5 replies to this topic

[100 Years of Tears]

Hello Message Board...

I was just checking out ticket prices for opening day at Wrigley vs. opening day at the cell... When comparing tickets of close to equal value ($56 per seat at Wrigley and $48 per seat at the cell), the seats at Wrigley are subjected to $6.72 each for tax, $4.75 per ticket for a 'per ticket fee', and $0.43 per ticket for some other tax... that's a total of $11.90 per seat in taxes and fees ($23.80 for the 2 seats).

At the cell, the $48 seats are subjected to a $5 'convenience' charge each and $0.45 in tax each. That's a total of $10.90 in taxes in fees. What's even more infuriating is that the tax on a seat at the cell is essentially <1%.

Can anyone shed some light on why the Cubs ticket buyers are stuck paying 12% tax when Sox buyers are paying less than 1%??? I'd really like to hear the actual legal reason that this is happening.... As a STH, I've always known we were paying more in taxes than fans at the cell, but I had no idea I was getting this screwed. Why can the city impose a massive tax on one baseball team, but not the other?

[Robbo]

Very interesting 100 YoT. Makes you wonder.

The $6.72 tax/seat for those tickets at Wrigley is the 12% Amusement Tax.

Amusement Tax is only applied to events with 750+ people in attendance so I can only assume that is why the desolate park off 35th is not subject to this tax. Fans would need to show up to games.

[Spriggs]

So why aren't the Sox subject to the amusement tax? Is the cell in some kind of enterprise zone or something?

[hansman1982]

So why aren't the Sox subject to the amusement tax? Is the cell in some kind of enterprise zone or something?

It could be because the Sox don't actually own the park and the city gets their "taxes" through other means.

Or, it's that the Cubs are a cash cow and the city is milking the snot out of it.

[Tommy]

I hope Brett does his Ace investigating on this. I'd love to hear more on this topic. Interesting stuff.

[fromthemitten]

So why aren't the Sox subject to the amusement tax? Is the cell in some kind of enterprise zone or something?

It could be because the Sox don't actually own the park and the city gets their "taxes" through other means.

Or, it's that the Cubs are a cash cow and the city is milking the snot out of it.

Yeah the Sox have a lease on the stadium that goes to ISFA (if you recall the Tribune tried selling Wrigley to them) but it still isn't fair