely - I wouldn't for a minute assume casino organizations are clean, especially abroad where they might feel safer from domestic prosecution. I just don't think diversifying into unrelated and personally-criminal activities would make much sense.

You think casinos have no involvement in illegal activities because they are already making enough money? Maybe I watch too many movies but that sounds bizarro-world to me.

I think already-rich casino magnates don't get involved in totally unrelated serious crime like importing drugs.

I'm fully aware that the casinos used to be shoulder to shoulder with the mob, and have done plenty of shady things. I guess I just meant that it would be stupid to diversify so riskily - in movie terms, it'd be like a hacker starting a sideline in gun running.

People are not rational. Drugs and legal gambling have a history.

What about the tax implications?

If these are "donations" to non-profits, wouldn't this reduce one's tax liability.