Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Donate
Topics

Vikings-stadium tax thought: If ‘beneficiaries’ pay, why not the media?

Please don’t confuse this with support for a new Vikings stadium, but if legislative sponsors are touting some sort of “beneficiaries pay” tax scheme, why the hell don’t they add a few percent on media ad sales — at least for ads before, during and

Please don’t confuse this with support for a new Vikings stadium, but if legislative sponsors are touting some sort of “beneficiaries pay” tax scheme, why the hell don’t they add a few percent on media ad sales — at least for ads before, during and after Vikings games and in sports sections?

While I’m not anxious to nick the cash flow of my media brethren and sistren, our local TV, radio, newspaper and Internet types profit more directly from the Purple than some unfortunate soul renting a car to attend an agricultural-implements convention. And don’t get me started on the fairness of hitting Minneapolis and Hennepin County shoppers again so Tom Bakk’s constituents can have a home team.

While I doubt it would raise much, a media tax might also have the salutary effect of dissipating a bit of the froth surrounding the coverage of this so-far-unconvincing crisis.

Update: And yes, this doesn’t include some sort of surtax on, or condemnation of, Star Tribune land near the stadium.