OT: Bills new stadium public funding

[BennyBledsoe]

Buffalo Bills operating income 2020 | Statista They lost money in one year. It is the ONLY year they lost money in the last 20.

You're also quoting the number from 2020...the COVID year.

The Giants lost 13 million. The 49ers lost 45. The Bears lost 3.6. The Eagles lost 26. Texans lost 20. Seahawks lost 21. Packers lost 34. Raiders lost 5. Ravens lost 21. Vikings lost 10. Colts lost 20. Falcons lost 4. Chargers lost 49. Panthers lost 22. Saints lost 16. Cardinals lost 16. Titans lost 12. Lions lost 22. Bengals lost 17. And the Bills lost 18.

The NFL’s Most Valuable Teams 2021: Average Team Value Soars To $3.5 Billion As League Shrugs Off Pandemic Year

With lucrative new media deals and some fruitful investments, the NFL’s 32 teams are worth 14% more than last year on average as the Dallas Cowboys hold on to the top spot at $6.5 billion.

www.forbes.com

20 of the league's 32 teams lost money that year. Ten lost more than the Bills.

But 2020 was an aberration for pretty much all these teams, as well. Even the Patriots went from 250 to 142 million from 2019 to 2020.

I could show you the full statistical sets for every NFL team's operating income from 2001-2020.

They all show that owning a NFL team is VERY profitable.

 

[Triumph]

At SB42, I was told by a Canadian sportswriter covering the NFL that the Bills to Toronto was a done deal.

Then the 2008 great recession struck.

Toronto had plans to build a spanking new NFL venue with luxury suites galore. Evidently, Toronto has a vibrant business environment with plenty of corporations ready to purchase luxury suites. Obviously, the NFL loved this move seizing at the opportunity to get a foot in the door of the Canadian market, but also for the new money. Bills tickets were some of the cheapest you can find. Stadiums in Buffalo and Jacksonville are underperformers bringing in NFL revenue. Ive never been to Ralph Wilson but have heard its a real dump. The Jags stadium is no prize either.

BTW, the Chiefs want a new stadium and are threatening to move across state lines. The KC Royals are in the midst of moving downtown. If youve never been to either facility, but wanted to go, now would be a good time to make plans.

Both stadiums are old, but also very nice. Tailgating space galore which is half the fun IMO.

 

[Ring 6]

......you're defending multibillionaires who operate most of these teams as vanity projects/tax shelters? If there was no advantage to owning a NFL team, the value of selling that team wouldn't keep going up.

This does not seem a very well thought out take, mg.

Actually he thoroughly thought it through and you responded with rich people are mean.

 

[BTTA]

Not sure how that applies to my comment, but ask yourself why does the NFL have an anti-trust exemption.

Because the NFL is somewhat like the USPS - it is part of the national culture and economy that can not provide its value if treated like a normal business. The country needs NFL teams spaced out geographically, so people feel as much of a regional connection as possible to a team. That is, of course, in competition with the desires of NFL owners to maximize the value of their franchises, which is good for them but not for the country.

 

[Ring 6]

Because the NFL is somewhat like the USPS - it is part of the national culture and economy that can not provide its value if treated like a normal business. The country needs NFL teams spaced out geographically, so people feel as much of a regional connection as possible to a team. That is, of course, in competition with the desires of NFL owners to maximize the value of their franchises, which is good for them but not for the country.

So we agree that the antitrust exemption is because antitrust laws shouldn’t apply to sports leagues because they couldn’t otherwise exist.
I’m still not seeing how that would allow the federal government to be able to dictate to states what they do with their revenues.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I am opposed to all forms of corporate welfare, so put me down as disappointed in the NY legislature. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

 

[Nunchucks]

Billionaires are great at spending other people's money, they are welfare royalty. The pittance the poor get isn't enough for a Billionaire to wipe his arse with.

 

[patfanken]

They will get it back in taxes.

That's the justification that is often given to pacify voters, but the reality in study after study of these stadium giveaways has been that the taxes received NEVER come close to equaling what the state paid out. I find it obscene that this welfare for the super-rich continues. I thought after Kraft PROVED that an NFL owner could privately build and maintain a decent stadium for his team and make it financially profitable, most NFL stadia would be privately funded in the future. I couldn't have been more wrong. You just have to look at the scam that Tepper, the Panther owner (who is SO rich he could by and sell a fellow Billionaire like Bob Kraft) is trying to pull on getting public money to build his team's training facility. But after decades of tax cuts and special interest clauses written into new tax codes, it is still never enough for these guys.

I love the Pats, but I would NEVER be OK to see public money used benefit the team or its facilities. (unless of course it would be paid back in a sure and timely manner. Like what the Pats did to pay back the infrastructure changes the state did from parking revenues)

 

[XLIX]

That's the justification that is often given to pacify voters, but the reality in study after study of these stadium giveaways has been that the taxes received NEVER come close to equaling what the state paid out.

That's just not true in all cases. I am not going to argue philosophically whether or not the state should subsidize private industry, I am just going to look at it from a numbers standpoint: If we assume that the Bills would leave the state without this deal, then this particular deal is not a bad one for NY. They are paying $600 million (plus another $250 from the county). The state will easily recover that much money in income taxes over the 30 year lease - to say nothing of all the other taxes and fees the government collects from events.

 

[Ring 6]

That's the justification that is often given to pacify voters, but the reality in study after study of these stadium giveaways has been that the taxes received NEVER come close to equaling what the state paid out. I find it obscene that this welfare for the super-rich continues. I thought after Kraft PROVED that an NFL owner could privately build and maintain a decent stadium for his team and make it financially profitable, most NFL stadia would be privately funded in the future. I couldn't have been more wrong. You just have to look at the scam that Tepper, the Panther owner (who is SO rich he could by and sell a fellow Billionaire like Bob Kraft) is trying to pull on getting public money to build his team's training facility. But after decades of tax cuts and special interest clauses written into new tax codes, it is still never enough for these guys.

I love the Pats, but I would NEVER be OK to see public money used benefit the team or its facilities. (unless of course it would be paid back in a sure and timely manner. Like what the Pats did to pay back the infrastructure changes the state did from parking revenues)

Financial studies done by people with an agenda are hardly reliable.
Just the income tax generated on players, management, teams profits, etc end up paying for the stadium in the long run, and the long run is what matters because the project is financed with bonds not cash.
Imagine taking all of the income tax revenue generated by the Bills existing and taking it away.
The studies often cited just assume the money fans spend will be spent elsewhere in the community and that’s not totally accurate.

The fact that an owner CAN afford to pay doesn’t mean he should if he has an alternative. It’s like saying you can afford to give a 100% tip at dinner, so you should. Kraft chose to invest in the stadium and patriot place because he knew it would make him money, not because the state would pay for it and he decided to be altruistic.

 

[patfanken]

That's just not true in all cases. I am not going to argue philosophically whether or not the state should subsidize private industry, I am just going to look at it from a numbers standpoint: If we assume that the Bills would leave the state without this deal, then this particular deal is not a bad one for NY. They are paying $600 million (plus another $250 from the county). The state will easily recover that much money in income taxes over the 30 year lease - to say nothing of all the other taxes and fees the government collects from events.

Just off the top of my head, my first reaction is about "the time value of money" Even if what you say is true (and that's a BIG if), the state will lose millions in interest and the use of that money that could have been used in other projects. Forget about the use in schools, rapid transit, or police, there are other projects that would be MORE valuable. Use about 5% of that money to manage infrastructure changes that will encourage a builder to do a tall office building which will return more than the investment in income, property and sales taxes that building will generate in about a third of the time.

Money is tight in states. For the last 2 years we have seen states receive millions less in taxes because of business closures and decreased spending due to Covid. Giving $800 to a couple that could finance the ENTIRE thing is ludicrous. And I have to question your comment that the state "will easily recover that much money in income taxes". Google "stadium financing" and find me a SINGLE report that says that a state/city/county got back their investment when they paid a high percentage of building an NFL stadium.

 

[XLIX]

Just off the top of my head, my first reaction is about "the time value of money"

If you have to resort to factoring in the time value of money, then you've just obliterated your entire argument that "the taxes received NEVER come close to equaling what the state paid out."

Even if what you say is true (and that's a BIG if),

Actually, if you do the math, it's not a big "if". It is a virtual certainty.

Money is tight in states.

Irrelevant. We are talking about a specific project and asking whether or not money in is greater than or less than money out.

For the last 2 years we have seen states receive millions less in taxes because of business closures and decreased spending due to Covid.

Irrelevant. We are talking about a specific project and asking whether or not money in is greater than or less than money out.

Giving $800 to a couple that could finance the ENTIRE thing is ludicrous.

Well, now you're getting into the philosophical argument about whether or not states should finance private industry. I am not arguing that point one way or the other. I am merely pointing out that the math (in this particular case) checks out far, far better than you seem to think it does.

And I have to question your comment that the state "will easily recover that much money in income taxes". Google "stadium financing" and find me a SINGLE report that says that a state/city/county got back their investment when they paid a high percentage of building an NFL stadium.

I don't need to google it because I know what the NY State income tax rate is, I know what the Buffalo Bills payroll is, and I know what the projected payrolls for the upcoming years are anticipated to be. Barring some sort of NFL catastrophe, the state will recover well over $600 million over the next 30 years on income taxes alone.

Seriously. Do the math.

 

[JayNM]

Financial studies done by people with an agenda are hardly reliable.
Just the income tax generated on players, management, teams profits, etc end up paying for the stadium in the long run, and the long run is what matters because the project is financed with bonds not cash.
Imagine taking all of the income tax revenue generated by the Bills existing and taking it away.
The studies often cited just assume the money fans spend will be spent elsewhere in the community and that’s not totally accurate.

The fact that an owner CAN afford to pay doesn’t mean he should if he has an alternative. It’s like saying you can afford to give a 100% tip at dinner, so you should. Kraft chose to invest in the stadium and patriot place because he knew it would make him money, not because the state would pay for it and he decided to be altruistic.

Yes, the sport/enternainment industry are, of course, not historically linked to obscure facts and alter things that dont suit their interest...

Ill say this, it's a bad side of having "independent" states is that they can lose tax income, sure

But if we are talking making more buck per dollar, just make another shopping mall. Defending Billionaire's tax manipulation based on some possible long return investment on tax based on a stadium, with an private owner is very weak sauce

 

[patfanken]

I don't need to google it because I know what the NY State income tax rate is, I know what the Buffalo Bills payroll is, and I know what the projected payrolls for the upcoming years are anticipated to be. Barring some sort of NFL catastrophe, the state will recover well over $600 million over the next 30 years on income taxes alone.

Seriously. Do the math.

If it were as simple as that I'd agree....BUT... unless those players are filing simple tax returns without a CPA then your income levels won't hold water. There is a reason Donald Trump hasn't paid taxes for most of the last decade, or when Mitt Romney was running for President it was released that he paid only 18% on millions of dollars income, while most people who made around $25,000 were paying at the 24%. bracket.

Disclaimer: I really liked most of what Mitt Romney did when he was Gov. here. Among the reasons I voted for him was Mass Health, which SHOULD have be a blueprint for what states COULD do for their citizens if they wanted to.

So this isn't about the fact Romney wasn't paying his fair share, but more about tax laws that allow Billionaires to manipulate the law and in so doing LEGALLY pay less (on a percentage basis) than the average Joe.

Which is a long way of saying that dividing the Bills payroll by the percentage of the state income tax which can be anything roughly 4-10% of "taxable income". Then you have divide THAT by half, because they only pay taxes on games played in NY. So if you assume a $240MM cap at the 10% level (and if they pay 10% they better find new CPA's) that would mean about $12MM/yr, so you are looking at about 60-70 years to recoup the $850MM you laid out almost a century ago.

And yes I am aware that there will be other much smaller incomes streams, but I'm just using your OWN example. AND BTW- the time value of money IS an important factor in ANY long term investment or expense. The fact you so casually brushed it off, makes your own point tainted

 

[Ring 6]

Yes, the sport/enternainment industry are, of course, not historically linked to obscure facts and alter things that dont suit their interest...

Ill say this, it's a bad side of having "independent" states is that they can lose tax income, sure

But if we are talking making more buck per dollar, just make another shopping mall. Defending Billionaire's tax manipulation based on some possible long return investment on tax based on a stadium, with an private owner is very weak sauce

Who is defending anything? Fact is the state gets the money back, and the owner would be a fool to not use the leverage he has.

 

[Ring 6]

If it were as simple as that I'd agree....BUT... unless those players are filing simple tax returns without a CPA then your income levels won't hold water. There is a reason Donald Trump hasn't paid taxes for most of the last decade, or when Mitt Romney was running for President it was released that he paid only 18% on millions of dollars income, while most people who made around $25,000 were paying at the 24%. bracket.

Disclaimer: I really liked most of what Mitt Romney did when he was Gov. here. Among the reasons I voted for him was Mass Health, which SHOULD have be a blueprint for what states COULD do for their citizens if they wanted to.

So this isn't about the fact Romney wasn't paying his fair share, but more about tax laws that allow Billionaires to manipulate the law and in so doing LEGALLY pay less (on a percentage basis) than the average Joe.

Which is a long way of saying that dividing the Bills payroll by the percentage of the state income tax which can be anything roughly 4-10% of "taxable income". Then you have divide THAT by half, because they only pay taxes on games played in NY. So if you assume a $240MM cap at the 10% level (and if they pay 10% they better find new CPA's) that would mean about $12MM/yr, so you are looking at about 60-70 years to recoup the $850MM you laid out almost a century ago.

And yes I am aware that there will be other much smaller incomes streams, but I'm just using your OWN example. AND BTW- the time value of money IS an important factor in ANY long term investment or expense. The fact you so casually brushed it off, makes your own point tainted

Dude, come on.
Do you understand why wealth doesn’t equal income? Do you understand that every single tax payer pays the exact same tax rate brackets on their taxable income? If a person makes $1,000,000 in income and LOOSES 900,000 in a business venture their INCOME is $100,000. If they pay 30% tax, you don’t get to say they only paid 3% on their $1,000,000 and be credible.

How do you think Romney “manipulated” the tax laws? Please list all if the allowable deductions that are not cash expenditures. Do you believe that a self employed person who generates $1,000,000 in revenue but has $800,000 in expenses so he actually clears $200,000 should be paying tax on $800,000?
Exactly which deductions do you think are “manipulation”?

Why would you think the Bills players would pay less than anyone else? You do realize they are ineligible for IRA, student loan interest, and are capped on SALT deductions right? How do you think they pay less. Do you think it’s a scam to open a business and LOSE MONEY to avoid paying tax on it? How does that make sense?
Please list all the ways you think these players avoid paying taxes. I’d like to join them, but unfortunately, it’s a fake story.

You don’t divide it in half because the other team pays New York taxes on the games played in Buffalo.

As far as time value of money, great point because the money is raised by bonds so it is laid back over all those years so the tinn me d value of money doesn’t apply here.

 

[patman52]

Don’t think he wanted to move the team given his investment in the region and his sports enterprises. He’s plowed over a billion into it. But this $850m is beyond absurd and they’ll never see the money back. As for NYC and downstate voters the state poured a lot of money into the Mets and Yankees stadia.

Those are baseball stadiums used more than 100 times a year, how do you compare that to a team that plays 10 games a year. The ancillary tax earnings from neighborhood bars and restaurants, and not ten tailgate parties. The NY taxpayers have already financed 200 mill of repairs and upgrades for the bills over the last 25 years.

 

[XLIX]

If it were as simple as that I'd agree....BUT... unless those players are filing simple tax returns without a CPA then your income levels won't hold water. There is a reason Donald Trump hasn't paid taxes for most of the last decade, or when Mitt Romney was running for President it was released that he paid only 18% on millions of dollars income, while most people who made around $25,000 were paying at the 24%. bracket.

I have already had this exact same conversation before. I can't remember who it was with, but I sure hope it wasn't with you because I would hate to feel I wasted my breath.

Athletes' income is regular income and it all gets taxed as regular income. They aren't Donald Trump or Warren Buffet or Mitt Romney who make their money from long term investments and sit for years on unrealized capital gains.

Do a google search on how much athletes pay in taxes. The highest paid ones lose well over a third to Uncle Sam.

So this isn't about the fact Romney wasn't paying his fair share, but more about tax laws that allow Billionaires to manipulate the law and in so doing LEGALLY pay less (on a percentage basis) than the average Joe.

No offense, but comparing an athlete's taxable income to Mitt Romney's taxable income show a complete lack of understanding of tax law. As a venture capitalist, Romney can hold off on declaring his gains, and when he does declare them, they are taxed as long term capital gains, which is around 15%-20%.

An athlete's income is regular income. There's no getting around paying regular taxes on that much regular income.

Which is a long way of saying that dividing the Bills payroll by the percentage of the state income tax which can be anything roughly 4-10% of "taxable income". Then you have divide THAT by half, because they only pay taxes on games played in NY.

Yes, but the visitors have to pay NY state taxes for those games played in Orchard Park, so the number you cut in half gets doubled.

So if you assume a $240MM cap at the 10% level (and if they pay 10% they better find new CPA's) that would mean about $12MM/yr, so you are looking at about 60-70 years to recoup the $850MM you laid out almost a century ago.

As mentioned above, you forgot the road team's tax burden. So if we include the road team, we are looking at $24MM/yr. All of a sudden it won't take 70 years to pay off the cost, it will only take 35.

Oh, and the above calculation relies on the ridiculously foolhardy assumption that the salary cap won't be going up at all at any point over the next 30 years. Given all the new revenue lines the NFL is getting (not to mention the inevitable 18th game), I bet the cap doubles within the next 10 to 15 years. So by 2037, the state can reasonably project $48 million per year of income tax. At the rate, the burden gets paid in 17 years.

And bear in mind, that all the above calculations show only the income taxes paid by the players. It doesn't include all the Bills executives and coaches, the taxes and fees from ticket sales, other events that take place at the stadium, etc, etc.

 

[patman52]

Dude, come on.
Do you understand why wealth doesn’t equal income? Do you understand that every single tax payer pays the exact same tax rate brackets on their taxable income? If a person makes $1,000,000 in income and LOOSES 900,000 in a business venture their INCOME is $100,000. If they pay 30% tax, you don’t get to say they only paid 3% on their $1,000,000 and be credible.

How do you think Romney “manipulated” the tax laws? Please list all if the allowable deductions that are not cash expenditures. Do you believe that a self employed person who generates $1,000,000 in revenue but has $800,000 in expenses so he actually clears $200,000 should be paying tax on $800,000?
Exactly which deductions do you think are “manipulation”?

Why would you think the Bills players would pay less than anyone else? You do realize they are ineligible for IRA, student loan interest, and are capped on SALT deductions right? How do you think they pay less. Do you think it’s a scam to open a business and LOSE MONEY to avoid paying tax on it? How does that make sense?
Please list all the ways you think these players avoid paying taxes. I’d like to join them, but unfortunately, it’s a fake story.

You don’t divide it in half because the other team pays New York taxes on the games played in Buffalo.

As far as time value of money, great point because the money is raised by bonds so it is laid back over all those years so the tinn me d value of money doesn’t apply here.

The issues was romney income was based on bain capitals income as capital gains, which is taxed les than earned income.

 

[Grogan14]

They will get it back in taxes.

No they will not. Its a fraud for billionaires

"From a return-on-investment standpoint, economists and researchers almost universally agree that stadiums are unlikely to generate anywhere near the level of tax revenue needed to offset the public subsidies tied to their construction."

Research shows sports stadiums generate little new economic acivity.

Research shows sports stadiums generate little new economic acivity.

www.investigativepost.org