A real gamble.

As if the state didn't have enough problems with its legally questionable absorption of the medical malpractice fund, it turns out the give-and-take over how to administer the new tax on gambling winnings may cause a few moments of agita for state revenuers as well.

First, there's the sticky situation of taxing lottery winnings. One of the more intriguing scenarios--that's likely to raise a ruckus--is the idea that the new 10 percent tax on winnings over 10 percent be applied to the folks who won the big bucks in the past and chose to take the annuity payment over a period of years. (In the case of Powerball. that's 30 years. For Megabucks. it's 25.)

Then there's the idea being floated to tax the lottery winnings of folks who won in the first six months of the year, before the tax took effect. Smells retroactive from here--and that's without the benefit of a law degree.

A third, somewhat more ironic, possibility involves the language, "winnings from anywhere derived"--meaning that New Hampshire folks with winnings at Foxwoods, Vegas, or even through the Massachusetts lottery--will have to pony up for the new tax. Kind of odd, dontcha think, for a state whose governor only just the other day signed a law preventing Massachusetts and other states from forcing New Hampshire retailers to collect their sales taxes.