Bill Overview
Title: No Tax Subsidies for Stadiums Act of 2022
Description: This bill denies an exclusion from tax of the interest on professional stadium bonds (i.e., bonds used to finance or refinance capital expenditures for a stadium or arena used for professional sports exhibitions, games, or training).
Sponsors: Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or affected by the financing of professional sports stadiums worldwide
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The bill targets financial mechanisms related to the construction and renovation of professional sports stadiums, which involve significant amounts of public and private investment.
- Professional sports teams and franchises that benefit from tax subsidies for bond interests on stadiums will be directly impacted.
- The financial institutions and investors involved in the issuance and management of these bonds will also be impacted.
- Communities and governments that rely on tax subsidies as a part of their economic development strategy involving sports infrastructure development will be affected.
- The fans and local population who support and attend events at these stadiums might see indirect impacts, such as changes in the availability of funds for stadium improvements or local economic benefits related to sports events.
- Approximately 30 professional stadiums in major sports leagues in the U.S., and hundreds globally that may consider financing options are relevant.
Reasoning
- This policy primarily affects stakeholders in the financing and management of professional sports stadiums. In the U.S., municipal bonds have historically been used to fund infrastructure projects including stadiums, drawing interest from public financial bodies and private investors.
- The policy is likely to have variable impacts: strong on franchise owners and investors due to financial implications, moderate on local governments that may rely on stadium-driven economic development, and generally low on average citizens unless they work directly in roles connected to these stadiums.
- The distribution includes individuals from financial and government sectors as well as citizens affected indirectly by changes in sports-related local economic activities.
- Given budget constraints, the immediate fiscal impact of the policy is negligible, but it can influence long-term financial planning and resource allocation among affected parties.
Simulated Interviews
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The withdrawal of tax subsidies will likely make stadium bonds less attractive.
- This policy might shift investments into other infrastructure projects instead.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Local Government Official (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Municipalities will have fewer incentives to support stadium projects.
- Could lead to reallocating funds to other public needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Stadium Management Executive (Dallas, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy means we need to rethink our future financing strategies.
- Stadiums may see delays or scaling back in planned enhancements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Retired Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am worried about how this might affect local sports events.
- Local businesses could see some changes in patronage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Sports Journalist (St. Louis, MO)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy may change how teams negotiate for new stadiums.
- Financial scrutiny on sports investments is likely to increase.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Investment Banker (Miami, FL)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could dampen appetite for investing in stadium developments.
- We might need to explore other client investments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Sports Team Owner (Green Bay, WI)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Removing subsidies limits our financing options greatly.
- There is uncertainty in how rapidly we can pursue improvements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
Concession Stand Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It might mean fewer events, which means less work for me.
- I'm worried about potential lower incomes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
College Student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The change might lead us to explore more sustainable funding strategies.
- It could shift the focus from taxpayer funding to more private investments.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Community Organizer (Boston, MA)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a right move towards reducing backdoor public expenses on pro sports.
- I worry about finding effective alternative community investments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Professional sports stadiums have often been financed with municipal bonds due to tax-exemptions making financing cheaper.
- Ending tax subsidies could make financing more expensive for sports facilities, potentially limiting public-funded stadium projects.
- Some cities and states may nevertheless continue to fund stadiums using taxpayer money via different mechanisms.