Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill amends Internal Revenue Code section 103 to disallow federal tax-exempt status for bonds issued to finance or refinance professional sports stadiums or related property. A “professional stadium bond” is any bond whose proceeds finance a facility used at least five days in a year for professional sports.
Progressives emphasize eliminating corporate welfare; conservatives emphasize local control.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill plainly and directly implements a narrow substantive change to the Internal Revenue Code by adding a new disallowance for 'professional stadium' bonds and supplying a single definitional clause and effective date.
The bill amends Internal Revenue Code section 103 to disallow federal tax-exempt status for bonds issued to finance or refinance professional sports stadiums or related property.
A “professional stadium bond” is any bond whose proceeds finance a facility used at least five days in a year for professional sports.
The prohibition applies to bonds issued after the law’s enactment.
Content is narrowly focused and clear but politically sensitive to local stakeholders and faces higher Senate difficulty; limited built-in compromises.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill plainly and directly implements a narrow substantive change to the Internal Revenue Code by adding a new disallowance for 'professional stadium' bonds and supplying a single definitional clause and effective date. The principal elements required to effect the statutory change are present.
Progressives emphasize eliminating corporate welfare; conservatives emphasize local control.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize eliminating corporate welfare; conservatives emphasize local control.
Likely supportive; sees the bill as closing a corporate welfare loophole and reducing public subsidies to wealthy sports franchises.
Views removal of tax-exempt financing as a straightforward way to discourage public funding of private stadium projects.
Cautiously supportive but pragmatic.
Appreciates reducing special-interest tax breaks and fiscal restraint, while worrying about state and local autonomy and unintended local impacts.
Prefers measured implementation and a short transition period.
Mixed-to-skeptical.
Some conservatives favor eliminating corporate welfare and could back this.
Others oppose expanding federal tax code micromanagement and worry about hurting local economic development and state control over financing.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrowly focused and clear but politically sensitive to local stakeholders and faces higher Senate difficulty; limited built-in compromises.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize eliminating corporate welfare; conservatives emphasize local control.
Content is narrowly focused and clear but politically sensitive to local stakeholders and faces higher Senate difficulty; limited built-in…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill plainly and directly implements a narrow substantive change to the Internal Revenue Code by adding a new disallowance for 'professional stadium' bonds and supplying a…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.