Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6433

Bill Overview

Title: IOC Act

Description: This bill eliminates the tax exemption for any organization or entity whose primary purpose is the promotion of international, multi-sport, athletic competitions, and that has gross receipts in in excess of $100 million for any of the 3 preceding taxable years (e.g., the International Olympic Committee).

Sponsors: Rep. Waltz, Michael [R-FL-6]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals participating in or viewing international multi-sport competitions (e.g., the Olympics)

Estimated Size: 250000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Professional Gymnast (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this policy reduces the funding available for our training or competitions, it will definitely affect us.
  • The Olympics are a huge part of my career, and any financial constraint on organizing committees could mean fewer opportunities for athletes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 6 8
Year 5 5 7
Year 10 5 7
Year 20 5 7

Sports Marketing Executive (New York, NY)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This will probably complicate the relationship with the IOC, affecting our marketing strategies.
  • There are immediate concerns about increased costs and reduced scope for branding at such events.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 5 7
Year 3 5 7
Year 5 5 7
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 7

School Physical Education Teacher (Houston, TX)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might affect how we promote sports at school, especially if the Olympics lose some spotlight.
  • However, direct impact on my job or happiness is unlikely.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Olympic Venue Manager (Salt Lake City, UT)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could influence future bidding and hosting opportunities, potentially reducing our city's involvement in Olympics-related activities.
  • While venue management planning can adjust, there could be fewer improvements or enhancements in the absence of IOC-led funding.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 5 7
Year 10 5 7
Year 20 5 7

Tech Start-Up Founder (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 27 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a small business involved indirectly, changes in profitability of clients like the IOC could trickle down to us.
  • We'll have to be more careful with forecasting and may need to diversify our client base.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 9
Year 2 7 9
Year 3 7 9
Year 5 7 9
Year 10 7 9
Year 20 7 9

High School Student (Chicago, IL)

Age: 17 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I dream of swimming in the Olympics one day, but if this policy affects athlete funding, my path might be harder.
  • It's important that athletes still receive the support they need to train and compete.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 6 8
Year 5 5 8
Year 10 5 8
Year 20 4 8

Corporate Sponsor Liaison (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Our main concern is how the IOC will adapt, which will influence our sponsorship commitments.
  • This could redefine how we engage with both international and local sports communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 5 7
Year 3 5 7
Year 5 4 7
Year 10 4 7
Year 20 5 7

Sports Journalist (Denver, CO)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might not change how the Olympics are reported, but could affect the stories around sponsorships and host cities.
  • There might be new angles to explore as organizations adjust to these rules.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Sports Agent (Portland, OR)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The focal points will be around securing sponsorships as IOC adjusts to new tax conditions.
  • Our athletes' success depends on stable financial support, which this policy might disrupt.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 6 8
Year 3 6 8
Year 5 6 8
Year 10 6 8
Year 20 7 8

Retired Audience Member (Boston, MA)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might not change how much I enjoy watching the Olympics, but could change presentation or coverage.
  • As a viewer, my main hope is that such events remain accessible and engaging.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)

Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)

Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)

Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)

Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)

Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)

Key Considerations