Connect with us

Spread & Containment

Merck CPO Julie Gerberding On The Deadliness Of Covid-19

Merck CPO Julie Gerberding On The Deadliness Of Covid-19

Published

on

Julie Gerberding coronavirus wuhan lab accident

CNBC’s Tyler Mathisen interviews Merck Chief Patient Officer Julie Gerberding and Scripps Research Executive Vice President Eric Topol from CNBC’s Healthy Returns Summit today

Get Our Activist Investing Case Study!

Get the entire 10-part series on our in-depth study on activist investing in PDF. Save it to your desktop, read it on your tablet, or print it out to read anywhere! Sign up below!

Q1 2020 hedge fund letters, conferences and more

WHEN: Today, Tuesday, May 12, 2020

Interview With Julie Gerberding And Eric Topol

Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC interview with Merck Chief Patient Officer Julie Gerberding and Scripps Research Executive Vice President and Scripps Research Translational Institute Founder and Director Eric Topol live from CNBC’s Healthy Returns virtual summit on Tuesday, May 12th.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Good, as always, to remember that more people recover from this illness than those who succumb from it, which is not to minimize the pain and distress of those we have lost and the families of those people have suffered.  As we move now to our final discussion, sort of to tie it all up, join me in welcoming Julie Gerberding, who used to run the CDC and is now the Chief Patient Officer at Merck.  We also expect to have Eric Topol with us.  He is the founder and director of the Scripps Institute and a best-selling author.  We're working out a few technical hairballs there.  Julie, I'm sure you understand, so it will be you and me at first.  And welcome, we're delighted to have you with us.

JULIE GERBERDING:  Thank you, I'm happy to be here.  Thank you.

TYLER MATHISEN:  So glad you could run the anchor leg with us here.  You were one of the first people way back in January to sound a kind of clarion call.  Maybe even before some of the people who are both in government now, including Dr. Fauci and others, you realized that this coronavirus was a beast of an entirely different sort.  What told you that?

JULIE GERBERDING:  Well, you know, I had been involved very much in the original SARS outbreak in 2003, and one of the characteristics of that outbreak is it wasn't very transmissible at the community level.  So when I saw the case numbers in China, and then when I recognized the situation on the cruise ships and other people in very confined areas, I really could see that this was going to be a much more transmissible problem in the community.  And that was frightening.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Did you have a sense, beyond the transmissibility of the illness, which was truly alarming, did you have a sense of how deadly and vicious it was?

JULIE GERBERDING:  Well, you know, my first fear was the fact that the original 2003 SARS coronavirus had a very high fatality rate, about 10 percent.  So imagine if this very transmissible virus had that kind of a fatality rate.  So I was very worried about how serious this was going to be.  When I recognized the data coming out of China that indicated it wasn't as fatal as we had feared, I still didn't feel much relief when the numbers started showing that it was significantly more deadly than influenza.  So we were dealing with something that was highly transmissible and had a fatality rate that was significantly higher than what we were used to dealing with in seasonal influenza and even in the 2009 influenza pandemic.  So on a global basis, this was a huge threat, and indeed it proved to be a pandemic of the kind that we haven't seen for a century.

TYLER MATHISEN:  I want to talk a little bit about the experience in China and then the experience we've had here in the United States with more cases by far than any other country.  But I guess I would like to ask you what we've learned so far about this pandemic, this virus.  Was it realistic, ever, that we or China could contain this virus?

JULIE GERBERDING:  Well, I think it was worth a try.  And we have to give China some credit for the fact that they made heroic efforts to try to clamp down and reduce the transmission of this virus, and I think it did buy the world some time so that we could understand a little bit better what was happening there and take some of the steps for preparation that were necessary. So that was not something that you would argue against doing, but it did not prove to be successful.  And no one was surprised when we began to see this spill over into other countries and when it ultimately spread across the world. The biggest lesson learned, I think so far, has been that when the world faces a pandemic like this, people can really align around the idea of mitigation and working together to try and reduce the surge in cases so that our health systems have a chance of managing the tremendous burden that they encounter, and that those social distancing measures actually do have an impact.  I think we had that hypothesis based on the experience in the 1918 influenza pandemic.  But country after country, community after community, we are really seeing the data that the kinds of steps that are intrusive and challenging and difficult for everyone to sustain actually do save lives, slow down the peak of the curve; and ultimately, if we are willing to sustain the course, they will help lower the area under the curve, which means lives will be saved while we are waiting for treatments that reduce mortality or vaccines that can protect us from infection.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Before I bring in Eric Topol, who is now good -- Mr. Topol, welcome.  We're glad to have you with us.  Because we're on kind of a thread here talking about the origin of this disease in China, I want to ask you, Dr. Gerberding, the Chinese incidence appears to have fallen very, very dramatically.  They had a high rise and then a very steep falloff.  If the numbers of new cases coming out of China are to be believed, why did that happen there?  What can we learn, what can we take from their experience; or is the take-away that the Chinese were never really honest about the numbers in the first place and aren't being so now?

JULIE GERBERDING:  Well, of course I don't have insight into the ground truth in China, since I'm not in the government and I'm not privy to some of the confidential communications that are probably going back and forth.  But as I said, I think social distancing can really matter, and in China they have the capacity to impose mandatory social distancing that exceeds anything we could probably imagine experiencing in the United States or in the western world.  So if that is what it takes to really contain the epidemic, we've learned an important lesson there. I suspect, however, that like we're seeing in other countries, as China gets back to business and people begin to resume their normal lives, we're going to see hot spots there, because this virus hasn't gone away, and there's nothing that says that the risk today of a hot spot emerging is any less than the risk was several months ago.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Eric Topol, weigh in here.  We have about 4 percent of the world's population in the United States, but we've got something like 28 -- a third of the coronavirus cases, 28 percent of the confirmed deaths.

ERIC TOPOL:  Right.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Why have we been hit so hard, so much --

ERIC TOPOL:  Good to be with you, Tyler and Julie.  I think the main issue is that we were so far behind the outbreak.  So, instead of getting the testing in gear even before it arrived in the U.S. with the first patient January 21st, we were basically paralyzed for at least a month and a half; and at the same time, of course, we know South Korea mobilized, they got testing going right away, and they got in front of the outbreak. So if you just look at that and you look at all the other countries in the world that were successful, and there's over 20 of them, the common theme is that they got testing going early, they had containment, and they wound up with much better outcomes. So we're at the main, I think, breakdown that led to everything else was just never getting any sense of containment, letting the virus run rampant through the U.S., diffuse spread; and you know, we're living with that now, unfortunately.

TYLER MATHISEN:  So I guess that leads me to a question, Mr. Topol, about science and government working together.  And I would love, Julie, to hear your thoughts on this as well.  Generally speaking, what you just pointed to would be either a failure of science or a failure of government to react quickly enough, or a failure for the two of them to agree and coalesce around a strategy.  So talk to me about that and whether science and government -- let's focus here on the United States -- have been working well together.  Eric?

ERIC TOPOL:  Well, I guess I would start and say that our government wasn't working because it was -- it knew that we needed the tests, but even though they were failing and they were contaminated, there was no back-up plan and so we were caught flat-footed.  And, in fact, other countries started testing randomly, even before there was a patient in their country.  Iceland is notable, but several others, as well. So we were totally unprepared.  We were in a state of denial; that is, some of our leading government officials, that this wasn't even going to come to the U.S., which was, you know, remarkably naive. So the science -- I mean, any epidemiologist would know that this was going to come, come to the U.S., and we just had no readiness whatsoever.  And the inability to test for what really turned out to be a couple of months just let this just go like a wildfire through the country.  And we are in this irrevocable path where we know --

TYLER MATHISEN:  -- how do you think they can be used to improve our overall health care system?  And I'll ask the same question to you, Eric, in just a moment.

JULIE GERBERDING:  The serious and I think most tragic learning in all of this is how fragile our health system is when it comes to managing surge capacity.  Now, this was something that was known and has been an issue several times in recent years when we've had a bad flu season or in 2009 when we had the flu pandemic, but we really have not yet sufficiently invested in surge.  Our health systems operate on thin margins and try to minimize the unnecessary utilization or stockpiling, so to speak, of resources.  And yet, when we see a requirement that exceeds our baseline capacity, it's really hard to meet that capacity.  And so the incredible effort on the part of health workers, Merck and Pfizer and Lilly came together and said, we have many health workers, let's allow them to volunteer and pay their salaries so that we can help augment the health care workforce, which was spread so thin.  These are problems that should have been anticipated and, yet, they are very difficult to solve.  We don't have the mentality that pandemic preparedness is a national security capacity that we need to manage in the same way we manage our defense capacity, so that we have something available if we need it and just pray that we don't.  So I think that's really one of the most important things that I hope changes as we go forward, that we will have redundancies and capabilities to manage surge. On the other side, though, there is a good thing in this, and that is the science, in that we have really I think understood that science has advanced so far.  It's on our side, and we're really beginning to identify the marvelous engagements, as we've been hearing all afternoon, in the antivirals and the immunologic therapies and the vaccines that hopefully will come down the pike sooner rather than later.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Eric, I guess it's early to come away with deep learnings.  Because as we began this day, we asked Dr. Gottlieb what inning are we in, and he said, Maybe we're in the second inning, and this may be a double header.  We don't know when this is going to come back.  But talk to me a little bit about from where you stand, what are the deep learnings?  And I know in another question -- and I know it's one that you have an opinion on, and that is from one of the viewers, how rapidly is the virus mutating?  Knock that one out first, maybe, and then go to the deep learning.

ERIC TOPOL:  Yeah, well, that's one thing that's really fortunate, Tyler, is the virus is not mutating in any rapid way.  In fact, it's quite slow.  So while that gives a wonderful ability for genomicists to track the virus from state to state, country to country, just by those mutations that are basically innocent, we haven't seen a new strain at all.  And so that's one of the only good things about the COVID-19 virus story.  Mutations, yes; but they're basically just good for detective work for tracking the virus and nothing more.  There is no evidence that there's been a mutation that is pathogenic, that is worse transmissibility or worse potency or anything like that.

TYLER MATHISEN:  And what about that deep learning question?

ERIC TOPOL:  Usually I ascribe deep learning for artificial intelligence, for deep neural networks.  But here our learning hopefully is substantial, because this I think is the greatest public health blunder, catastrophe, in the history of the country.  So hopefully we'll learn a lot.  But the one thing that we have to learn besides preparedness is that we have a very shaky information system.  So we are the third largest country in the world, and instead of having all our data together, like so many other countries that have real health systems, learning health systems -- I'll give you an example.

In the UK they have this ICNARC, which is every ICU patient, real time, being able to learn from each of those patients.  So, for example, if you know that mechanical ventilation can make people worse, you're going to learn that much sooner than in the U.S. where we have lack of cohesiveness, which is so incredibly not coalesced with that rich data that we could have to help guide us and learn from every patient.  So that's something that we need to work on in the future.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Okay.  I'm going to ask a couple of questions about reopening the economy, and then we'll go to a kind of lightning round with the time we have, we'll spill over just a little bit.  Dr. Fauci, this morning Dr. Gerberding said, in front of Congress, that we risk needless suffering and death if we open society too soon and then run the risk of reinfection or a spread of it.  As we have seen in some of the states where steps have been taken to reopening the economy, the case count has been rising and rising rather dramatically. On the other hand, the testing count in some of those cases has been rising rather dramatically, as well.  So there's a confusion, I would think, among epidemiologists to the point of are we seeing more cases because we're reopening, or are we identifying more cases because we're testing more? So how do you get to the bottom of this, and if you are a policymaker or an epidemiologist, make the conclusion that we reopen too soon; or not?

JULIE GERBERDING:  Well, first of all, the frame of this is the fact that while there are hot spots where many people have been infected, as a population of people across the United States, the vast majority of us have not been infected and we are not immune, and we remain susceptible. So anything that introduces the virus into that population of people is prone to set off another hot spot and increase the probability of transmission.

That's just a fact, and we don't need testing and a lot of other interventions to figure that out.  I do think that the epidemiologists have a tough job because testing is all over the map, and we also recognize that now we have a variety of tests, some of which are more accurate than others, so we have that confounder, but the lagging indicater and the one that probably is the most meaningful in terms of the morbidity and mortality of the recrudescence is the hospitalization; and that, we don't need a test to observe.  We can count the number of patients who are admitted and the number of people who are in the intensive care unit.

And as those numbers begin to increase, we know that we've gone too far in relieving our social distancing.  It's tragic to have to get to that point, but that's exactly what Dr. Fauci was trying to say this morning, is that if that's what we do, we can anticipate that we will pay a big price.

TYLER MATHISEN:  That's very interesting.  We were speaking yesterday in a different venue, I was, with the mayor of Scottsdale, Arizona.  And he made exactly that point; that the real telltale for him is hospital admissions, ICU admissions, and that that, you don't need a test to know about that.  You have the real numbers. Mr. Topol, you mentioned earlier sort of the slowness and speaking with conflicting voices.  It feels to me as though the messaging around coronavirus has been -- there's been a lot of dissonant messaging:  We've got tests for everybody.  No, we don't; yes, we do.  This is going to go away; no, it isn't.  It's a serious threat; no, it isn't.  There's been a lot of conflicting messaging that I think has confused people.  Am I right?

ERIC TOPOL:  Absolutely.  No, I think -- you could go back to, you know, March 6th, when everyone can have a test, and we still aren't there here in May.  So, no, there's been terrible problems with mixed and missed messaging, and I think that has certainly set us back, as well. But, you know, I think that the problem was that we were flying blind during those months, part of January, all of February, and the first half of March.

And now we're flying blind again because we don't have the testing infrastructure in place.  The other thing that we could do, of course, is get digital surveillance.  We've already seen this week a report about using smartphone apps for just collecting symptoms.  And what we can also do is get resting heart rate.  If we did that for 100 million people, or even a tiny fraction of that, of Americans that have a fitness band or a smart watch, we could get resting heart rate as a way to not fly blind while we're waiting for the testing infrastructure to get whole.

What I'm amazed about, Tyler, is that we've had all these weeks of relative lookdowns or absolute lookdowns, and we still haven't gotten this testing story right.  Of course, the problem is, if you don't get that right -- and that includes testing people who don't have any symptoms, even random testing, at scale, you know, we haven't done that yet.  And if you don't do that, you're not ready to do contact tracing and isolation.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Yeah.

ERIC TOPOL:  So the basic steps here, we're just violating.

TYLER MATHISEN:  I guess I find that -- we'll skip beyond this, but the idea of using smart devices for patient monitoring.  Americans have a very ambiguous, ambivalent relationship with sharing personal data.  On the one hand, they're very scared of an intrusive government listening to what they do or say; on the other hand, they are more than happy to share their location with Waze all the time to help them get through traffic.  But I see a big opportunity there for personal monitoring devices. Dr. Gerberding, let me go back to a question about reopening the economy. Can we ever really go back to a fully reopened economy unless we have an effective vaccine against this disease?  And how hopeful are you that we will be able to come up with a vaccine?  Coronavirus is the common cold -- the common cold is a coronavirus, and we have no vaccine against that.  What tells you we'll be able to have a vaccine on this, and will we really go back to normal until we do?

JULIE GERBERDING:  Well, let me say a few things about the vaccine.  And I say this with some humility, because Merck did cross the finish line with a vaccine for Ebola that was developed under somewhat similar circumstances, an emergent public health crisis in western Africa and then a second public health crisis in the Eastern DRC. And I think some of the things we learned there in that context is that when you have an emergency like this, you really do rally the biopharmaceutical ecosystem to come to the rescue, and people will put aside their competitive pressures or the things that are normally on their plate and work hard to try to contribute to solutions.

These situations demand multiple shots on goal; we saw that with Ebola, and we are certainly seeing it now with more than 130 antivirals and many dozens of vaccine candidates, some of which are in clinical trials already.  So those shots on goal is important, and I think that allows us to have more confidence that something will cross the finish line that will be valuable and hopefully provide durable protection.  The bar for safety is very high in this regard, so we can't promise that we're going to give the right balance of a great vaccine that's also very safe in the fastest manner possible, but we should be hopeful that we have a prospect of doing that.  And ultimately, the way to end the pandemic, we have three choices, and all could come into play.

One is that we do find treatments that lower the fatality rate and the hospitalization rate to the point where it is more like seasonal influenza and we can manage it; or we develop a vaccine that offers protective immunity to broad swaths of the population; or, worst case scenario, we just wait until enough people have had it that we develop population-level herd immunity and the epidemic can't be propagated.  I am most hopeful that we'll find antivirals fast.  I think the prospects for a vaccine are an area that we should be optimistic; but the timeline is challenging, and herd immunity will eventually happen one way or another, but I hope and pray that that isn't what we have to resort to.

TYLER MATHISEN:  One last question to you, Dr. Gerberding, before I go back to Eric for the final question of the afternoon.  There's been increased worry about children, and at one point there was some thinking that children were relatively resistant to this virus.  But we've seen lots of cases now in which the illness is either detected or some other manifestation of this illness, something like an inflammatory response, like Kawasaki, has taken effect.  Talk to me a little about that, and then answer a couple of questions that I asked Dr. Gottlieb this morning.  If you had a young child, would you send that young child away to sleepaway camp this summer, day camp this summer; and what about going to either a public or a swim club swimming pool?

JULIE GERBERDING:  So, yeah, I think the situation with the pediatrics, the very, very young infants as well as children, is confusing.  Because we typically expect, or basically every respiratory virus with which I'm familiar, that the children will be the sort of cesspool where the virus gets transmitted in daycares or schools, and that children are really important in the transmission at the community level.  Now, clearly we know children are not immune to this virus.

We have plenty of examples where children have been ill and hospitalized, but they are a minority of the cases.  And so that suggests that either they manage it as a mild upper respiratory illness and that doesn't go any further, or there's something about their receptor status or their host immune response that protects them from developing the symptomatic disease. We don't know how capable they are of transmitting, even when asymptomatic, but as we see the epidemic expand and we have the opportunity to study the disease more closely, the awareness that some children do develop this very difficult autoimmune disorder, something like Kawasaki's disease, if it's not exactly Kawasaki's disease, this is a very serious and often fatal condition.

And so this tells us we have a lot to learn, and we better keep an open mind about the status of our children in this context. So if I had young children, I have to admit that I would not send my young children to camp or to the swimming club this summer until I was confident that my community was not a place where there was active transmission. I hope I'm wrong about that.  And as the studies that Dr. Topol has been talking about get conducted and we understand better the true bottom of the iceberg that is there under the tip, which are all the cases with symptoms and in hospitals, I hope as we understand the true prevalence of the disease in our communities, we will get answers to this question; and I hope that happens sooner rather than later.

TYLER MATHISEN:  I guarantee you, there are millions of parents, including this one, who hope that your hope proves true and that camp is able to happen and swim days are able to happen. Eric, wrap us up here.  We've obviously seen a major outbreak in this country, in Italy, in Great Britain, and to lesser extents in other countries.  But there are other parts of the world where this disease has not ripped through yet the way one might expect.  How worried are you about what could happen as this disease begins to manifest in countries that are even less prepared than we are, or were, to contend with it; countries like Brazil, countries in central and sub-Saharan Africa, countries in Asia and maybe Latin America?

ERIC TOPOL:  All right.  Well, I think the ones that have signed on now to be major trouble spots, countries, are certainly Brazil, as you mentioned, Tyler, India and Russia.  Those are the ones that are really on the rise.  And to add to that, Mexico.  We haven't yet seen the signal of this diffuse spread with cases and fatalities through the continent of Africa, but that's certainly a major liability going forward. So I think this is what many of us think.

There will be a second cycle that Tony Fauci referred to earlier today, and also I know was discussed throughout this program, not the rebound story, but as it cycles around the world because of these other continents that are just now kind of showing up. But just to think that the U.S. is in the same category as Brazil, India and Russia as to its response, it's really -- has to be categorized as a pathetic response. Now, on the other hand, we are really good at things like developing neutralizing antibodies and drugs and vaccines.  So that's the sanguine side of this, and hopefully that will be good for all people in the world, not just those in the U.S. So we have a counterbalancing of seeing momentum, really unprecedented momentum in the programs for drugs and neutralizing antibodies, convalescent plasma and the vaccine.

Hopefully, as these other continents show what is inevitable, and we go through what will be a two- or three-year story at the least with respect to additional cycles and ever-present, you know, we will have remedies.  And I do think that in the months ahead we will see the fatality rate drop down, because we're starting to see therapies that are proven to be effective.  And one just other note, I should have mentioned, Tyler.

When you asked about the messaging, the mask story was just really abominable; that we shouldn't wear a mask because there weren't enough masks, then we should wear masks.  So this has just been part and parcel of the problem of not having a consistent, uniform science-based communication.  I hope we'll see that improve, because this is going to be a long haul.  And as Scott asserted earlier today in the program, whatever inning you want to put it in, it's in the early phases.

TYLER MATHISEN:  Lots of lessons learned, and we've certainly learned a lot today.  Dr. Topol, thank you for leaving us on that hopeful note.  Dr. Gerberding, as someone who is on the front lines in this fight, working with your researches at Merck and elsewhere in the industry, we thank you.  And thank you both for your time today, really appreciate it.

ERIC TOPOL:  Thank you.

The post Merck CPO Julie Gerberding On The Deadliness Of Covid-19 appeared first on .

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Students lose out as cities and states give billions in property tax breaks to businesses − draining school budgets and especially hurting the poorest students

An estimated 95% of US cities provide economic development tax incentives to woo corporate investors, taking billions away from schools.

Published

on

By

Exxon Mobil Corp.'s campus in East Baton Rouge Parish, left, received millions in tax abatements to the detriment of local schools, right. Barry Lewis/Getty Images, Tjean314/Wikimedia

Built in 1910, James Elementary is a three-story brick school in Kansas City, Missouri’s historic Northeast neighborhood, with a bright blue front door framed by a sand-colored stone arch adorned with a gargoyle. As bustling students and teachers negotiate a maze of gray stairs with worn wooden handrails, Marjorie Mayes, the school’s principal, escorts a visitor across uneven blue tile floors on the ground floor to a classroom with exposed brick walls and pipes. Bubbling paint mars some walls, evidence of the water leaks spreading inside the aging building.

“It’s living history,” said Mayes during a mid-September tour of the building. “Not the kind of living history we want.”

The district would like to tackle the US$400 million in deferred maintenance needed to create a 21st century learning environment at its 35 schools – including James Elementary – but it can’t. It doesn’t have the money.

Property tax redirect

The lack of funds is a direct result of the property tax breaks that Kansas City lavishes on companies and developers that do business there. The program is supposed to bring in new jobs and business but instead has ended up draining civic coffers and starving schools. Between 2017 and 2023, the Kansas City school district lost $237.3 million through tax abatements.

Kansas City is hardly an anomaly. An estimated 95% of U.S. cities provide economic development tax incentives to woo corporate investors. The upshot is that billions have been diverted from large urban school districts and from a growing number of small suburban and rural districts. The impact is seen in districts as diverse as Chicago and Cleveland, Hillsboro, Oregon, and Storey County, Nevada.

The result? A 2021 review of 2,498 financial statements from school districts across 27 states revealed that, in 2019 alone, at least $2.4 billion was diverted to fund tax incentives. Yet that substantial figure still downplays the magnitude of the problem, because three-quarters of the 10,370 districts analyzed did not provide any information on tax abatement agreements.

Tax abatement programs have long been controversial, pitting states and communities against one another in beggar-thy-neighbor contests. Their economic value is also, at best, unclear: Studies show most companies would have made the same location decision without taxpayer subsidies. Meanwhile, schools make up the largest cost item in these communities, meaning they suffer most when companies are granted breaks in property taxes.

A three-month investigation by The Conversation and three scholars with expertise in economic development, tax laws and education policy shows that the cash drain from these programs is not equally shared by schools in the same communities. At the local level, tax abatements and exemptions often come at the cost of critical funding for school districts that disproportionately serve students from low-income households and who are racial minorities.

In Missouri, for example, in 2022 nearly $1,700 per student was redirected from Kansas City public and charter schools, while between $500 and $900 was redirected from wealthier, whiter Northland schools on the north side of the river in Kansas City and in the suburbs beyond. Other studies have found similar demographic trends elsewhere, including New York state, South Carolina and Columbus, Ohio.

The funding gaps produced by abated money often force schools to delay needed maintenance, increase class sizes, lay off teachers and support staff and even close outright. Schools also struggle to update or replace outdated technology, books and other educational resources. And, amid a nationwide teacher shortage, schools under financial pressures sometimes turn to inexperienced teachers who are not fully certified or rely too heavily on recruits from overseas who have been given special visa status.

Lost funding also prevents teachers and staff, who often feed, clothe and otherwise go above and beyond to help students in need, from earning a living wage. All told, tax abatements can end up harming a community’s value, with constant funding shortfalls creating a cycle of decline.

Incentives, payoffs and guarantees

Perversely, some of the largest beneficiaries of tax abatements are the politicians who publicly boast of handing out the breaks despite the harm to poorer communities. Incumbent governors have used the incentives as a means of taking credit for job creation, even when the jobs were coming anyway.

“We know that subsidies don’t work,” said Elizabeth Marcello, a doctoral lecturer at Hunter College who studies governmental planning and policy and the interactions between state and local governments. “But they are good political stories, and I think that’s why politicians love them so much.”

Academic research shows that economic development incentives are ineffective most of the time – and harm school systems.

While some voters may celebrate abatements, parents can recognize the disparities between school districts that are created by the tax breaks. Fairleigh Jackson pointed out that her daughter’s East Baton Rouge third grade class lacks access to playground equipment.

The class is attending school in a temporary building while their elementary school undergoes a two-year renovation.

The temporary site has some grass and a cement slab where kids can play, but no playground equipment, Jackson said. And parents needed to set up an Amazon wish list to purchase basic equipment such as balls, jump ropes and chalk for students to use. The district told parents there would be no playground equipment due to a lack of funds, then promised to install equipment, Jackson said, but months later, there is none.

Cement surface surrounded by a fence with grass beyond. There's no playground equipment..
The temporary site where Fairleigh Jackson’s daughter goes to school in East Baton Rouge Parish lacks playground equipment. Fairleigh Jackson, CC BY-ND

Jackson said it’s hard to complain when other schools in the district don’t even have needed security measures in place. “When I think about playground equipment, I think that’s a necessary piece of child development,” Jackson said. “Do we even advocate for something that should be a daily part of our kids’ experience when kids’ safety isn’t being funded?”

Meanwhile, the challenges facing administrators 500-odd miles away at Atlanta Public Schools are nothing if not formidable: The district is dealing with chronic absenteeism among half of its Black students, many students are experiencing homelessness, and it’s facing a teacher shortage.

At the same time, Atlanta is showering corporations with tax breaks. The city has two bodies that dole them out: the Development Authority of Fulton County, or DAFC, and Invest Atlanta, the city’s economic development agency. The deals handed out by the two agencies have drained $103.8 million from schools from fiscal 2017 to 2022, according to Atlanta school system financial statements.

What exactly Atlanta and other cities and states are accomplishing with tax abatement programs is hard to discern. Fewer than a quarter of companies that receive breaks in the U.S. needed an incentive to invest, according to a 2018 study by the Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, a nonprofit research organization.

This means that at least 75% of companies received tax abatements when they’re not needed – with communities paying a heavy price for economic development that sometimes provides little benefit.

In Kansas City, for example, there’s no guarantee that the businesses that do set up shop after receiving a tax abatement will remain there long term. That’s significant considering the historic border war between the Missouri and Kansas sides of Kansas City – a competition to be the most generous to the businesses, said Jason Roberts, president of the Kansas City Federation of Teachers and School-Related Personnel. Kansas City, Missouri, has a 1% income tax on people who work in the city, so it competes for as many workers as possible to secure that earnings tax, Roberts said.

Under city and state tax abatement programs, companies that used to be in Kansas City have since relocated. The AMC Theaters headquarters, for example, moved from the city’s downtown to Leawood, Kansas, about a decade ago, garnering some $40 million in Promoting Employment Across Kansas tax incentives.

Roberts said that when one side’s financial largesse runs out, companies often move across the state line – until both states decided in 2019 that enough was enough and declared a cease-fire.

But tax breaks for other businesses continue. “Our mission is to grow the economy of Kansas City, and application of tools such as tax exemptions are vital to achieving that mission, said Jon Stephens, president and CEO of Port KC, the Kansas City Port Authority. The incentives speed development, and providing them "has resulted in growth choosing KC versus other markets,” he added.

In Atlanta, those tax breaks are not going to projects in neighborhoods that need help attracting development. They have largely been handed out to projects that are in high demand areas of the city, said Julian Bene, who served on Invest Atlanta’s board from 2010 to 2018. In 2019, for instance, the Fulton County development authority approved a 10-year, $16 million tax abatement for a 410-foot-tall, 27,000-square-foot tower in Atlanta’s vibrant Midtown business district. The project included hotel space, retail space and office space that is now occupied by Google and Invesco.

In 2021, a developer in Atlanta pulled its request for an $8 million tax break to expand its new massive, mixed-use Ponce City Market development in the trendy Beltline neighborhood with an office tower and apartment building. Because of community pushback, the developer knew it likely did not have enough votes from the commission for approval, Bene said. After a second try for $5 million in lower taxes was also rejected, the developer went ahead and built the project anyway.

Invest Atlanta has also turned down projects in the past, Bene said. Oftentimes, after getting rejected, the developer goes back to the landowner and asks for a better price to buy the property to make their numbers work, because it was overvalued at the start.

Trouble in Philadelphia

On Thursday, Oct. 26, 2023, an environmental team was preparing Southwark School in Philadelphia for the winter cold. While checking an attic fan, members of the team saw loose dust on top of flooring that contained asbestos. The dust that certainly was blowing into the floors below could contain the cancer-causing agent. Within a day, Southwark was closed – the seventh Philadelphia school temporarily shuttered since the previous academic year because of possible asbestos contamination.

A 2019 inspection of the John L Kinsey school in Philadelphia found asbestos in plaster walls, floor tiles, radiator insulation and electrical panels. Asbestos is a major problem for Philadelphia’s public schools. The district needs $430 million to clean up the asbestos, lead, and other environmental hazards that place the health of students, teachers and staff at risk. And that is on top of an additional $2.4 billion to fix failing and damaged buildings.

Yet the money is not available. Matthew Stem, a former district official, testified in a 2023 lawsuit about financing of Pennsylvania schools that the environmental health risks cannot be addressed until an emergency like at Southwark because “existing funding sources are not sufficient to remediate those types of issues.”

Meanwhile, the city keeps doling out abatements, draining money that could have gone toward making Philadelphia schools safer. In the fiscal year ending June 2022, such tax breaks cost the school district $118 million – more than 25% of the total amount needed to remove the asbestos and other health dangers. These abatements take 31 years to break even, according to the city’s own scenario impact analyses.

Huge subsets of the community – primarily Black, Brown, poor or a combination – are being “drastically impacted” by the exemptions and funding shortfalls for the school district, said Kendra Brooks, a Philadelphia City Council member. Schools and students are affected by mold, asbestos and lead, and crumbling infrastructure, as well as teacher and staffing shortages – including support staff, social workers and psychologists.

More than half the district’s schools that lacked adequate air conditioning – 87 schools – had to go to half days during the first week of the 2023 school year because of extreme heat. Poor heating systems also leave the schools cold in the winter. And some schools are overcrowded, resulting in large class sizes, she said.

Front of a four-story brick school building with tall windows, some with air-conditioners
Horace Furness High School in Philadelphia, where hot summers have temporarily closed schools that lack air conditioning. Nick-philly/Wikimedia, CC BY-SA

Teachers and researchers agree that a lack of adequate funding undermines educational opportunities and outcomes. That’s especially true for children living in poverty. A 2016 study found that a 10% increase in per-pupil spending each year for all 12 years of public schooling results in nearly one-third of a year of more education, 7.7% higher wages and a 3.2% reduction in annual incidence of adult poverty. The study estimated that a 21.7% increase could eliminate the high school graduation gap faced by children from low-income families.

More money for schools leads to more education resources for students and their teachers. The same researchers found that spending increases were associated with reductions in student-to-teacher ratios, increases in teacher salaries and longer school years. Other studies yielded similar results: School funding matters, especially for children already suffering the harms of poverty.

While tax abatements themselves are generally linked to rising property values, the benefits are not evenly distributed. In fact, any expansion of the tax base due to new property construction tends to be outside of the county granting the tax abatement. For families in school districts with the lost tax revenues, their neighbors’ good fortune likely comes as little solace. Meanwhile, a poorly funded education system is less likely to yield a skilled and competitive workforce, creating longer-term economic costs that make the region less attractive for businesses and residents.

“There’s a head-on collision here between private gain and the future quality of America’s workforce,” said Greg LeRoy, executive director at Good Jobs First, a Washington, D.C., advocacy group that’s critical of tax abatement and tracks the use of economic development subsidies.

Three-story school building with police officers out front and traffic lights in the foreground
Roxborough High School in Philadelphia. AP Photo/Matt Rourke

As funding dwindles and educational quality declines, additional families with means often opt for alternative educational avenues such as private schooling, home-schooling or moving to a different school district, further weakening the public school system.

Throughout the U.S., parents with the power to do so demand special arrangements, such as selective schools or high-track enclaves that hire experienced, fully prepared teachers. If demands aren’t met, they leave the district’s public schools for private schools or for the suburbs. Some parents even organize to splinter their more advantaged, and generally whiter, neighborhoods away from the larger urban school districts.

Those parental demands – known among scholars as “opportunity hoarding” – may seem unreasonable from the outside, but scarcity breeds very real fears about educational harms inflicted on one’s own children. Regardless of who’s to blame, the children who bear the heaviest burden of the nation’s concentrated poverty and racialized poverty again lose out.

Rethinking in Philadelphia and Riverhead

Americans also ask public schools to accomplish Herculean tasks that go far beyond the education basics, as many parents discovered at the onset of the pandemic when schools closed and their support for families largely disappeared.

A school serving students who endure housing and food insecurity must dedicate resources toward children’s basic needs and trauma. But districts serving more low-income students spend less per student on average, and almost half the states have regressive funding structures.

Facing dwindling resources for schools, several cities have begun to rethink their tax exemption programs.

The Philadelphia City Council recently passed a scale-back on a 10-year property tax abatement by decreasing the percentage of the subsidy over that time. But even with that change, millions will be lost to tax exemptions that could instead be invested in cash-depleted schools. “We could make major changes in our schools’ infrastructure, curriculum, staffing, staffing ratios, support staff, social workers, school psychologists – take your pick,” Brooks said.

Other cities looking to reform tax abatement programs are taking a different approach. In Riverhead, New York, on Long Island, developers or project owners can be granted exemptions on their property tax and allowed instead to shell out a far smaller “payment in lieu of taxes,” or PILOT. When the abatement ends, most commonly after 10 years, the businesses then will pay full property taxes.

At least, that’s the idea, but the system is far from perfect. Beneficiaries of the PILOT program have failed to pay on time, leaving the school board struggling to fill a budget hole. Also, the payments are not equal to the amount they would receive for property taxes, with millions of dollars in potential revenue over a decade being cut to as little as a few hundred thousand. On the back end, if a business that’s subsidized with tax breaks fails after 10 years, the projected benefits never emerge.

And when the time came to start paying taxes, developers have returned to the city’s Industrial Development Agency with hat in hand, asking for more tax breaks. A local for-profit aquarium, for example, was granted a 10-year PILOT program break by Riverhead in 1999; it has received so many extensions that it is not scheduled to start paying full taxes until 2031 – 22 years after originally planned.

Kansas City border politics

Like many cities, Kansas City has a long history of segregation, white flight and racial redlining, said Kathleen Pointer, senior policy strategist for Kansas City Public Schools.

James Elementary in Kansas City, Mo. Danielle McLean, CC BY-ND

Troost Avenue, where the Kansas City Public Schools administrative office is located, serves as the city’s historic racial dividing line, with wealthier white families living in the west and more economically disadvantaged people of color in the east. Most of the district’s schools are located east of Troost, not west.

Students on the west side “pretty much automatically funnel into the college preparatory middle school and high schools,” said The Federation of Teachers’ Roberts. Those schools are considered signature schools that are selective and are better taken care of than the typical neighborhood schools, he added.

The school district’s tax levy was set by voters in 1969 at 3.75%. But successive attempts over the next few decades to increase the levy at the ballot box failed. During a decadeslong desegregation lawsuit that was eventually resolved through a settlement agreement in the 1990s, a court raised the district’s levy rate to 4.96% without voter approval. The levy has remained at the same 4.96% rate since.

Meanwhile, Kansas City is still distributing 20-year tax abatements to companies and developers for projects. The district calculated that about 92% of the money that was abated within the school district’s boundaries was for projects within the whiter west side of the city, Pointer said.

“Unfortunately, we can’t pick or choose where developers build,” said Meredith Hoenes, director of communications for Port KC. “We aren’t planning and zoning. Developers typically have plans in place when they knock on our door.”

In Kansas City, several agencies administer tax incentives, allowing developers to shop around to different bodies to receive one. Pointer said he believes the Port Authority is popular because they don’t do a third-party financial analysis to prove that the developers need the amount that they say they do.

With 20-year abatements, a child will start pre-K and graduate high school before seeing the benefits of a property being fully on the tax rolls, Pointer said. Developers, meanwhile, routinely threaten to build somewhere else if they don’t get the incentive, she said.

In 2020, BlueScope Construction, a company that had received tax incentives for nearly 20 years and was about to roll off its abatement, asked for another 13 years and threatened to move to another state if it didn’t get it. At the time, the U.S. was grappling with a racial reckoning following the murder of George Floyd, who was killed by a Minneapolis police officer.

“That was a moment for Kansas City Public Schools where we really drew a line in the sand and talked about incentives as an equity issue,” Pointer said.

After the district raised the issue – tying the incentives to systemic racism – the City Council rejected BlueScope’s bid and, three years later, it’s still in Kansas City, fully on the tax rolls, she said. BlueScope did not return multiple requests for comment.

Recently, a multifamily housing project was approved for a 20-year tax abatement by the Port Authority of Kansas City at Country Club Plaza, an outdoor shopping center in an affluent part of the city. The housing project included no affordable units. “This project was approved without any independent financial analysis proving that it needed that subsidy,” Pointer said.

All told, the Kansas City Public Schools district faces several shortfalls beyond the $400 million in deferred maintenance, Superintendent Jennifer Collier said. There are staffing shortages at all positions: teachers, paraprofessionals and support staff. As in much of the U.S., the cost of housing is surging. New developments that are being built do not include affordable housing, or when they do, the units are still out of reach for teachers.

That’s making it harder for a district that already loses about 1 in 5 of its teachers each year to keep or recruit new ones, who earn an average of only $46,150 their first year on the job, Collier said.

East Baton Rouge and the industrial corridor

It’s impossible to miss the tanks, towers, pipes and industrial structures that incongruously line Baton Rouge’s Scenic Highway landscape. They’re part of Exxon Mobil Corp.’s campus, home of the oil giant’s refinery in addition to chemical and plastics plants.

Aerial view of industrial buildings along a river
Exxon Mobil Corp.’s Baton Rouge campus occupies 3.28 square miles. AP Photo/Gerald Herbert

Sitting along the Mississippi River, the campus has been a staple of Louisiana’s capital for over 100 years. It’s where 6,000 employees and contractors who collectively earn over $400 million annually produce 522,000 barrels of crude oil per day when at full capacity, as well as the annual production and manufacture of 3 billion pounds of high-density polyethylene and polypropylene and 6.6 billion pounds of petrochemical products. The company posted a record-breaking $55.7 billion in profits in 2022 and $36 billion in 2023.

Across the street are empty fields and roads leading into neighborhoods that have been designated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as a low-income food desert. A mile drive down the street to Route 67 is a Dollar General, fast-food restaurants, and tiny, rundown food stores. A Hi Nabor Supermarket is 4 miles away.

East Baton Rouge Parish’s McKinley High School, a 12-minute drive from the refinery, serves a student body that is about 80% Black and 85% poor. The school, which boasts famous alums such as rapper Kevin Gates, former NBA player Tyrus Thomas and Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Gardner C. Taylor, holds a special place in the community, but it has been beset by violence and tragedy lately. Its football team quarterback, who was killed days before graduation in 2017, was among at least four of McKinley’s students who have been shot or murdered over the past six years.

The experience is starkly different at some of the district’s more advantaged schools, including its magnet programs open to high-performing students.

Black-and-white outline of Louisiana showing the parishes, with one, near the bottom right, filled in red
East Baton Rouge Parish, marked in red, includes an Exxon Mobil Corp. campus and the city of Baton Rouge. David Benbennick/Wikimedia

Baton Rouge is a tale of two cities, with some of the worst outcomes in the state for education, income and mortality, and some of the best outcomes. “It was only separated by sometimes a few blocks,” said Edgar Cage, the lead organizer for the advocacy group Together Baton Rouge. Cage, who grew up in the city when it was segregated by Jim Crow laws, said the root cause of that disparity was racism.

“Underserved kids don’t have a path forward” in East Baton Rouge public schools, Cage said.

A 2019 report from the Urban League of Louisiana found that economically disadvantaged African American and Hispanic students are not provided equitable access to high-quality education opportunities. That has contributed to those students underperforming on standardized state assessments, such as the LEAP exam, being unprepared to advance to higher grades and being excluded from high-quality curricula and instruction, as well as the highest-performing schools and magnet schools.

“Baton Rouge is home to some of the highest performing schools in the state,” according to the report. “Yet the highest performing schools and schools that have selective admissions policies often exclude disadvantaged students and African American and Hispanic students.”

Dawn Collins, who served on the district’s school board from 2016 to 2022, said that with more funding, the district could provide more targeted interventions for students who were struggling academically or additional support to staff so they can better assist students with greater needs.

But for decades, Louisiana’s Industrial Ad Valorem Tax Exemption Program, or ITEP, allowed for 100% property tax exemptions for industrial manufacturing facilities, said Erin Hansen, the statewide policy analyst at Together Louisiana, a network of 250 religious and civic organizations across the state that advocates for grassroots issues, including tax fairness.

The ITEP program was created in the 1930s through a state constitutional amendment, allowing companies to bypass a public vote and get approval for the exemption through the governor-appointed Board of Commerce and Industry, Hansen said. For over 80 years, that board approved nearly all applications that it received, she said.

Since 2000, Louisiana has granted a total of $35 billion in corporate property tax breaks for 12,590 projects.

Louisiana’s executive order

A few efforts to reform the program over the years have largely failed. But in 2016, Gov. John Bel Edwards signed an executive order that slightly but importantly tweaked the system. On top of the state board vote, the order gave local taxing bodies – such as school boards, sheriffs and parish or city councils – the ability to vote on their own individual portions of the tax exemptions. And in 2019 the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board exercised its power to vote down an abatement.

Throughout the U.S., school boards’ power over the tax abatements that affect their budgets vary, and in some states, including Georgia, Kansas, Nevada, New Jersey and South Carolina, school boards lack any formal ability to vote or comment on tax abatement deals that affect them.

Edwards’ executive order also capped the maximum exemption at 80% and tightened the rules so routine capital investments and maintenance were no longer eligible, Hansen said. A requirement concerning job creation was also put in place.

Concerned residents and activists, led by Together Louisiana and sister group Together Baton Rouge, rallied around the new rules and pushed back against the billion-dollar corporation taking more tax money from the schools. In 2019, the campaign worked: the school board rejected a $2.9 million property tax break bid by Exxon Mobil.

After the decision, Exxon Mobil reportedly described the city as “unpredictable.”

However, members of the business community have continued to lobby for the tax breaks, and they have pushed back against further rejections. In fact, according to Hansen, loopholes were created during the rulemaking process around the governor’s executive order that allowed companies to weaken its effectiveness.

In total, 223 Exxon Mobil projects worth nearly $580 million in tax abatements have been granted in the state of Louisiana under the ITEP program since 2000.

“ITEP is needed to compete with other states – and, in ExxonMobil’s case, other countries,” according to Exxon Mobil spokesperson Lauren Kight.

She pointed out that Exxon Mobil is the largest property taxpayer for the EBR school system, paying more than $46 million in property taxes in EBR parish in 2022 and another $34 million in sales taxes.

A new ITEP contract won’t decrease this existing tax revenue, Kight added. “Losing out on future projects absolutely will.”

The East Baton Rouge Parish School Board has continued to approve Exxon Mobil abatements, passing $46.9 million between 2020 and 2022. Between 2017 and 2023, the school district has lost $96.3 million.

Taxes are highest when industrial buildings are first built. Industrial property comes onto the tax rolls at 40% to 50% of its original value in Louisiana after the initial 10-year exemption, according to the Ascension Economic Development Corp.

Exxon Mobil received its latest tax exemption, $8.6 million over 10 years – an 80% break – in October 2023 for $250 million to install facilities at the Baton Rouge complex that purify isopropyl alcohol for microchip production and that create a new advanced recycling facility, allowing the company to address plastic waste. The project created zero new jobs.

The school board approved it by a 7-2 vote after a long and occasionally contentious board meeting.

“Does it make sense for Louisiana and other economically disadvantaged states to kind of compete with each other by providing tax incentives to mega corporations like Exxon Mobil?” said EBR School Board Vice President Patrick Martin, who voted for the abatement. “Probably, in a macro sense, it does not make a lot of sense. But it is the program that we have.”

Obviously, Exxon Mobil benefits, he said. “The company gets a benefit in reducing the property taxes that they would otherwise pay on their industrial activity that adds value to that property.” But the community benefits from the 20% of the property taxes that are not exempted, he said.

“I believe if we don’t pass it, over time the investments will not come and our district as a whole will have less money,” he added.

In 2022, a year when Exxon Mobil made a record $55.7 billion, the company asked for a 10-year, 80% property tax break from the cash-starved East Baton Rouge Parish school district. A lively debate ensued.

Meanwhile, the district’s budgetary woes are coming to a head. Bus drivers staged a sickout at the start of the school year, refusing to pick up students – in protest of low pay and not having buses equipped with air conditioning amid a heat wave. The district was forced to release students early, leaving kids stranded without a ride to school, before it acquiesced and provided the drivers and other staff one-time stipends and purchased new buses with air conditioning.

The district also agreed to reestablish transfer points as a temporary response to the shortages. But that transfer-point plan has historically resulted in students riding on the bus for hours and occasionally missing breakfast when the bus arrives late, according to Angela Reams-Brown, president of the East Baton Rouge Federation of Teachers. The district plans to purchase or lease over 160 buses and solve its bus driver shortage next year, but the plan could lead to a budget crisis.

A teacher shortage looms as well, because the district is paying teachers below the regional average. At the school board meeting, Laverne Simoneaux, an ELL specialist at East Baton Rouge’s Woodlawn Elementary, said she was informed that her job was not guaranteed next year since she’s being paid through federal COVID-19 relief funds. By receiving tax exemptions, Exxon Mobil was taking money from her salary to deepen their pockets, she said.

A young student in the district told the school board that the money could provide better internet access or be used to hire someone to pick up the glass and barbed wire in the playground. But at least they have a playground – Hayden Crockett, a seventh grader at Sherwood Middle Academic Magnet School, noted that his sister’s elementary school lacked one.

“If it wasn’t in the budget to fund playground equipment, how can it also be in the budget to give one of the most powerful corporations in the world a tax break?” Crockett said. “The math just ain’t mathing.”

Christine Wen worked for the nonprofit organization Good Jobs First from June 2019 to May 2022 where she helped collect tax abatement data.

Nathan Jensen has received funding from the John and Laura Arnold Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and the Washington Center for Equitable Growth. He is a Senior Fellow at the Niskanen Center.

Danielle McLean and Kevin Welner do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Revving up tourism: Formula One and other big events look set to drive growth in the hospitality industry

With big events drawing a growing share of of tourism dollars, F1 offers a potential glimpse of the travel industry’s future.

Published

on

By

Sergio Perez of Oracle Red Bull Racing, right, and Charles Leclerc of the Scuderia Ferrari team compete in the Las Vegas Grand Prix on Nov. 19, 2023. Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images

In late 2023, I embarked on my first Formula One race experience, attending the first-ever Las Vegas Grand Prix. I had never been to an F1 race; my interest was sparked during the pandemic, largely through the Netflix series “Formula 1: Drive to Survive.”

But I wasn’t just attending as a fan. As the inaugural chair of the University of Florida’s department of tourism, hospitality and event management, I saw this as an opportunity. Big events and festivals represent a growing share of the tourism market – as an educator, I want to prepare future leaders to manage them.

And what better place to learn how to do that than in the stands of the Las Vegas Grand Prix?

A smiling professor is illuminated by bright lights in a nighttime photo taken at a Formula 1 event in Nevada.
The author at the Las Vegas Grand Prix. Katherine Fu

The future of tourism is in events and experiences

Tourism is fun, but it’s also big business: In the U.S. alone, it’s a US$2.6 trillion industry employing 15 million people. And with travelers increasingly planning their trips around events rather than places, both industry leaders and academics are paying attention.

Event tourism is also key to many cities’ economic development strategies – think Chicago and its annual Lollapalooza music festival, which has been hosted in Grant Park since 2005. In 2023, Lollapalooza generated an estimated $422 million for the local economy and drew record-breaking crowds to the city’s hotels.

That’s why when Formula One announced it would be making a 10-year commitment to host races in Las Vegas, the region’s tourism agency was eager to spread the news. The 2023 grand prix eventually generated $100 million in tax revenue, the head of that agency later announced.

Why Formula One?

Formula One offers a prime example of the economic importance of event tourism. In 2022, Formula One generated about $2.6 billion in total revenues, according to the latest full-year data from its parent company. That’s up 20% from 2021 and 27% from 2019, the last pre-COVID year. A record 5.7 million fans attended Formula One races in 2022, up 36% from 2019.

This surge in interest can be attributed to expanded broadcasting rights, sponsorship deals and a growing global fan base. And, of course, the in-person events make a lot of money – the cheapest tickets to the Las Vegas Grand Prix were $500.

Two brightly colored race cars are seen speeding down a track in a blur.
Turn 1 at the first Las Vegas Grand Prix. Rachel Fu, CC BY

That’s why I think of Formula One as more than just a pastime: It’s emblematic of a major shift in the tourism industry that offers substantial job opportunities. And it takes more than drivers and pit crews to make Formula One run – it takes a diverse range of professionals in fields such as event management, marketing, engineering and beyond.

This rapid industry growth indicates an opportune moment for universities to adapt their hospitality and business curricula and prepare students for careers in this profitable field.

How hospitality and business programs should prepare students

To align with the evolving landscape of mega-events like Formula One races, hospitality schools should, I believe, integrate specialized training in event management, luxury hospitality and international business. Courses focusing on large-scale event planning, VIP client management and cross-cultural communication are essential.

Another area for curriculum enhancement is sustainability and innovation in hospitality. Formula One, like many other companies, has increased its emphasis on environmental responsibility in recent years. While some critics have been skeptical of this push, I think it makes sense. After all, the event tourism industry both contributes to climate change and is threatened by it. So, programs may consider incorporating courses in sustainable event management, eco-friendly hospitality practices and innovations in sustainable event and tourism.

Additionally, business programs may consider emphasizing strategic marketing, brand management and digital media strategies for F1 and for the larger event-tourism space. As both continue to evolve, understanding how to leverage digital platforms, engage global audiences and create compelling brand narratives becomes increasingly important.

Beyond hospitality and business, other disciplines such as material sciences, engineering and data analytics can also integrate F1 into their curricula. Given the younger generation’s growing interest in motor sports, embedding F1 case studies and projects in these programs can enhance student engagement and provide practical applications of theoretical concepts.

Racing into the future: Formula One today and tomorrow

F1 has boosted its outreach to younger audiences in recent years and has also acted to strengthen its presence in the U.S., a market with major potential for the sport. The 2023 Las Vegas race was a strategic move in this direction. These decisions, along with the continued growth of the sport’s fan base and sponsorship deals, underscore F1’s economic significance and future potential.

Looking ahead in 2024, Formula One seems ripe for further expansion. New races, continued advancements in broadcasting technology and evolving sponsorship models are expected to drive revenue growth. And Season 6 of “Drive to Survive” will be released on Feb. 23, 2024. We already know that was effective marketing – after all, it inspired me to check out the Las Vegas Grand Prix.

I’m more sure than ever that big events like this will play a major role in the future of tourism – a message I’ll be imparting to my students. And in my free time, I’m planning to enhance my quality of life in 2024 by synchronizing my vacations with the F1 calendar. After all, nothing says “relaxing getaway” quite like the roar of engines and excitement of the racetrack.

Rachel J.C. Fu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Dropping Like a Stone: ON RRP Take‑up in the Second Half of 2023

Take-up at the Overnight Reverse Repo Facility (ON RRP) has halved over the past six months, declining by more than $1 trillion since June 2023. This steady…

Published

on

Take-up at the Overnight Reverse Repo Facility (ON RRP) has halved over the past six months, declining by more than $1 trillion since June 2023. This steady decrease follows a rapid increase from close to zero in early 2021 to $2.2 trillion in December 2022, and a period of relatively stable balances during the first half of 2023. In this post, we interpret the recent drop in ON RRP take-up through the lens of the channels that we identify in our recent Staff Report as driving its initial increase.

ON RRP Take-up Has Been Decreasing since June 2023…

A blue single-line chart depicts ON RRP take-pp from 2020  through the end of 2023 in trillions of U.S. dollars. The chart shows a steady increase from close to zero in early 2021 to $2.2 trillion in December 2022. Ater a period of relatively stable balances in the first half of 2023, the chart shows a recent drop in ON RRP take-up.
Source: Federal Reserve of St. Louis. FRED database.

Banks’ Balance-Sheet Costs

As the Federal Reserve expanded its balance sheet in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, it increased the supply of reserves to the banking system and, as a result, banks’ balance sheets also grew. Reserves increased from $1.6 trillion—or 9 percent of banks assets—in January 2020 to $3.2 trillion—or 16 percent of bank assets—over the following three months, reaching a historical maximum of 19 percent of banks’ assets in September 2021. As the chart below shows, bank assets also grew from $18 trillion in January of 2020 to $20 trillion in April 2020, and continued to increase to $23 trillion in May 2023.

As banks’ balance sheets expand, regulatory ratios—such as the supplementary leverage ratio (SLR)—are likely to become tighter for some institutions. Banks react to increased balance-sheet costs by pushing some of their deposits toward the money market fund (MMF) industry—for instance, by lowering the rate paid on bank deposits—and reducing their demand for short-term debt. As we explain in our paper, both effects are likely to have boosted ON RRP take-up during March 2021 – May 2023, as most MMFs are eligible to invest in the ON RRP and do so especially when alternative investment options, such as banks’ wholesale short-term debt—including repos by dealers affiliated with a bank holding company—dwindle.

Likely, these effects have subsided relative to 2022. Indeed, since June 2023, bank assets have hovered around $23 trillion, slightly below their March 2023 peak. Moreover, reserves have been around 14 percent of bank assets since June 2023, below the average of 16 percent observed between March 2020 and May 2023. Since the SLR treats all assets in the same way regardless of their riskiness, large banks’ balance-sheet expansions are particularly costly if they are used to finance safe assets with low returns. Therefore, though bank assets have remained relatively stable, the recent decline in the ratio of reserves to bank assets has likely reduced banks’ overall balance-sheet costs.

…while Bank Assets and Reserves Relative to Bank Assets Have Remained Roughly Constant.

 A two-line chart depicts bank assets in red and the ratio of bank reserves to assets in blue from 2020 to late 2023. Since June 2023, bank assets have hovered around $23 trillion, slightly below their March 2023 peak. Moreover, reserves have been around 14 percent of bank assets since June 2023.
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. FRED database.

Consistent with a decrease in banks’ balance-sheet costs (and an increase in the supply of bank debt), the interest rates at which banks and broker dealers borrow via overnight Treasury-backed repos have increased since the fourth quarter of 2022 and are now a few basis points above the ON RRP rate (see chart below). This positive rate differential pushes MMFs away from investing at the ON RRP facility and into private repos.

The SOFR-ON RRP Spread Has Been Positive…

A blue single-line chart depicts the spread between the secured overnight financing rate and the ON RRP rate in basis points from 2020 through the end of 2024. The rate differential has been positive since early 2023.
Source: Federal Reserve of St. Louis, FRED database.

Monetary Policy

Monetary policy can affect ON RRP take-up by MMFs in two ways. First, the interest-rate pass-through of MMF shares is higher than that of bank deposits; as a result, the size of the MMF industry comoves with the monetary policy cycle as investors switch from bank deposits to MMF shares when the policy rate increases. Though the assets of the MMF industry are at an all-time high, the pace of the increase has somewhat decreased recently, consistent with a slower pace of monetary policy tightening; moreover, the share of MMF assets managed by government funds—the ones most likely to invest in the ON RRP—has decreased since June 2022 by 7 percentage points.

Second, monetary policy can affect MMFs’ take-up at the ON RRP also through its effect on interest-rate uncertainty. Higher uncertainty leads MMFs to rebalance their portfolios toward investments with shorter duration; the ON RRP is one such investment as it is overnight. Indeed, interest rate uncertainty—as measured by the MOVE index—had increased substantially during the latest tightening cycle, raising from 57.3 in May 2021 to 136 in May 2023. Recently, however, the increase has been partially reversed. Indeed, the average level of the MOVE was 125.6 in the first half of 2023 but declined to 117.3 in the second half of the year.

…while Interest-Rate Uncertainty Has Been Decreasing.

A blue single line chart shows that interest rate uncertainty—as measured by the MOVE index—had increased substantially during the latest tightening cycle, raising from 57.3 in May 2021 to 136 in May 2023.
Source: Yahoo! Finance.

The Supply of T-bills

A third driver of ON RRP take-up is the supply of T-bills. The Federal Government has expanded the supply of T-bills dramatically in 2023: T-bills outstanding increased from $3.7 trillion at the end of 2022 to $5.3 trillion at the end of September 2023, with a $1.3 trillion increase since June. As the supply of T-bills grows, the investment options of MMFs—and especially of government funds, which represent 83 percent of the industry and can only invest in short-term government debt and repos backed by government debt—expand and, as a result, their investment in the ON RRP dwindles. In our staff report, we estimate that a $100 billion increase in the amount of T-bill issuance reduces the proportion of ON RRP investment in a government-MMF portfolio by 2.3 percentage points, relative to that in a prime-MMF portfolio; since average monthly T-bill issuance went from $1.12 trillion in the period from 2022:Q1-2023:Q1 to $1.53 trillion in 2023:Q2-2023:Q3, this effect on portfolio rebalancing amounts to an additional decrease in ON RRP investment of roughly $350 billion.

Summing It Up

The increase in ON RRP take-up between 2021 and May 2023 was driven by a series of factors: a rise in banks’ balance-sheet costs due to the expansion of the supply of reserves in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the rapid hikes in policy rates aimed at fighting inflation and the resulting increase in interest-rate uncertainty, and the decrease in the T-bill supply of 2021-22 resulting from the normalization of public debt after the COVID-19  crisis.

These factors have reversed: the Federal Reserve restarted running off its balance sheet after the temporary expansion during the banking turmoil of March 2023; the growth of the banking system waned while the ratio of reserves to asset decreased; the pace of interest-rate hikes slowed down; and the T-bill supply increased again. If these dynamics persist in the months ahead, ON RRP take-up may continue to decrease. Such a steady decline would be consistent with that observed in early 2018, when investment at the ON RRP gradually disappeared as the Federal Reserve continued to normalize the size of its balance sheet and reserves in the banking system became less abundant.

Gara Afonso is the head of Banking Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.

Marco Cipriani is the head of Money and Payments Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.  

Gabriele La Spada is a financial research economist in Money and Payments Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.   

How to cite this post:
Gara Afonso, Marco Cipriani, and Gabriele La Spada, “Dropping Like a Stone: ON RRP Take‑up in the Second Half of 2023,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, December 19, 2023, https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2023/12/dropping-like-a-stone-on-rrp-take-up-in-the-second-half-of-2023/.

Disclaimer
The views expressed in this post are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the author(s).

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending