The European Commission submitted a list of questions to the United States government seeking answers to what a trade organization deemed U.S. violation of international agreements related to online gambling.

A copy of the submission, which was obtained by Red Herring on Friday, includes 50 questions related to a World Trade Organization ruling in favor of Antigua and Barbuda. The ruling held that the U.S. engaged in discriminatory trade practices against foreign online gambling operators. (see Will Online Gambling Return?)

"This means that the European online gambling operators are continuing to fight to encourage the U.S. to open its market, and to end its retaliation and discrimination against their activities," said Michael Waxman, a spokesman for Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative, a Washington DC based lobby group.

The U.S. is not compelled to answer the Commission's list of questions, but the Europeans can take their case to the WTO if their investigation is stymied by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), the agency responsible for coordinating U.S. trade policy.

"While the questionnaire is not legally binding it demonstrates a need for more transparency and a better understanding about what's been going on," said Naotaka Matsukata, senior policy advisor at Alston & Bird, LLP, and former director of policy planning for U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick "In all likelihood the USTR will not respond to this questionnaire."

After losing the WTO case, the U.S. moved to modify the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), the WTO treaty it was found to have violated by making online gambling illegal in the U.S.

The U.S. said in effect that when it made its commitment to GATS back in 1993, no one could have reasonably thought that its commitment included online gambling, an activity that was “illegal” in the U.S.

Many of the European Commission's questions relate to remote gambling on horse racing in the U.S. More than 18 states in the U.S. authorize "wagering by wire" on horse racing, and that is what many see as the weak link in the U.S. argument.

If remote gambling on horse racing is legal in the U.S. then banning offshore firms from offering gambling services online is discriminatory, the argument goes.

"The U.S. conducted its trade policy recklessly and the Europeans are well within their rights to conclude that they have not been treated fairly and they most likely will take it to the next level," Mr. Matsukata said.