Why Not Just Eliminate The Entertainment Tax?
Remember last week when it was announced the Laurie’s were selling the Blues hockey team along with the lease on the Savvis center? The issue of the burden of the entertainment tax came up as an issue in their decision. Today’s Business Journal reports:
Upon request from St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, the St. Louis Board of Aldermen will consider legislation that would exempt professional boxing from the city of St. Louis’ entertainment tax. Giving the sport an exemption from the city’s entertainment tax could bring more fights that could generate more revenue for the city, Slay said in a release.
So the theory goes the tax is keeping us from having more events and ultimately we’d be better off not having the entertainment tax so we could collect other taxes such as hotel tax as well as sales tax on food and other purchases. OK, if this is the case why not just repeal the tax altogether? Why just for professional boxing and why just for 3 years?
– Steve
I may be dead wrong but I believe it is because Slay knows what he can and cannot get out of the Board of Alderman and particularly the great city anti-hero Jim Shrewsberry.
Back when it was announced that the Lauries intend to sell the Blues, it was said to be due in no small part to the entertainment tax that now applies to them but not the Cards or Rams. This is all according to Blues president Mark Sauer. In this same interview Sauer made it a point to say that it was not Slay who was against them on this issue.
I don’t want to sound like Jim Shrewberry is all bad. I think he may take some of the fiscal responsibilty thing too far or at the very least have mistaken priorities. Afterall, this is one of two people who recently voted down a raise for city prosecutors who are responsible for putting violent criminals behind bars. Prosecutors who make less than traffic prosecutors in the county do.
Keeping the Blues in Downtown St. Louis is important. I am confident that the terms of the lease the owners of the Blues signed make it almost impossible and certainly very expensive for them to leave.
I would argue, personally, that there is a difference between using an incentive to create something new or better — and subsidizing the operation of a current level of business.
We don’t have a pro boxing scene right now. The experts think we could have a good one, if we treated pro boxing the way we treat all “scripted performances” and non-pro boxing — i.e., no ticket tax.
There does exist, BTW, a mechanism among the current ordinances that allows pro sports franchises to use some portion of the City ticket tax to subsidize substantial new investment in their facilities.
Shrewsbury was our guest on “The Wire” last night (find here,when the audio feed is updated), and discussed this topic. For the curious, the amusement tax levied by the city (separate from the state’s own amusement tax) brings in $5 million per year into the city’s general revenue, according to Shrewsbury.