CincyInDC Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 looks like it'll be cardinals [spit] and the dirty birds for me. I can't miss Oktoberfest in Munich. :) Going to the Titans game and a Brewers game. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 That's the part that is the scam. Non-profits don't have to compete with Fortune 500 companies for executive talent yet some pay more. I disagree; I'd much rather work for an NPO involved in something I believe in, all things being equal. The scam here is that the NFL is absolutely, ruthlessly a for-profit business. Distributing the majority of those profits to the individual franchises doesn't make them a non-profit - or shouldn't, anyway. Many of the largest for-profit corporations in this country don't pay taxes, either, so I guess that's a lost cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CincyInDC Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I disagree; I'd much rather work for an NPO involved in something I believe in, all things being equal. I did that for a good while. The trouble with nonprofits is that the people who have been around the longest (and who make decent coin) think working at such a place is its own reward and they pay new people peanuts. I no longer save the world for a living...now I provide the technical infrastructure to help TV stations and their advertisers book commercials. And I don't feel bad about it one little bit. EDIT: My point is that "all things being equal" does not apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I did that for a good while. The trouble with nonprofits is that the people who have been around the longest (and who make decent coin) think working at such a place is its own reward and they pay new people peanuts. I no longer save the world for a living...now I provide the technical infrastructure to help TV stations and their advertisers book commercials. And I don't feel bad about it one little bit. EDIT: My point is that "all things being equal" does not apply. Er, yeah.. That's my point as well. NPO's in general don't pay competitive salaries - unless they're the NFL. I don't have any illusions about "Saving the World", but I do find the time to volunteer now & then to help make it suck a little less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I disagree; I'd much rather work for an NPO involved in something I believe in, all things being equal. The scam here is that the NFL is absolutely, ruthlessly a for-profit business. Distributing the majority of those profits to the individual franchises doesn't make them a non-profit - or shouldn't, anyway. Many of the largest for-profit corporations in this country don't pay taxes, either, so I guess that's a lost cause. Yes, part of working for a non-profit is a sense of mission. Charity CEOs tend to be hired mainly on fundraising ability, ie how big a rolodex they have. Fortune 500 types tend to be hired based on their ability to execute their strategy, ie develop new products, gain market share, etc. Those are different skill sets that don't overlap very much. The NFL is certainly a for profit business with the commissioner getting tens of millions of dollars and one of the league's broadcasting executives also getting tens of millions in the last few years. Yeah, it's annoying to see large profitable companies not paying income tax. I've paid more tax than GE in some recent years. The reason is that they are allowed to have different accounting for IRS and SEC purposes. So they report losses to the tax authorities while reporting profits to investors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Just to be clear. Income tax. Corporation profits are not income to anyone unless distributed. That is taxed as income to the individual tax payer. Wage is also taxed. People get mind fucked over this manipulation of reality. Tax is also paid on company valuation as owners realize that gain through capital gains. Retained earnings of a corporation should not be taxed under a true income based system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Just to be clear. Income tax. (etc) I'm not sure if affirming that we live in a plutocracy was exactly your point, but that's what I'm taking from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 The people that complain about corporations not paying taxes often ignore the law has morphed to allow the government to enact double taxation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_dish Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 That's the part that is the scam. Non-profits don't have to compete with Fortune 500 companies for executive talent yet some pay more. Eh, partially true. When you have a non-profit with thousands of workers (and sometimes billions and billions in revenue/donations/expendatures etc) you need that type of leader to man the helm. They may not be going after P&Gs CEO, but they are going after absolute top level talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saphead Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Peyton Mannings 63 year old ass will be broke down by December. We will be facing Ada Ohio's Zac Dysert in that game. Write it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PutWittyNameHere Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Many non profits have highly paid executives as well. Very few, if any, get paid like Goodell. I researched a few of the bigger nonprofits a few months ago, and the vast majority make below $2M. Goodell cleared $44M+ last year. It's a lot easier to call yourself a non-profit when you're just funneling all your profits in the CEOs bank account. Pay taxes on your product, or just give your extra income to the executive staff? Easy call for the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Goodell gets taxed on his income. Revenue and profits are taxed at the team ownership level. This isn't real hard to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Goodell gets taxed on his income. Revenue and profits are taxed at the team ownership level. This isn't real hard to understand. Explain to me how the NFL is a nonprofit business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Explain to me how the NFL is a nonprofit business. Simple. The portion of the NFL that has received "nonprofit" designation is an association of common lines of business. There are no sharholders for the nonprofit portion of the NFL. Revenues/Expenses and thus Profits are passed to the "common lines of business" were the tax IS paid. Profits made from the Revenue generated by the teams are taxed. The NFL nonprofit entity at times runs a loss mostly due to the previously mentioned salaries. However, those salaries are funded by the teams through dues etc. The salaries of the nonprofit employees are taxed on that individuals tax return. If you are mistakenly referring to "the NFL" as the entire ball then that is your misunderstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 The people that complain about corporations not paying taxes often ignore the law has morphed to allow the government to enact double taxation. What's wrong with double taxation? The whole point of a corporation is that it's an artificial body to stand between the owners and taxes or liability. If you want to say that corporate rates in the US are too high compared with other countries or that the tax code is a mess of exemptions and special favors, that's a different argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 What's wrong with double taxation? The whole point of a corporation is that it's an artificial body to stand between the owners and taxes or liability. If you want to say that corporate rates in the US are too high compared with other countries or that the tax code is a mess of exemptions and special favors, that's a different argument. Merely pointing that the tax law does work in favor of the Government and it seems that point is often lost on those that preach tax fairness. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange 'n Black Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Simple. The portion of the NFL that has received "nonprofit" designation is an association of common lines of business. There are no sharholders for the nonprofit portion of the NFL. Revenues/Expenses and thus Profits are passed to the "common lines of business" were the tax IS paid. Profits made from the Revenue generated by the teams are taxed. The NFL nonprofit entity at times runs a loss mostly due to the previously mentioned salaries. However, those salaries are funded by the teams through dues etc. The salaries of the nonprofit employees are taxed on that individuals tax return. If you are mistakenly referring to "the NFL" as the entire ball then that is your misunderstanding. This exactly... Is this really that hard to understand? The NFL itself only exists to administrate the 32 franchises. Whatever revenue it does not spend on operating expenses is distributed to the teams, where it's taxed just like any other profit. The franchises themselves are certainly NOT nonprofit entities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 This exactly... Is this really that hard to understand? The NFL itself only exists to administrate the 32 franchises. Whatever revenue it does not spend on operating expenses is distributed to the teams, where it's taxed just like any other profit. The franchises themselves are certainly NOT nonprofit entities. Agreed the franchises aren't non-profits. The league isn't either. The broadcast networks and the NFLPA sign contracts with the NFL, not 32 separate contracts with each team. The NFL should pay taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Simple. The portion of the NFL that has received "nonprofit" designation is an association of common lines of business. There are no sharholders for the nonprofit portion of the NFL. Revenues/Expenses and thus Profits are passed to the "common lines of business" were the tax IS paid. Profits made from the Revenue generated by the teams are taxed. The NFL nonprofit entity at times runs a loss mostly due to the previously mentioned salaries. However, those salaries are funded by the teams through dues etc. The salaries of the nonprofit employees are taxed on that individuals tax return. If you are mistakenly referring to "the NFL" as the entire ball then that is your misunderstanding. Er, I didn't ask what shady semantic accounting tricks the NFL uses to avoid paying taxes. I'm asking how an entity set up, in part, to redistribute profits could ever be considered a nonprofit. Every business could make this same argument by reinvesting anything left after expenses are paid, and/or creating some shell company through which they could funnel income. "Oh there's nothing left after we paid everyone and bought everyone company cars and homes, so we're a nonprofit" Uh, no. If I was a contractor hired to do a job, and then paid several other people to do the actual work while paying myself a hefty salary, that wouldn't make my company a nonprofit. Operating at a loss doesn't make them a nonprofit, either. edit: this is rapidly veering into J&D territory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Agreed the franchises aren't non-profits. The league isn't either. The broadcast networks and the NFLPA sign contracts with the NFL, not 32 separate contracts with each team. The NFL should pay taxes. What are you talking about? The only revenue in the debate is the dues revenue collected from the teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 What are you talking about? The only revenue in the debate is the dues revenue collected from the teams. Who receives all the advertising money? Who administers the profit-sharing system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Er, I didn't ask what shady semantic accounting tricks the NFL uses to avoid paying taxes. I'm asking how an entity set up, in part, to redistribute profits could ever be considered a nonprofit. Every business could make this same argument by reinvesting anything left after expenses are paid, and/or creating some shell company through which they could funnel income. "Oh there's nothing left after we paid everyone and bought everyone company cars and homes, so we're a nonprofit" Uh, no. If I was a contractor hired to do a job, and then paid several other people to do the actual work while paying myself a hefty salary, that wouldn't make my company a nonprofit. Operating at a loss doesn't make them a nonprofit, either. edit: this is rapidly veering into J&D territory Your contractor example wouldn't make you a nonprofit that is correct, but that isn't what the NFLMC is doing. The revenue at stake under the nonprofit status are the actual dues paid by the teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldcat Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 The NFL negotiates a deal. It takes in money, and distributes all of it to the 32 teams. What is there to tax? There's no net income. That's like saying that Red Cross should be taxed on the funds it creates and delivers to the disaster areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Who receives all the advertising money? Who administers the profit-sharing system? Doesn't matter. The revenue reported by the entity and thus the only item protected under the status of non profit is the dues paid by the team. Oh what? You don't understand that? You don't believe it? Let me help you there is the federally funded thing called the IRS that should be capable enough to follow the money trail. The correct and only arguement questioning the business set up would be how much shelter if any do the individual teams get by writing-off dues (on their individual tax returns) paid to the NFLMC for maybe acting like a share service business center and operations. This idea that they are funneling operational revenue through the NFLMC is silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Doesn't matter. The revenue reported by the entity and thus the only item protected under the status of non profit is the dues paid by the team. Oh what? You don't understand that? You don't believe it? Let me help you there is the federally funded thing called the IRS that should be capable enough to follow the money trail. The correct and only arguement questioning the business set up would be how much shelter if any do the individual teams get by writing-off dues on their individual tax returns paid to the NFLMC for maybe acting like a share service business center and operations. This idea that they are funneling operational revenue through the NFLMC is silly. I think you are missing the point... No one is arguing that the NFL is breaking the law... They are saying the law (having been written with the aid of lobbyists who represent the very people who profit off it) sucks and should not be as it is. Do you understand now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.