首页> 外文学位 >Full count: The real cost of public subsidies for major league sports facilities.
【24h】

Full count: The real cost of public subsidies for major league sports facilities.

机译:全数:主要联赛体育设施的公共补贴的实际成本。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The real cost of public subsidies for sports facilities is significantly higher than popularly reported, and, as a result, governments and taxpayers underestimate the magnitude of their financial commitment. Specifically, land, infrastructure, the ongoing public costs associated with the operation of the facility, and foregone property taxes are routinely ignored. For each of the 99 facilities in-use for the 2001 season for the “big four” major league sports, I calculate the present (PV) of the public total public subsidy including public development costs (building, land, and infrastructure), annual public costs (maintenance, capital improvements, and municipal services) net of annual public revenues (rent and other revenue sharing as specified in the lease), and foregone property taxes, over an average 30-year lifespan, discounted to 2001. I construct two measures of variation: total public subsidy (expressed in 2001 dollars) and the public share of total development costs (expressed as a percent) to demonstrate that there is indeed significant variation in deal outcomes across jurisdictions.; I find that the real cost of public subsidies is underreported by an average of {dollar}51m per facility, representing a 40% increase in the total public subsidy. Whereas industry sources report an average public subsidy of {dollar}125m per facility based on a total development cost of {dollar}222m, I estimate that the real total public subsidy is {dollar}175m. Across all 99 facilities, I estimate the total value of the underreported public subsidy to be {dollar}5 billion dollars. The impact of adding these unreported costs is to increase the average public share of total development costs from 56% to 79%, an increase of 23 percentage points.
机译:体育设施的公共补贴的实际成本大大高于大众报道的水平,因此,政府和纳税人低估了其财政承诺的规模。具体而言,通常会忽略土地,基础设施,与设施运营相关的持续公共成本以及已放弃的财产税。对于2001赛季“四大”主要联赛使用的99项设施中的每一项,我计算的是公共总公共补贴的当前(PV),包括公共发展成本(建筑,土地和基础设施),年度公共成本(维护,资本改善和市政服务)扣除每年公共收入(租赁中指定的租金和其他收益分成)和已放弃的财产税(平均寿命为30年),折现到2001年。我构造了两个差异度量:公共补贴总额(以2001年美元表示)和公共份额占总开发成本的百分比(以百分比表示),以表明各个辖区的交易结果确实存在显着差异。我发现,公共补贴的实际成本被低估了,平均每个设施少付了5100万美元,占公共补贴总额的40%。业内消息人士称,根据总开发成本2.22亿美元,平均每个设施的公共补贴为1.25亿美元,但我估计实际的公共补贴总额为1.75亿美元。在所有99个设施中,我估计少报的公共补贴总价值为50亿美元。添加这些未报告成本的影响是将平均公共支出占总开发成本的比例从56%提高到79%,提高了23个百分点。

著录项

  • 作者

    Long, Judith Grant.;

  • 作者单位

    Harvard University.;

  • 授予单位 Harvard University.;
  • 学科 Urban and Regional Planning.; Economics General.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2002
  • 页码 537 p.
  • 总页数 537
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 区域规划、城乡规划;经济学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号