What the Diamondbacks' tax plan would cost Arizona taxpayers

Yahoo

26-02-2025

Arizona Diamondbacks players pay roughly $3.5 million a year in state income tax, according to a new estimate, amounting to more than a quarter of the money the team wants to keep so it can make improvements to Chase Field.
The tax payments were calculated as part of a routine analysis of a bill that proposes diverting income and sales taxes from the DBacks' home field to pay for stadium improvements. The bill is advancing through the Arizona Legislature and being changed along the way.
A key vote on Tuesday kindled debate over the proposal, with Democrats objecting to what they said was a rushed process, and prompted Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego to renew her objections. Gallego's office objected to an estimate of the financial impact on the city, saying it was far short of the actual hit to city revenues.
The bill would bring a solution to a disagreement over who should pay for improvements at the Major League Baseball stadium, which is owned by Maricopa County.
To help lawmakers understand how the bill would impact state tax collections, analysts working for the bipartisan Joint Legislative Budget Committee ran the numbers. Their analysis offers an estimate of the costs of the plan, which are in line with what team leaders previously projected.
Here are some of the key numbers from the analysis:
$15.7 million: Taxpayer dollars that would go to the DBacks in a year, instead of funding state, county and municipal governments. Of this, the state would give up $9.2 million and local governments $6.5 million each year.
2,544,260: Estimated number of people who attend regular season games or events, like concerts, at Chase Field in a year.
$3.5 million: estimated reduction to state income tax revenues by diverting players' payments, given the Diamondbacks' 2024 season payroll of $140.8 million and Arizona's 2.5% flat tax rate.
The analysis estimates that the typical person spends $60 at the ballpark when they are there, on things like concessions and merchandise. That is calculated based on publicly available attendance information and costs compiled by the professional sports industry newsletter Team Marketing Report.
It calculates the impact to sales tax revenue collections assuming fans buy two discounted "value beers" at $4.99 each — not the stadium's most costly offering, a double Casamigos for $36.99, which would yield a higher sales tax payment.
Is beer cheap at Chase Field? How prices at Diamondbacks games compare to other ballparks
Sales taxes are levied by the state, city and county, and a portion of the state's share is passed on to local governments across Arizona.
The financial estimate says the bill would reduce by $2.3 million the revenues that go to counties across the state, with most of that impacting Maricopa County at $1.1 million. The total impact to municipalities would be $4.2 million a year, with Phoenix absorbing the bulk of it at $3.5 million a year. Gallego disputes this number, however, saying it is much too low.
A spokesperson for Gallego said the Joint Legislative Budget Committee's analysis of the tax bill was incorrect and noted it did not rely on data but estimated costs. A city analysis showed Phoenix stands to lose $6.4 million in tax revenue each year under the bill, penciling out to $192 million over the 30-year term.
The financial impact analysis provided by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee is an estimate, and likely a low one. It does not include income taxes paid by DBacks staffers who are not players, players from visiting teams who pay taxes to Arizona, and does not account for recent changes to the bill.
The Arizona Department of Revenue, the state's tax collection agency, has not yet provided its own analysis.
The bill creating the funding structure, House Bill 2704, cleared a vote of the House of Representatives on Tuesday. If approved by a majority of lawmakers, it would then go to the Senate for approval before heading to Gov. Katie Hobbs, who has said she supports the concept.
Bill sponsor Rep. Jeff Weninger, R-Chandler, made several changes that he said were the result of discussions with lawmakers and representatives of Phoenix, who had expressed concerns. Those changes limit the term of the tax draw to 30 years, and add non-binding language that reflects the team's repeated commitment to spend roughly $250 million of its own to make stadium repairs.
Two Democratic lawmakers objected Tuesday to the speed of the bill, given the significant changes made the same day.
House Democratic Leader Rep. Oscar De Los Santos, D-Phoenix, said there had not been enough time for lawmakers to consider the changes, or potentially understand concerns raised by Phoenix. He noted his "alarm" about the speed.
"Of course everybody loves the DBacks," De Los Santos said. "I think there's a negotiated compromise that we could come to, but we should not be rushing through this legislative process."
Weninger said he made changes to accommodate concerns raised by Gallego's office, including putting the 30-year expiration date in the bill. But he said he had not heard directly from the mayor.
"With all due respect to the mayor, she didn't engage with me," he said. "She chose not to be part of those discussions. My door is always open to everyone."
Monica Alonzo, press secretary for Gallego, said in an email that Weninger "has continued to insist that funds should be diverted from Phoenix Police and Fire to pay for the Diamondbacks' stadium."
"There is no enforceable requirement in the bill that the Diamondbacks even pay a dime for the stadium's improvements," she said. "This kind of giveaway to sports billionaires at the expense of public safety is not something any responsible mayor could support.'
Derrick Hall, Arizona Diamondbacks president, CEO and general partner, noted in an emailed statement that the team has agreed to changes in response to objections from local governments, including ensuring local public safety funding and a county jail tax are not drawn into funding stadium repairs.
He said that the team believes the tax draw should be as long as a team is playing at Chase Field, but the DBacks "gave in again, knowing there could be another vote and reauthorization after 30 years."
Hall has compared the Diamondbacks' pitch to the arrangement that Arizona's NFL franchise, the Cardinals, has at State Farm Stadium in Glendale. While similar in many ways, there is a key difference.
The plan benefiting the Cardinals was approved by Maricopa County voters 25 years ago, with 52% in favor. The Diamondbacks' bill now advancing at the Capitol would not require a public vote.
"There is not a need for a vote of taxpayers with it being legislatively led and a precedent already in place," Hall said, a reference to the use of tax dollars to support State Farm Stadium. "Additionally, the clock has run out to wait for a vote with the lease expiring in 2-3 years."
Weninger said the Cardinals' agreement to collect tax revenues from State Farm Stadium was not comparable because that vote created the partnership, whereas the Diamondbacks' lease of a public building was approved by the county board.
The Diamondbacks bill was about putting public dollars toward maintaining a public asset, Weninger said, and "making the moves to keep this tax revenue generating machine, and world class team, here in Arizona.'
Gets backing: MLB commissioner expresses support for Arizona Diamondbacks' Chase Field plans
Reach reporter Stacey Barchenger at [e-mail] or 480-416-5669.
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: What the Diamondbacks' tax plan would cost Arizona taxpayers