Trump Bill Advances as Team Owner and College Tax Breaks in Peril
The omnibus 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' passed by the House of Representatives Thursday morning takes aim at team owners' coveted ability to write off most of the purchase price of a sports team, with a clause that would remove billions of dollars from being deducted on taxes.
'The bill itself, vis-a-vis sports teams ownership, isn't really a great thing,' Irwin Kishner, a partner at the law firm of Herrick, Feinstein, said on a phone call. 'You could argue the valuations of sports teams would be less than they were prior to that tax treatment.'
More from Sportico.com
Baseball America the Latest to Be Target of 'Bork Bill'
Congress May Have to Settle NCAA Athlete Eligibility Issue
Coffey Talk: Donn Davis on PFL's Rise and Sports 'Ego Money'
The bill, now numbered H.R. 1, covers a multitude of spending priorities including border security, defense and taxation, among others. The legislation also takes a hatchet to amortization, which is the depreciation of non-tangible assets often termed goodwill. Typically, 90% or more of a team's purchase price is goodwill, which excludes physical assets a team might possess, such as its stadium and weight room equipment.
'Team owners were allowed to deduct 100% of the purchase price over 15 years, and now they're only allowed to deduct 50% over 15 years, if it comes to law,' Robert Raiola, director of the sports and entertainment group at PKF O'Connor Davies accounting firm, said on a phone call.
Amortization is an accounting principle meant to assess a decline in value over time, like its cousin depreciation, which is meant to account for physical assets wearing out, such as machinery. In sports, values don't typically decline. The 1973 New York Yankees sale to George Steinbrenner is believed to be the last time a franchise from the big four U.S. leagues traded hands at a loss.
The amortization of team values is an under-the-radar tax benefit that is a key part of the calculus used in the decision to buy a U.S. sports franchise—and it plays a role in the skyrocketing prices paid for franchises in recent years. For example, under existing law, a team owner paying $1.6 billion for a franchise where $1.5 billion is intangible goodwill could deduct that $1.5 billion over 15 years. That $100 million annual deduction of taxable income probably saves the average team owner $40 million in actual taxes, assuming a 40% blended federal and state tax rate. Those deductions do raise the taxable income if and when the team is sold—all $1.5 billion would be a gain to be taxed—but not paying taxes today is preferable to paying them in the distant future.
The proposed law, which now moves to the Senate, means team owners would still get a $20 million annual tax savings under the example above. As drafted, it would cover all professional sports teams, and specifies football, hockey, soccer, baseball and basketball as examples. The amortization reduction applies only to new purchases after the bill becomes law, so any revenue bump to the federal government would be muted by the fact current team owners will be exempt under the proposal.
'The general public doesn't really feel sorry for these people either way, but for the owners themselves, it has a huge impact,' Kevin Thorne, managing partner of tax-focused Thorne Law Group, said on a phone call. 'I think it's going to be changed by the time it goes fully through [the Senate and reconciliation process]. A lot of people are going to be getting phone calls on The Hill.'
Two years ago Congress eliminated the ability of team owners to immediately depreciate the value of tangible assets of their franchises.
Tax benefits 'are a big part of the calculus' of buying a team, Kishner said. 'But it's still a regulated asset in that supply is less than demand and people have historically done very well owning these franchises.'
H.R. 1 also seeks to tax college athletic department licensing revenue. Typically, all nonprofits must pay income tax on revenue from activities not central to their tax-exempt status to avoid giving charities a competitive advantage over for-profit businesses.
Yet under current law, income from the sale or licensing by a college of its name and logo is exempt from unrelated business income taxation. This money can be significant: Ohio State University's athletic department for example, made $34.1 million in licensing and advertising revenue in the latest reported year, according to the Sportico College Sports Finances Database. Athletic department logos of seemingly every college in the U.S. are widely licensed for apparel and other goods. That money would now be subject to the 21% corporate tax rate—at the same time the NCAA is proposing expanded scholarship limits and direct payments to athletes.
Another clause in the budget as passed would allow health savings account money to be used to pay for gym membership, capped at $500 a year per person and $1,000 per family. Publicly traded gym operators Planet Fitness (PLNT) and Life Time Group Holdings (LTH) were up modestly in trading today, outpacing the broader market.
H.R. 1 passed the full House by a vote of 215-214 with one abstention, and it will likely see changes in the Senate, despite the Republicans' six-seat advantage. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has set a July 4 target date to pass the legislation. The bill, weighing in at more than 1,100 pages, will now be referred to the Senate finance and budget committees, which may propose amendments that will need to be reconciled with the House version. Both bodies will need to approve by majority vote a final version before it can be sent to President Trump to be signed into law.
With assistance from Michael McCann
Best of Sportico.com
Most Expensive Sports Memorabilia and Collectibles in History
The 100 Most Valuable Sports Teams in the World
NFL Private Equity Ownership Rules: PE Can Now Own Stakes in Teams
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
SCOOP: House Republicans target 'vulnerable' Democrats for voting against tax cuts in 'big, beautiful bill'
Print Close By Paul Steinhauser Published June 23, 2025 FIRST ON FOX – The House Republican campaign committee is taking aim at congressional Democrats whom they charge are "pushing the largest tax hike in generations." As part of their aggressive messaging following the passage last month of the GOP's landmark spending and tax cut bill – dubbed by President Donald Trump as his "big, beautiful bill" – the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is launching ads on Monday against 25 House Democrats who likely face challenging re-elections in the 2026 midterms. "Democrats jacked up inflation, making life more expensive for all of us. We need help. Now, they're pushing the largest tax hike in generations," charges the narrator in the digital ads, which were shared first with Fox News. The narrator argues that the Democrats being targeted in the ads are "completely out of touch" and urges viewers of the spots to tell the Democratic lawmakers to keep their "hands off your hard-earned money." FIRST ON FOX: TRUMP-ALIGNED GROUP LAUNCHES SECOND ACT IN PUSH TO PASS 'BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL' The bill passed the House of Representatives last month by just one vote, along partisan lines. And Trump is pushing for a July 4 deadline for the measure to pass through Congress and land on his desk at the White House. The GOP-crafted measure is stuffed full of Trump's campaign trail promises and second-term priorities on tax cuts, immigration, defense, energy and the debt limit. It includes extending his signature 2017 tax cuts, which are set to sunset this year without action by Congress – and eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay. But the measure, if signed into law, would likely even further fuel the nation's massive budget deficit. The national debt currently sits at $36,215,397,741,847.76 as of June 18, according to FOX Business' National Debt Tracker. FOX NEWS POLL: WHAT AMERICANS THINK ABOUT THE ECONOMY AND TRUMP'S 'BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL' The spots, backed by a modest ad buy, are targeting California Democrats Josh Harder (9th District), Adam Gray (13th), George Whitesides (27th), Derek Tran (45th) and Dave Min (47th), and Florida's Darren Soto (9th) and Jared Moskowitz (23rd). Also included are Reps. Frank Mrvan (1st) of Indiana, Jared Golden (2nd) of Maine, Kristen McDonald Rivet (8th) of Michigan, Don Davis (1st) of North Carolina, Nellie Pou (9th) of New Jersey, Gabe Vasquez (2nd) of New Mexico, Dina Titus (1st), and Susie Lee (3rd), and Steven Horsford (4th) of Nevada. The NRCC ads also take aim at Reps. Tom Suozzi (3rd), Laura Gillen (4th) and Josh Riley (19th) of New York, Marcy Kaptur (9th) and Emilia Sykes (13th) of Ohio, Henry Cuellar (28th) and Vicente Gonzalez (34th) of Texas, Eugene Vindman (7th) of Virginia, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (3rd) of Washington state. Democrats are working to win back control of the House in next year's midterms, as the GOP defends its razor-thin majority in the chamber. "Out of touch House Democrats lit the fire of inflation and tried to slap Americans with the biggest tax hike in decades, all to fund their radical agenda. Voters won't forget this betrayal – not now, not next November," NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella claimed. FIRST ON FOX: THESE REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS SAY THEY 'STAND UNITED' IN SUPPORT OF TRUMP'S 'ONE BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL' A memo last month by the NRCC encouraged House Republicans to make the tax cuts a priority as they defended their votes on the tax and spending bill, and to take aim at Democrats for pushing to raise taxes on average Americans. The memo highlighted that the bill "prevents tax increases to put more money in every American's pocket." As Democrats attack the bill, they're highlighting the GOP's proposed restructuring of Medicaid – the nearly 60-year-old federal program that provides health coverage to roughly 71 million low-income Americans. The changes to Medicaid , as well as cuts to food stamps, another one of the nation's major safety net programs, were drafted in part as an offset to pay for extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts. The measure includes a slew of new rules and regulations, including work requirements for many of those seeking Medicaid coverage. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Democrats have relentlessly attacked Republicans over what they say will be "huge cuts" to Medicaid if the bill becomes law. But the NRCC pushes back, saying in its memo that it is "protecting Medicaid by removing illegal immigrants and eliminating fraud." Print Close URL
Politico
a day ago
- Politico
Republican plans to cap student borrowing could shatter an everyday profession
A series of changes to long-running federal student loan programs tucked into the Republican tax plan has doctors panicked and struggling to find GOP allies. The Senate education committee's portion of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill includes a new cap on how much people can borrow for medical school and other professional programs that is well below the sticker price most students are facing. Lawmakers are also proposing to nix a class of federal loans graduate students use to cover housing and other non-tuition expenses. For low-income and first-generation college students with aspirations of becoming physicians, these plans, if enacted, could squash their dreams, according to medical college leaders. As the full Senate irons out the bill and Trump rattles school finances with funding freezes, doctors' groups are asking Congress to preserve the more generous loan options or risk a sharp drop in who's studying medicine — a profession that's already facing a shortage. While part of the stress on poorer students comes from the ever-increasing cost of higher education, the bill would likely push more of them toward private loans that require a co-signer, which are out of reach for many, and come with steeper interest rates. 'A lot of our medical schools, mine included, have a lot of first-generation college students. When they come into medical education, more times than not, they don't have co-signers,' said John L. Hummer, president of Burrell College of Osteopathic Medicine, a school with campuses in New Mexico and Florida for which 81 percent of students depend on the federal Grad PLUS program Republicans are looking to eliminate. The Senate education tax bill establishes a $200,000 ceiling on federal student loans for professional degrees, like medicine. But the median cost of attending four years of medical school for the class of 2025 is $286,454 for public institutions and $390,848 for private schools, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. It's a range that exceeds the costs many doctors now serving in Congress paid when they earned their degrees. Many did not respond to inquiries from POLITICO about how the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would affect medical school enrollment — and those that did were not sympathetic about student debt. 'You're looking at a person, a first-generation college student, who went to medical school, and didn't borrow money,' Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), who sits on the Senate HELP Committee, said. 'I worked my tail off. Anyone who is paying more than $100,000 to go to school is making a huge mistake.' Marshall graduated from the University of Kansas School of Medicine in 1987, when the average in-state tuition for a public medical school nationally was around $4,696. That sum in today's dollars is about $13,300 — far less than what the Kansas program costs in 2025. Members of the medical community believe limits on federal loans or steering students to borrow from private lenders will exacerbate a long-running national physician shortage the Association of American Medical Colleges projects could be as high as 86,000 doctors by 2036. David Bergman, senior vice president of government relations and health affairs at the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, said students at medical schools his group represents have said it's been difficult to access private loans. Some lenders, like PNC Bank, hold student debt for which about 90 percent of private loans have a co-signer, while others had interest rates as high as 16 percent — nearly twice that of a Grad PLUS loan. 'The consequence of all this, of course, is that it's the low-income students who are going to suffer the most,' Bergman said. 'They may not have great credit, so then they may not be able to get the loans. Or they may get higher rate loans that put them further in debt.' One former Trump administration official shares this concern. 'I do worry about the assumption that the private sector is going to step in,' said Diane Jones, a former Education Department official from Trump's first term. 'Maybe they would, but I'm not sure they would step in to make loans available to low-income students.' Even some people in the lending business are skeptical the industry's bigger players will change their rules around co-signers. 'It just takes a lot more energy because it's riskier. Period. Banks aren't in the business of doing riskier products,' said Ken Ruggiero, co-founder and CEO of Ascent, a private loan company that will lend to applicants without a co-signer. 'They are in the business of talking to a person who has a very good income and credit score and letting the student sign the agreement.' The House version of the bill would also shut down Grad PLUS and put a cap on lending to graduate students for professional programs, putting pressure on the Senate to change course. But HELP Committee Chair Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said there needs to be more accountability for the high tuition prices writ large that aren't exclusive to medical schools. 'There should be some ratio between earning potential and what it costs,' Cassidy said. 'I met with neurosurgeons and cosmetologists and they had the same discussion about the cost of education.' Jason Goldman, president of the American College of Physicians, which represents internal medicine doctors, related specialists and medical students, is skeptical that capping loan amounts would force medical schools to immediately lower tuition. Over the span of 21 years, medical school tuition has gone up 81 percent, outpacing inflation, according to AAMC. 'The reality is it's very expensive to train a physician — the amount of hours that go into lectures, labs, professors and housing and everything it takes to graduate is expensive,' Goldman said. He fears that some students may be dissuaded from becoming primary care doctors, a specialty where shortages are profound, especially in rural areas. Some in Congress have pushed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to address proposed limits to federal lending for student borrowers pursuing health care-related degrees. During a House Appropriations Committee hearing in May, Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) asked McMahon to take a look at aid programs that help students complete their degrees. 'We do know we have a shortage of nurses and doctors,' McMahon said. 'I think there are a lot of programs we can look at to train nurse technicians to get them into the marketplace faster.' Other Congress members have proposed student loan changes outside of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to address health care shortages. Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Jackie Rosen (D-Nev.) introduced legislation in April that would create a student loan repayment program for specialists within medical professions who practice in rural areas. They also introduced the Specialty Physicians Advancing Rural Care Act in previous legislative sessions citing a dearth of providers in rural communities. 'The entire nation is dealing with a physician shortage, and rural communities in Mississippi have been particularly affected,' Wicker said in a statement. 'Congress can help provide a solution.' Jones, the official from Trump's first term, also worries that some students may have to forgo medical school because they won't be able to secure financial assistance. She attended medical school in the 1980s when the loan program she was using was suspended, ultimately leading her to drop out because she could no longer afford the program. 'I didn't have a parent who could co-sign for a private loan, and I didn't have access to any other resources,' she said. 'I personally lost the opportunity to pursue the career that I wanted, that I had earned the right to pursue.'
Politico
2 days ago
- Politico
Republicans' loan plan presents new obstacles for low-income students
A series of changes to long-running federal student loan programs tucked into the Republican tax plan has doctors panicked and struggling to find GOP allies. The Senate education committee's portion of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill includes a new cap on how much people can borrow for medical school and other professional programs that is well below the sticker price most students are facing. Lawmakers are also proposing to nix a class of federal loans graduate students use to cover housing and other non-tuition expenses. For low-income and first-generation college students with aspirations of becoming physicians, these plans, if enacted, could squash their dreams, according to medical college leaders. As the full Senate irons out the bill and Trump rattles school finances with funding freezes, doctors' groups are asking Congress to preserve the more generous loan options or risk a sharp drop in who's studying medicine — a profession that's already facing a shortage. While part of the stress on poorer students comes from the ever-increasing cost of higher education, the bill would likely push more of them toward private loans that require a co-signer, which are out of reach for many, and come with steeper interest rates. 'A lot of our medical schools, mine included, have a lot of first-generation college students. When they come into medical education, more times than not, they don't have co-signers,' said John L. Hummer, president of Burrell College of Osteopathic Medicine, a school with campuses in New Mexico and Florida for which 81 percent of students depend on the federal Grad PLUS program Republicans are looking to eliminate. The Senate education tax bill establishes a $200,000 ceiling on federal student loans for professional degrees, like medicine. But the median cost of attending four years of medical school for the class of 2025 is $286,454 for public institutions and $390,848 for private schools, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. It's a range that exceeds the costs many doctors now serving in Congress paid when they earned their degrees. Many did not respond to inquiries from POLITICO about how the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would affect medical school enrollment — and those that did were not sympathetic about student debt. 'You're looking at a person, a first-generation college student, who went to medical school, and didn't borrow money,' Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), who sits on the Senate HELP Committee, said. 'I worked my tail off. Anyone who is paying more than $100,000 to go to school is making a huge mistake.' Marshall graduated from the University of Kansas School of Medicine in 1987, when the average in-state tuition for a public medical school nationally was around $4,696. That sum in today's dollars is about $13,300 — far less than what the Kansas program costs in 2025. Members of the medical community believe limits on federal loans or steering students to borrow from private lenders will exacerbate a long-running national physician shortage the Association of American Medical Colleges projects could be as high as 86,000 doctors by 2036. David Bergman, senior vice president of government relations and health affairs at the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, said students at medical schools his group represents have said it's been difficult to access private loans. Some lenders, like PNC Bank, hold student debt for which about 90 percent of private loans have a co-signer, while others had interest rates as high as 16 percent — nearly twice that of a Grad PLUS loan. 'The consequence of all this, of course, is that it's the low-income students who are going to suffer the most,' Bergman said. 'They may not have great credit, so then they may not be able to get the loans. Or they may get higher rate loans that put them further in debt.' One former Trump administration official shares this concern. 'I do worry about the assumption that the private sector is going to step in,' said Diane Jones, a former Education Department official from Trump's first term. 'Maybe they would, but I'm not sure they would step in to make loans available to low-income students.' Even some people in the lending business are skeptical the industry's bigger players will change their rules around co-signers. 'It just takes a lot more energy because it's riskier. Period. Banks aren't in the business of doing riskier products,' said Ken Ruggiero, co-founder and CEO of Ascent, a private loan company that will lend to applicants without a co-signer. 'They are in the business of talking to a person who has a very good income and credit score and letting the student sign the agreement.' The House version of the bill would also shut down Grad PLUS and put a cap on lending to graduate students for professional programs, putting pressure on the Senate to change course. But HELP Committee Chair Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said there needs to be more accountability for the high tuition prices writ large that aren't exclusive to medical schools. 'There should be some ratio between earning potential and what it costs,' Cassidy said. 'I met with neurosurgeons and cosmetologists and they had the same discussion about the cost of education.' Jason Goldman, president of the American College of Physicians, which represents internal medicine doctors, related specialists and medical students, is skeptical that capping loan amounts would force medical schools to immediately lower tuition. Over the span of 21 years, medical school tuition has gone up 81 percent, outpacing inflation, according to AAMC. 'The reality is it's very expensive to train a physician — the amount of hours that go into lectures, labs, professors and housing and everything it takes to graduate is expensive,' Goldman said. He fears that some students may be dissuaded from becoming primary care doctors, a specialty where shortages are profound, especially in rural areas. Some in Congress have pushed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to address proposed limits to federal lending for student borrowers pursuing health care-related degrees. During a House Appropriations Committee hearing in May, Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) asked McMahon to take a look at aid programs that help students complete their degrees. 'We do know we have a shortage of nurses and doctors,' McMahon said. 'I think there are a lot of programs we can look at to train nurse technicians to get them into the marketplace faster.' Other Congress members have proposed student loan changes outside of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to address health care shortages. Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Jackie Rosen (D-Nev.) introduced legislation in April that would create a student loan repayment program for specialists within medical professions who practice in rural areas. They also introduced the Specialty Physicians Advancing Rural Care Act in previous legislative sessions citing a dearth of providers in rural communities. 'The entire nation is dealing with a physician shortage, and rural communities in Mississippi have been particularly affected,' Wicker said in a statement. 'Congress can help provide a solution.' Jones, the official from Trump's first term, also worries that some students may have to forgo medical school because they won't be able to secure financial assistance. She attended medical school in the 1980s when the loan program she was using was suspended, ultimately leading her to drop out because she could no longer afford the program. 'I didn't have a parent who could co-sign for a private loan, and I didn't have access to any other resources,' she said. 'I personally lost the opportunity to pursue the career that I wanted, that I had earned the right to pursue.'
