Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL as a tax exempt entity


Recommended Posts

This is a pretty good article on exactly how the NFL is classified

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2013/06/01/nfl-as-tax-exempt-less-than-meets-the-eye/

 

 

Essentially 501©(6) organizations are not charities, because their members are trying to make money.  The members, though, are trying to make money for themselves.  They don’t really have an interest in having the 501©(6) make money.  That is why it is not-for profit even though it is not a charity.

 

So if you take away the NFL's tax exempt status you don't generate any taxes because the NFL takes a loss every year

 

 

The NFL had expenses in excess of revenue of $77,628,857 for the year ended 3/31/2012 and $52,195,407 for the prior year.  Apparently, that is nothing new.  The liabilities of the NFL exceeded its assets by $316,642,454  at 3/31/2012.  Superficially, my reasoning would be that if the NFL was organized as an LLC, instead of as an exempt organization, the member teams would have had nearly a third of a billion more in deductions since inception.  I’m sure it is more complicated than that, but I suspect that the motivation for the way it operaties may be to keep liabilities off the balance sheets of the member organizations.  It appears to me that if there is a game there, it is a GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) game, not a tax game.
 
Superficially, it appears that, if the NFL were not an exempt organization, it would not owe federal income taxes, because it has not been making money.  If you view the NFL in conjunctions with its member teams, it appears that it has the effect of increasing aggregate taxable income.

 

 

If this is all true then why the hell are lawmakers so hellbent on changing the status?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any good business owner knows for tax reasons you either want to show your company either breaking even or taking a loss every year, if you make money and show that you do you have to pay taxes on it and the US has among the highest coprate tax rates in the world so go figure they try not to pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is the NFL fiscally irresponsible?

 

i didnt say they were or weren't im just speaking from the mind of a politician.[i used bad wording i know, devils advocate]

 

from my understanding, NFL teams combine revenue and distribute it, much in a socialism fashion.

 

Kinda like the NBA floats the WNBA while the WNBA loses money year after year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that its even a discussion whether or not its right or wrong for a sports organization to pay taxes speaks volumes about how screwed up the system is.  Our tax code is over 76,000 pages long.  That makes a new york city phone book look like a Readers Digest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that its even a discussion whether or not its right or wrong for a sports organization to pay taxes speaks volumes about how screwed up the system is.  Our tax code is over 76,000 pages long.  That makes a new york city phone book look like a Readers Digest.

it's about economic impact, when apple sales products the only people making money is apple. when the NFL has a game, there are 70+thousand people showing up to games, and spend money on travel, food, merch ect.. and for fans of the away team, it drives up restaurant revenue in those cities, not to mention a great deal of the revenue generated by the franchises are paid to their players who while making millions are taxed at very high rates and pay millions in taxes, the NFL is a money making machine, if the NFL were to pull out of a city, the lost tax revenue might get close to $100m a year to that city (well maybe not just the city because there is a fair amount that goes to the feds but you get the point).

 

that why when the Panthers were asking for $200 million for upgrades I was saying all they were really asking for was the equivalent of a 2 year tax break from the city and state government.

 

it's called market size and market impact, if people actually knew how some of this stuff actually worked it would be amazing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's about economic impact, when apple sales products the only people making money is apple. when the NFL has a game, there are 70+thousand people showing up to games, and spend money on travel, food, merch ect.. and for fans of the away team, it drives up restaurant revenue in those cities, not to mention a great deal of the revenue generated by the franchises are paid to their players who while making millions are taxed at very high rates and pay millions in taxes, the NFL is a money making machine, if the NFL were to pull out of a city, the lost tax revenue might get close to $100m a year to that city (well maybe not just the city because there is a fair amount that goes to the feds but you get the point).

that why when the Panthers were asking for $200 million for upgrades I was saying all they were really asking for was the equivalent of a 2 year tax break from the city and state government.

it's called market size and market impact, if people actually knew how some of this stuff actually worked it would be amazing

You may have misinterpreted my post a bit. I get all that and I too was one of the few that supported the team getting the money. The loss far outweighed any small increases that may incur. I was trying to say that people are discussing the wrong things nowadays. The tax status of the NFL should not be a focus of discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't think they changed as much as you think between the INT and the final sack (immediate pressure with 4 linemen). They definitely stopped blitzing as much, if a blitz means rushing more than the front 4/5. They definitely did some exotic packages where they sent LBs/DBs and dropped linemen into coverage though. The fumble and INT were both blitzes. And yes they were successful. And yes, I agreed with Bryce not taking care of the ball. Really not many answers on those plays - just take the sack and live another play (unless you're Lamar). Which he didn't do. And no, you can't run prevent on the goal line. What's prevent defense to you? Alignment, personnel, cushion, etc.? Just curious. My reply was to the post that they sat back in some soft zone the whole game - until the end, when it mattered. That's not true. They blitzed, they disguised coverages and blitzers, they pressed, they bailed, they covered the flats, all of that. Not trying to argue. Just trying to inform. Actually they only blitzed once on the final drive, and the DB got away with a bad hold on Tremayne. Otherwise looked like it would have been a completion for a first down. The Cardinals' final drive defense looked a lot like the rest of the game.  I know it's easy to get upset after a lose (I'm guilty), but Mondays are when cooler heads prevail. Right? Emotions can make us seem like we don't know what we're talking about. The Huddle isn't supposed to be that. I always saw it as a place to go discuss the Carolina Panthers with more than the casual fan, and their emotionally charged opinions. I can get that at the local grocery store, where they don't know anything about NC/SC, let alone the Panthers. 
    • Poor guy went from the Ravens to this disaster
    • You have to make the best of it and find moments of happiness.  So, I picked up the Falcons D in my money league for this week. 
×
×
  • Create New...