(05-25-2014 01:46 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote: 5. large programs will find a way to shelter 100% of their income from any taxes besides possibly payroll taxes and those same payroll taxes will apply to 100% of the programs that participate in that system no matter their total revenue or their net loss or their potential profit so it will end up hurting those programs long before it does anything to the large programs that begging bowl fans wish to tear apart even come close to being harmed.......so you are planning and hastening your own destruction with these types of foolish plans
6. the vast majority of D1-A athletics programs and especially the ones that have income above revenues are state owned entities and that is not going to change and states are not going to let the federal government start taxing their university systems even if it is "athletics income" that will simply not happen period the end and even if it is attempted that income will be shifted and the distribution of it will be changed so that it is state income and thus not taxable by the feds period the end
it is amazing the lack of even basic understanding of how taxes and income and profits works for even the average supposed "educated" American much less the dramatic failings of silly plans like this or the outcomes of them if the were ever possibly implemented
To be tax deductable, the enterprise has to have a tax deductable mission that falls under the IRS codes. If athletics are excluded from the educational mission that would have far reaching impact across society. For example a community foundation that today gives money to the county recreation agency for new uniforms, that would all go away as a taxable enterprise.
The recreational softball league would have to set up a for profit entity. Now the community foundation could still purchase a service to make and distribute the uniforms as a business venture outside of the foundation but they loose the ability pass through charitable donations for community recreation. If the operating income of the foundation is large enough overall they could still make and sell uniforms provided their board agrees with the approach.
College athletics is already split on taxable (ticket sales, TV money) and non-taxable lines (donations, scholarships). What the P5 is trying to prevent is law suits from injuries by modernizing supplemental insurance. Also giving players more flexibility, stipends things the unionizing movement is trying to push. If it ever came down to a Supreme Court decision that college athletes were determined to be employees of the university, it actually would be a good thing for universities.
1. As employees the athletes would fall under the employee union and not have the ability to bargain for specific rights in a student athlete union, specifically high risk category insurance.
2. Universities with their scholarships are paying students room and board. Since all university employees can take classes for free they wouldn't have to put the value of tuition anymore as a line item under the athletic department. That lowers athletic budgets right there by several million for every school.
3. Since 80% of the scholarship is going to cover tuition and that goes away, the only thing the school would be obligated to give the athletes is 12,000 dollar graduate level stipend to cover boarding costs.
If I'm a P5 school with a 70 million dollar athletic budget I look at paying the players as an added expense because before with the room/board scholarship model it didn't cost anything aside from utilities to have the players. The large size of the athletic budget is accepted within the university community as the cost of doing business in the SEC, B1G and PAC ect. There are a lot of high end corporate thinking professors at those schools. If I'm a G5 school with a 30 million dollar athletic budget that is under constant faculty scrutiny as to whether athletics brings value to a university, paying the players is exactly the model that you want to move to because it lowers the athletic budget from 30-25 million plus strengthens the faculty union's hand in negotiations.
All the P5 really wants is to co-opt the unionization process with upgraded insurance a stipend (4,000-5,000), ability for continuing education after having completed a 4 year scholarship ect. They don't want to get started down the path of paying 15,000 per student athlete if they don't have to. G5 schools are chomping at the bit for their own autonomy because if they get it and the non-FBS conferences can't vote in the changes they'll be at a huge competitive advantage over the MVC, Big West, Southern Conference ect. They don't have to match the P5 on the stipends either so long as they add high risk insurance and continuity to finish their degree.