• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Congress revoke the NFL's tax exempt status?

Should NFL be required to pay Federal taxes?

  • Yes (explain)

    Votes: 35 76.1%
  • No (explain)

    Votes: 6 13.0%
  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 5 10.9%

  • Total voters
    46
when did I say that? All I said about Goddell's taxation is that his pay has absolutely nothing to do with NFL's non-profit status.
Do you always assume that every response to your posts will be disagreement? I was merely adding to your point.


The NFL is a non-profit because it doesn't operate for-profit but as an organization institution for the Football teams.
They are an organizational institution for "for profit" football teams. That makes them a for-profit organizational institution. Their "no profit" status is merely an abuse of the intended legal criteria. A kid's football program having pot-luck dinners as fund-raisers this is not.
 
Most definitely, building a $1 billion stadium in the great recession was tasteless enough, but this is nothing but pure entertainment. They are not a necessity of life.

The NFL most certainly isn't. College football is another story ;).
 
Do you always assume that every response to your posts will be disagreement? I was merely adding to your point.

Alright.

They are an organizational institution for "for profit" football teams. That makes them a for-profit organizational institution.

No, that makes the football teams for profit institutions. The NFL doesn't generate a profit.

Their "no profit" status is merely an abuse of the intended legal criteria. A kid's football program having pot-luck dinners as fund-raisers this is not.

I didn't know "having pot-luck dinners as fund-raisers" is the legal definition of non-profit.
 
What???? I didn't know the NFL was tax exempt! Why on earth is THAT? That's ridiculous! I say cut this before we cut food stamps. (Obviously, I'm not a sports fan.)

One can not cut what they do not spend.
 
The NFL most certainly isn't. College football is another story ;).

College football is too often one-sided to be enjoyable, though I will watch a game occasionally if I have time.
 
why not make them reimburse every citizen or traveler that has paid a stadium tax
 
I didn't know "having pot-luck dinners as fund-raisers" is the legal definition of non-profit.
It's not. But, based on your last two responses, I now know that casual communication is not your strong suit. (Seriously, most people would have gotten that.) Duly noted.
 
This argument is such a scam. Every team owner, player and other associate in the NFL pays taxes. Only the league administration is a non-profit organization.
 
I think they (and really all) non-profits should have certain rules about how much they are allowed to pay their employees if they wish to keep non-profit status. If upper management of a non-profit is receiving as much pay as most CEOs of major corporations, then yes, that shows that they are making an actual profit, and that it is going into the pockets of their employees, particularly upper level employees. Now, I wouldn't automatically revoke non-profit status, but it would essentially be redistribution of the money or reducing how much money is taken in overall.
 
The NFL should be required to pay taxes, as they are clearly a business and not a charity. They are legally supposed to be promoting the entire football industry as their charitable work, but in practice they obviously exclusively support their specific team franchises. Its as transparent as creating a "soda industry league" who only ever deals with Coke. The NBA is honest about their status as a business and there is no reason why the NFL or other professional sporting leagues should get special treatment.
 
I think they (and really all) non-profits should have certain rules about how much they are allowed to pay their employees if they wish to keep non-profit status. If upper management of a non-profit is receiving as much pay as most CEOs of major corporations, then yes, that shows that they are making an actual profit, and that it is going into the pockets of their employees, particularly upper level employees. Now, I wouldn't automatically revoke non-profit status, but it would essentially be redistribution of the money or reducing how much money is taken in overall.
Some would counter that it takes money to attract the best qualified people, and I don't necessarily disagree with that, but there is some point where you have to question the person's devotion to the cause if the amount of money means that much to them.
 
This argument is such a scam. Every team owner, player and other associate in the NFL pays taxes. Only the league administration is a non-profit organization.

I'll repeat: this argument is BS. The NFL administration is responsible for an insignificant part of "NFL profits". The admin's total spending is nothing compared to revenue. All revenue is taxed.
 
Most definitely, building a $1 billion stadium in the great recession was tasteless enough, but this is nothing but pure entertainment. They are not a necessity of life.

Who built the stadium? Must have been some company I suppose.
 
Of course it costs us to give an entity a subsidy that effectively pays their taxes for them. We do it for GE, for Exxon, and now for the NFL? Ridiculous. GE paid zero U S income taxes last time I read about their taxes. That was money out of my pocket and out of your pocket. For companies that don't even need it. Our taxpayer money goes straight into a rich company's pot of gold.
 
I reacted to your statement comparing corporations to wolves, which to me is too broad. If you are referring to non-profits, it still seems to overbroad to me, but whatever. Victory? WTF is that on an online board?

I think you misread my statement:
.... if they actually used their donations to do good, I'd feel differently. But most of them are just corporations wearing sheep's clothing.

As for the "victory", I'm just being friendly and humorous, you've misread my original statement and my response. OK? WTF is anything on an online board? It's all just conversation, we have little impact on final outcomes.
 
College football is too often one-sided to be enjoyable, though I will watch a game occasionally if I have time.

There's always a good game on or two. Though this last weekend was pretty boring.
 
I think they (and really all) non-profits should have certain rules about how much they are allowed to pay their employees if they wish to keep non-profit status. If upper management of a non-profit is receiving as much pay as most CEOs of major corporations, then yes, that shows that they are making an actual profit, and that it is going into the pockets of their employees, particularly upper level employees. Now, I wouldn't automatically revoke non-profit status, but it would essentially be redistribution of the money or reducing how much money is taken in overall.

Then you have the valid argument of needed to compete with for-profit corporate America for top quality executives who know what they're doing. The same can be said for compensation for the leader of the free world but at least he'll get rich after he leaves office.
 
I'll repeat: this argument is BS. The NFL administration is responsible for an insignificant part of "NFL profits". The admin's total spending is nothing compared to revenue. All revenue is taxed.

I honestly don't think a lot of people understand the difference between revenue and profits. A bank teller is "responsible" for millions of dollars a year but isn't taxed on it because its not her's to keep. The NFL does not operate in order to make a profit (for itself). It does a good job however at helping the teams make a profit, and those teams pay taxes.
 
The money that teams pay to run the NFL administration has already been taxed.
 
The money that teams pay to run the NFL administration has already been taxed.

At a significantly reduced rate because the multi-million dollar memberships dues paid to the NFL lowers their liability. Considering that other sports leagues like the NBA admit to being for profit businesses, what exactly makes the NFL special in deserving 501c6 status?
 
Then you have the valid argument of needed to compete with for-profit corporate America for top quality executives who know what they're doing. The same can be said for compensation for the leader of the free world but at least he'll get rich after he leaves office.

Except there is no valid competition for profit when speaking of non-profits like this. It is a failed argument. A non-profit does not have to find the best people for their benefit. They only need someone good enough to efficiently run their operations.
 
Last edited:
At a significantly reduced rate because the multi-million dollar memberships dues paid to the NFL lowers their liability. Considering that other sports leagues like the NBA admit to being for profit businesses, what exactly makes the NFL special in deserving 501c6 status?

The teams make money. The teams pay taxes. After taxes, the teams give some money to the NFL organization to take care of administration and such. That money has already been taxed. The NFL administration does not make any money.
 
I'll try to explain this stupid scam in a bit more detail.

The NFL teams make billions of dollars, all of it is taxed. The teams give a paltry ~200m to the NFL org for admin.

People act like billions are not taxed, but that's just ignorance. Only the 200m going to the NFL org would be (double) taxed.

This would be like the government taxing your chess club based on donations made to cover administration. Your dues would be taxed, and the admin gets less money... why? Should the government tax union dues as profit?
 
The teams make money. The teams pay taxes. After taxes, the teams give some money to the NFL organization to take care of administration and such. That money has already been taxed. The NFL administration does not make any money.

The money that the teams give to the NFL reduces their tax liability. That is a subsidy which other sporting leagues don't get. The NFL fails to meet the qualifications for a 501c6 and should not be granted such status. The official IRS definition for the non-profit.


A business league is an association of persons having some common business interest, the purpose of which is to promote such common interest and not to engage in a regular business of a kind ordinarily carried on for profit. Trade associations and professional associations are business leagues. To be exempt, a business league’s activities must be devoted to improving business conditions of one or more lines of business as distinguished from performing particular services for individual persons. No part of a business league’s net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual and it may not be organized for profit to engage in an activity ordinarily carried on for profit

The NFL obviously cannot meet those requirements and shouldn't be granted privileged status.
 
I'll try to explain this stupid scam in a bit more detail.

The NFL teams make billions of dollars, all of it is taxed. The teams give a paltry ~200m to the NFL org for admin.

People act like billions are not taxed, but that's just ignorance.

So its okay not pay taxes as long as its "only" on 200 million?

Only the 200m going to the NFL org would be (double) taxed.

The NFL currently assigns licensing revenue to abuse their non-profit status. They can easily switch it back to avoid double taxation if they had to operate as an honest business.

This would be like the government taxing your chess club based on donations made to cover administration. Your dues would be taxed, and the admin gets less money... why? Should the government tax union dues as profit?

Does your chess club do multi-billion dollar royalty licensing? The NFL is not a chess club, they are a business and should be treated as such.
 
Back
Top Bottom