A critical audit by the North Rhine-Westphalia State Audit Office (LRH) is intensifying debate surrounding the financial burdens placed on taxpayers to secure professional football matches. The LRH report, presented to the Düsseldorf Interior Ministry and obtained by “Der Spiegel”, argues for a direct contribution from the German Football Association (DFB) and the German Football League (DFL) towards the escalating costs of policing high-risk games.
The report details a significant potential for savings, estimating that approximately €8 million could have been saved last season if the costs associated with high-risk matches across Germany’s top three leagues had been passed onto the organizations benefitting from them. Expanding this model to include matches deemed to possess a moderate risk level, the potential savings reach a substantial €15 million.
The core argument put forth by the LRH centers on the fairness of the current system. “It is not justifiable for the public-and thus, taxpayers-to be regularly burdened with significant financial outlays to guarantee the security of games when the revenue flows primarily to private-sector actors” the report states. This sentiment echoes the “Bremen model” where high-risk games are assessed with specific fees.
The timing of the report is particularly sensitive. North Rhine-Westphalia’s police force is currently undertaking a review of its budget and seeking avenues for cost reduction. However, Interior Minister Herbert Reul, a known and passionate supporter of Bayer 04 Leverkusen, presents a potential obstacle to implementation. Critics argue that Reul’s personal affiliation with a major football club may hinder the adoption of a cost-sharing model that would directly impact the financial interests of professional football organizations.
The LRH’s findings are likely to reignite the ongoing discussion about the relationship between public funding and private enterprise within German professional football, raising critical questions about accountability and the equitable distribution of costs associated with large-scale sporting events. The debate now focuses on whether financial responsibility should reside squarely with the organizations earning the revenue, or if it should continue to fall upon the shoulders of the taxpayer.