The NFL has received more than $200 billion in subsidies since 2005, and it has also given away more than half of all NFL revenue.
But one part of that largesse has been more than pocketbook-shredding: The NFL’s share of the federal government’s corporate welfare.
That largesse is estimated to have generated $15.4 billion in federal spending, according to an analysis by the Brookings Institution.
What makes this largesse unique?
The NFL and its unions have been negotiating with the federal budget office for years to secure the federal funding for a new stadium in Minneapolis.
But as a result of the NFL’s recent efforts to secure more than a dozen concessions from the federal deficit watchdog, the negotiations are no longer a viable option.
The NFL would need to cut back some of its revenue if it were to secure a stadium in Minnesota, and its negotiating power has diminished.
How did this happen?
When the NFL was first created, the federal subsidy was pegged at $20 billion a year, with the NFL and the union sharing the rest.
But under President Bill Clinton’s stimulus package, the subsidy was increased to $30 billion a decade, and then to $40 billion a few years ago.
The federal government now supports the NFL through subsidies that average $3.6 billion per year.
What does that mean?
The federal subsidy for the NFL has helped the league make millions of dollars in tax breaks, and also has helped to boost the value of its corporate bonds.
But if the NFL were to cut its share of its federal subsidies by nearly half, that could make it more expensive for the league to operate.
That could cause the league’s share to plummet, and in the long run, potentially reduce the value that NFL franchises add to their stock.
Are the subsidies worth it?
While it is difficult to measure exactly what the federal subsidies have meant to the league, the research shows that it has had a positive impact on the value and value of NFL assets, including stadiums and equipment.
The data shows that the NFL is now worth more than the NFL stadium in Kansas City, which is valued at about $1.5 billion.
The Minneapolis stadium in the Twin Cities is valued for $1 billion.
And that’s not the only good news.
The research also shows that a smaller share of NFL revenue has also contributed to a better economic outlook.
For example, the study found that the subsidy to help fund the NFL stadiums in Minnesota and Kansas City has helped boost the economy in those cities, and that the subsidies have helped the region recover faster from the Great Recession than the national economy.
The study also shows a positive correlation between a smaller subsidy and the amount of corporate income tax that a business generates.
The more federal subsidies the NFL receives, the more money the league is allowed to generate in federal income taxes.
So a smaller NFL subsidy means that the league can use more of that money to pay taxes on the money it makes.
The Brookings Institution study does not look at the subsidies that the federal stimulus package provided to the sports leagues.
But it does show that the $3 billion in revenue the subsidies generated for the leagues, plus the $300 million in tax benefits for the companies, have helped to reduce corporate taxes in the metro areas, which has been an important point of contention between the NFL owners and the federal governments.
Is there any way to undo this?
The federal subsidies for the NBA and NFL have allowed the NFL to maintain an elite-level team.
But there are a number of ways to reduce the subsidies.
The most popular option would be to reduce subsidies for other professional sports.
The AFL-CIO is currently negotiating a deal with the league that would reduce the amount that NFL teams pay in corporate income taxes, and the AFL-CHL is considering similar proposals.
And the NFL should take a hard look at how it would reduce its subsidies to the national league.
A federal government study published in February by the American Enterprise Institute found that $1 in federal subsidies would pay for nearly all the stadiums that are being built in the coming years in Minneapolis and Minneapolis-St. Paul.
But even if the subsidies are cut by half, it could still be possible to raise taxes on corporations that make their money in the federal corporate tax code, which can be much more regressive than individual income taxes in many states.
So the federal revenue lost through lower subsidies for sports could be offset by other revenue gains.
In fact, the Brookings report found that an increase in the corporate tax rate to 25 percent from 20 percent would bring in about $12 billion over 10 years, while an increase to 40 percent from 25 percent would raise an additional $21 billion over the same time period.
This is just the beginning of what’s to come.