In the absence of for profit owners, is it even profit, or is it just surplus? Especially as, in the long run, it all goes on costs, or back into footy.It does disseminate profits as it sees fit, does it not?
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In the absence of for profit owners, is it even profit, or is it just surplus? Especially as, in the long run, it all goes on costs, or back into footy.It does disseminate profits as it sees fit, does it not?
Susie O Brien from Herald Sun chimes in on AFL Tax Free status today
The AFL says it's a charitable organisation — and enjoys a very beneficial tax-exempt status
Like any business tax would be on profit, not revenue. The amount spent on grassroots, and the AFL itself, would barely change. The 2017 report, was around $60m. With clever accounting that would drop - no large business pays the actual corporate tax rate - so a tax bill would only be in the $18m realm at the absolute most.Depending on how much tax they would be expected to pay, it might have a major impact on the AFL's ability to pay for everything they do now.
Would be interesting to see all players, staff and AFL staff take an across the board pay cut to absorb the shortfall.
Or clubs folded,
Or grassroots funding reduced,
Or ?
Like any business tax would be on profit, not revenue. The amount spent on grassroots, and the AFL itself, would barely change. The 2017 report, was around $60m. With clever accounting that would drop - no large business pays the actual corporate tax rate - so a tax bill would only be in the $18m realm at the absolute most.
The AFL and its constituent clubs (and all professional sport) operate more as an entertainment industry player than a sporting body. As such, paying tax seems fair enough.
Would you see distributions to the clubs as deductible for the AFL but taxable in the hands of the clubs?
Would fines levied by the AFL or clubs be taxable &/or deductible?
Crazy stufff ...
Not really
It would be treated exactly the safe as when woolies fines suppliers for delivers being 10m late
You spent 30 minutes creating that post, for me? Thanks.You started a Thread on 10.10.17 (Footy Industry Board, " Ground Rental Rates For AFL Clubs/Stadiums").
You claimed in that Thread the AFL:-
. should be "ashamed" for getting Govt. funding, due to its big $ TV Rights deals
. since it was getting Govt. funding for stadia, then NRL, ARU,& A League Clubs should have the "same" financial support from Govt. as the AFL gets for stadia.
. "...has no more right than say a Melbourne Victory to demand Govt. assistance for stadia infrastructure".
. was unethical in obtaining Govt. funds
I then asked you questions exploring your view on "ethics" (in my Oct. 2017 post, #97) - about whether the FFA, FIFA, & the game of soccer was ethical. You did not reply/answer my questions at all.
(1) Will you answer those questions?
You have now started this Thread - questioning whether the AFL, a NFP org., is entitled (like all NFP's) to its tax-exempt status. This is despite the fact that the AFL & Clubs pay wages to c. 900 employees -over $370,000,000 wages pa: & they PAY TAX on their wages. And the AFL is responsible for funding GR AF (which would be cut if your views prevailed).
In your post#12 above, you wrote " The AFL has created an industry of largely 600-1000 cashed up bogans". This is obviously false, & deliberately insulting. It is my understanding that the word "bogans" is often used on soccer websites by soccer supporters as a general description of AF players & supporters.
It is obvious you have an anti-AFL agenda -which you are attempting to hide behind a "concern for the taxpayer"/ "concern for community morality" facade. You are trying to portray the AFL as immoral, to undermine AF.
(2) Where have been your BF Threads (AND your AFFIRMATIVE posts elsewhere in BF on general comments attacking it) on:-
. the corrupt WC 2018 & 2022 bidding process & outcomes (including allegations of "slave-labour" in Qatar being used to build WC stadia)
. where the FFA recruited & paid many $millions-c.$11,000,000?- to very "dodgy" operators (inc. some with criminal records) to push its bid.
. where the tax payer paid the FFA c. $48,000,000 for the WC bid (some of it, according to Parliamentary reports, were bribes/ is unaccounted for); we got 1 vote, & the whole Bid was futile from the start, according to B.Mersiades & other soccer insiders.
(3) Do you think the FFA should refund the $48,000,000 before it ever receives any Federal/State/Council funding again?
(4) Do you think FIFA is totally corrupt?
(5) It is apparent your preferred sport is soccer. Why do you think A League crowds & ratings are so dysmal in Aust.?
You are not willing to answer my questions, which are all relevant to your previous comments. Appropriate conclusions can be drawn.My concern for Aussie Rules is that the AFL HQ have 'the maintenance and operation of Australian Football' as a low KPI.[The AFL is undeniably the biggest sport in Aust. -by far: that's your main "concern"]
In terns of Aussie Soccer, David Gallop is a News Limited plant.[Aaahh... yes, of course. "Soccer's issue"/problems are caused by News Limited] Soccer's issue (as opposed to 'problem') is currently in-house.[So, once soccer solves its "in-house issue", it will be on a glorious trajectory]
Have fun sipping latte's at the PR firm tomorrowYou are not willing to answer my questions, which are all relevant to your previous comments. Appropriate conclusions can be drawn.
You are clearly a hypocrite, with your faux concerns about AF. You are clearly a soccer troll.
Clearly a troll from a bitter soccer supporter, angry that soccer is a niche sport in Australia and a very poor cousin to the AFL/NRL.You are not willing to answer my questions, which are all relevant to your previous comments. Appropriate conclusions can be drawn.
You are clearly a hypocrite, with your faux concerns about AF. You are clearly a soccer troll.
Clearly a troll from a bitter soccer supporter, angry that soccer is a niche sport in Australia and a very poor cousin to the AFL/NRL.
The cause of all soccer’s problems is Media agenda/ bogan population
You are a soccer supporter/Melb. Victory fan who is regularly "outraged" on BF by AFL "corruption, lack of ethics, & malpractice" - & even start Threads on these themes.Have fun sipping latte's at the PR firm tomorrow
In terns of Aussie Soccer, David Gallop is a News Limited plant. Soccer's issue (as opposed to 'problem') is currently in-house.
You are a soccer supporter/Melb. Victory fan who is regularly "outraged" on BF by AFL "corruption, lack of ethics, & malpractice" - & even start Threads on these themes.
However, when asked why don't you have the same outrage on soccer's incontrovertible lack of ethics etc, & when questions are put to you directly on soccer's ethical problems, you flatly refuse to answer the questions! Thus, obviously, revealing yourself as a soccer troll!
Gallop was a News guy at the NRL, he isnt at the A-league - who head hunted him, despite his massive unpopularity with NRL fans.
Ummm, who issue the TV rights for the A-League... Fox Sports. News Corp last I checked..... Even ex FFA CEO Ben Buckley has a day job at Fox Sports now....
3. Andrew Jennings (BBC UK)< Jesse Fink (Sydney) and Bonita Mersiades and #newfifanow on Twitter are covering corruption in soccer.
Aaahh...you have clearly demonstrated you are very knowledgeable, & a real expert, on soccer. But refuse to answer questions about soccer's real corruption & lack of ethics! LOL.
This confirms the obvious -you are aware of, but don't condemn soccer corruption/malpractice etc. You prefer to be eternally vigilant, & to make snide insinuations/express double-standards/have faux outrage over AF issues.
You are trolling BF.
This is quite literally the worst idea I've ever seen.
You do realise if you remove the tax-exempt status from the AFL, it could disseminate its profits however it saw fit, yes?
They dont already?
I think he means that the AFL would no longer be bound by the constraints that act on NFP organisations
More likely the AFL would likely structure its accounts in a way that it paid little of no tax anyway.
Hard for Australian companies which generate pretty much all their money in Australia. Their one big way would be stadium upgrades, which would mean State governments wouldnt be forking out hundreds of millions (or billions for the NSW government).
I think the fact it actually is a not for profit will better assist it in not declaring a taxable profit. This is the issue that others have pointed out. How do you you write the legislation in a way that would credibly see taxes paid by the AFL but not by other sporting and non-sporting NFP's? Most other sporting organisations get a fair chunk of the revenue from the taxpayer.
The AFL is ironically already the only sports organisation in the country that significantly contributes to stadium development
For profits operating in Australia generate profit. They need to make a profit to generate a return for owners/shareholders. The AFL, even if it loses its tax free status doesn't need to make a profit, so it wont. Company tax is on profit, not turnover.Hard for Australian companies which generate pretty much all their money in Australia. Their one big way would be stadium upgrades, which would mean State governments wouldnt be forking out hundreds of millions (or billions for the NSW government).