NFL Voluntarily Ends Tax Exempt Status
Source: Huffington Post.
The National Football League announced Tuesday that it is eliminating its tax-exempt status, a major source of contention for lawmakers and other critics of the league.
Here is the full statement from Robert McNair, chairman of the league's finance committee and owner of the Houston Texans:
"The income generated by football has always been earned by the 32 clubs and taxable there. This is the case whether the league office is tax exempt or taxable. The owners have decided to eliminate the distraction associated with misunderstanding of the league offices status, so the league office will in the future file returns as a taxable entity."
In a memo to the league's teams, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell called the tax-exempt status, which was first granted in 1942, a "distraction," adding that is has "been mischaracterized repeatedly in recent years."
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/28/nfl-tax-exempt-status_n_7162874.html
geomon666
(7,512 posts)You're next.
ret5hd
(20,435 posts)LynneSin
(95,337 posts)It's a sell out Mega Church now.
Trust me, the Churches sell out huge crowds just like the NFL.
Truthteller3562
(11 posts)NT
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)But the point is that there was an arena in Houston that once hosted a national sports team and now it is a mega church
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakewood_Church_Central_Campus
I wasn't misinformed, I just named the wrong place.
Dr. Forrester
(47 posts)You're thinking of the old Summit where the Rockets used to play which was bought by Joel Osteen and converted to a mega church. The Astrodome is just sitting there, unused.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I'm from the Northeast. We tear down those old places so it's fascinating what they do with them down south.
cstanleytech
(26,082 posts)That means no preaching for who people should vote for in any way, shape or form.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)Like you, I think they should stay out of politics, but I think the only ones who should get a break are the local churches. When religious groups have to send most of their collections to a headquarters that then uses that money for other things, they should be the ones that have to pay taxes. Some religions have huge real estate holding, the Jehovah's witness's are one example. They also make a lot of money from the literature they push door to door. They get out of paying taxes on the money they make doing this by saying it's a donation. In reality the members of the group actually play for the literature when they pick it up, then they also give the money they make from "donation" at the doors to the main branch in New York.
Same goes for other religions that the local churches send money to.
cstanleytech
(26,082 posts)politics in this country in any form I dont mind them being tax exempt.
If however someone whos a leader in the church wants to get involved though and is using the power of the church with the blessing of the church leadership then the tax exception needs to go bye bye then and that includes providing advice to a politician on his job and what bills he should and should not vote for.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)TerrapinFlyer
(277 posts)Then tax the businesses owned by the churches. -- FZ
former9thward
(31,805 posts)happyslug
(14,779 posts)Thus it is to cover up the Income of the head of the NFL is the reason the NFL is converting from a tax exempt non profit to a for profit entity. The NFL has no real income, it is a means to divide up any network money provided to the NFL as a whole. Dividing up that income can be done on an agency basis, i.e. the rights to NFL broadcasts belong to each team equally and any proceeds goes to each team equally. The only income the NFL has itself is the fee to make such deals with the network and if the income and other costs of running the NFL is less then the income earned as the agent of the teams, the NFL may NEVER make money and thus pay no income tax as a taxable corporation. Thus I suspect the NFL will NEVER be profitable thus will never pay Corporate Income Tax.
On the other hand, the NFL will no longer have to list its top five income earners to the IRS, as all tax exempt charities must do.
As to making churches taxable, Federal Law only covers INCOME. Thus any donations to any charity (including churches) are tax exempt under Federal Law. You seem to want the Federal Government to be able to tax such donations as income to the Charity. Such a change in the law would force ANY donations to ANY charity (even a Secular charity, such as the Red Cross) be classified as Income. All of the Charities will oppose such a change in the law.
As to the type of Charity, Congress has maintain it does NOT want to determine what is a "good" Charity or what is a "bad" charity. The only rule is that the Charity follows the IRS rules, including NOT saying their support any candidate in any election (or that they oppose any candidate). While the charity can NOT support candidates, the leaders of those Charities can do so, provided it is NOT done on the time they are working for the Charity. Furthermore the Charity can support POLITICAL ISSUES (such as Climate Change or abortion) as long as they do NOT come out a support a candidate (or oppose a candidate.
The Federal Government collects NO REAL ESTATE TAXES, thus the Churches themselves are covered by STATE Tax Exemptions as to REAL ESTATE TAXES. As long as the Church does NOT violate state law (such run a for profit business out of the church), the Church itself is tax free.
Now, what the leaders of the Church gets pay IS TAXABLE. i.e. if someone spends a million dollars on themselves, that million dollars is subject to Federal Income Tax. Now the same rules as to deductions as to corporate america also apply to these charities, i.e. meals done as part of business are deductible, any expense to operate the charity are deductible.
Clothing can be deducible and can NOT be deductible, the issue can it be worn "Off duty". If you have to purchase or your employer issues you a uniform, it is tax deducible, On the other hand if if can be worn while NOT working it is NOT tax deducible. A shirt with the company's logo on it, is tax deducible, but if you are a Maitre de of a fancy restaurant and have to wear a tux, that tux, since it does NOT have the company logo on it, could in theory be worn off work and thus NOT tax deducible. Clothing can be a headache. The Classic example of this are Military Uniforms. If you are in the Military full time, your uniform is something you are expected to wear even off duty (This was the norm prior to Vietnam, you were in the Military you did NOT wear civilian clothes ever, since Vietnam most military personnel can wear civilian clothing when NOT on duty). Since you are "on duty" 24 hours a day seven days a week, your uniform is something you can wear even when off the base and off duty. Thus full time military personal can NOT deduct the cost of their Uniforms. Reservists, on the other hand can, for the simple reason that it is NOT expected for them to wear it when they are NOT training. The same rule applies to Religious people, they can NOT deduct what is normal for them to wear, such as what a Catholic Priest wears every day, but given the nature of priest's garments worn only during mass, those can be tax deducible (or if provided to the Priest by the Diocese or Parish NOT considered income).
Notice the above rules are the same for pro profit corporations and non profit corporations. If your employer provides you clothing (other then safety clothing), it can be "Income" if you can in theory wear them off the job.
I bring up clothing and how the IRS treats it, to show that most of the deductions from Gross Income to get to Taxable Income are the same if you are a Charity or a for profit business. If excessive "benefits" are provided to a leader of either a charity or a for profit business, that is considered Income by the IRS and taxable. Just because someone is the leader of a Church does NOT mean he pays no income taxes. Such leaders MUST pay taxes on what ever is provided to them as Salary AND any "in kind" income such a free housing, use of an automobile and any other "aid" to such leader NOT directly tied in with running the Charity.
ciaobaby
(1,000 posts)How can this be? I so hope it is true.
And yes, The religious exemption must end, whether they want it to or not !!!!
former9thward
(31,805 posts)"The fact is that the business of the NFL has never been tax exempt," Goodell wrote. "Every dollar of income generated through television rights fees, licensing agreements, sponsorships, ticket sales, and other means is earned by the 32 clubs and is taxable there."
There's also a benefit to the league's executives -- they no longer are obligated to publicly disclose their salaries. The league office in New York was required to disclose its filings because it was classified as a non-profit organization, which it no longer will be.
Goodell, who has earned an average of $18.8 million a year during his first eight years as commissioner, pulled in $44.2 million in 2012 and $35 million in 2013, according to the IRS filings.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12780874/nfl-league-office-gives-tax-exempt-status
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)turbinetree
(24,632 posts)is that everyone of these stadiums that was funded with tax dollars should be owned and operated by the said taxpayers-------just like in Greenbay ( America's Team).
Because, they had to show the owners, the city ticket holders what they were making and what they were spending the money on---the only team.
mercuryblues
(14,491 posts)They have figured out a way to get a tax refund if they file taxes.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)It is THAT requirement the NFL wants to get out of. As a Corporation, the NFL's income is nil, it is an entity to work out agreements between the teams AND work out deals with the Networks,
In simple terms, this means NOTHING. You will have a for profit organization that will report it had no income for the year, as all of its revenue went to the costs of getting that revenue. i.e. 10 million income, 10 million spent on Salaries and operating expenses, total gross income Zero.
The money from the Networks will be disbursed to each team. I suspect via the NFL contract with the network (i.e. the NFL gets NONE of the money, an equal share of any money is to be given to each team as has been the practice for years).
In simple terms this is to be able to hide the income of the head of the NFL, nothing more.
mercuryblues
(14,491 posts)1/ as you stated
2/ I suspect this has something to do with the Redskins. They took a lot of heat from congress. Without the Tax exempt status, it gets congress out of their game.
3/ They tested the waters on this, they know they will still not have to pay a dime. If they are creative enough they will get a refund, like GE, Exxon, Boeing, Wells Fargo and others.
whistler162
(11,155 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)It's the teams that make all of the money, and they pay taxes on it like any other corporation.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)It's just there to set the rules of American Football and settle disagreements between the conferences. Honestly it's exactly the sort of organization that should be a 501(c)(6).