Time for today’s episode of poorly explained tax revenue implications of new sports projects! Our contestant is the Detroit News, with its headline:
That is quite the promise! How does News reporter Louis Aguilar work that out? Detroit has a 1.2 percent “jock tax” on athletes and entertainers who play or perform in the city while living elsewhere, and that, say Pistons officials, would provide the city with about $4 million a year in new income tax revenue, assuming all the concerts that would have gone to the Palace of Auburn Hills relocate to the new Detroit arena with the team if that arena is eventually demolished. That’d be worth about $60 million in present value, so: moneyz!
Of course, the city of Detroit is paying the Pistons $34.5 million to move in with the Red Wings in their new arena, so most of that big tax win will be going straight back to the team. It still means that, if the estimates are accurate — they were done by the Pistons, remember, and a tax attorney way down in the 15th paragraph of the News article notes that many entertainers and athletes may have tax shelters set up to avoid paying full jock taxes — the deal to bring in the Pistons was worth it for the city, if your definition of “worth it” is giving up most of the tax benefits you’d normally get from a business relocating to your city in order to get the business to relocate in the first place.
Also, of course, there’s the little matter of the $50 million in land that the city sold to the Red Wings for $1 to make the arena happen in the first place, plus the $266 million that the state of Michigan is spending to move two of its sports teams and a bunch of concerts from one part of the state to the other, and … I’m not sure what headline I would have gone with, but “big win” probably isn’t it.