The NFL have apparently chosen to ignore all the risk that could come as a result of their disrespectful behavior regarding the national anthem. But whether they acknowledge it or not, the consequences are here and they’ll just keep coming. As the kneeling continues, the ratings and ticket sales are dropping.
Now, the NFL is facing some more bad news, as new GOP tax bill is proposing billions in cuts to the “taxpayer subsidized” football stadiums.
The tax proposal would eliminate the big tax breaks cities and states receive on money borrowed to build stadiums meant to entice or prevent sports franchises from moving to another city.
Of course, the tax reform idea wasn’t ‘welcomed’ by the National Football League.
“We believe that the construction of new stadiums and renovations of stadiums are economic drivers in local communities,” said NFL spokesman Joe Lockhart. “If the idea is to promote economic growth, this would be a step backwards.”
The Las Vegas Raiders might be one of the first teams affected by the proposed tax break elimination.
With the team’s recent move to Sin City, the plan to get the team up and running includes building one of the most expensive sports stadium complexes in U.S. history. The plan also features an incredible $750 million in publicly issued, tax-exempt bonds to fund its construction, reports Truth Feed News.
Unfortunately for them, the new tax law would prevent the ability to issue those tax-exempt bonds, putting the Raiders’ whole deal in jeopardy.
“The stadium, as designed, appears to meet the definition of a project that could not use tax-exempt bonds,” said Las Vegas Stadium Authority and the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee, Jeremy Aguero. “That could potentially affect the financial models we have been using in estimating the potential cost of the project.”
Andrew Zimbalist, professor of economics at Smith College and renowned sports economist believes that sports stadiums are not a great investment.
There’s also another point, which is most important to dwell upon in this time of one of the worst economies in 70 years:
“In the typical case,” Zimbalist says, “the city and/or state contributes roughly two-thirds of the financing for the facility’s construction and takes on obligations for additional expenditures over time.”
If Andrew Zimbalist and so many like-minded economists are right, this reform is exactly what taxpayers need.
What do you think about this? Share this on Facebook and Twitter SCROLL DOWN FOR MORE