• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

MMA Payout

The Business of Combat Sports

  • Home
  • MMA
    • UFC
    • Bellator
    • One
    • PFL
  • Boxing
  • Legal
  • Ratings
  • Payouts
  • Attendance
  • Gate

TKO looking to amend Ali Act

April 15, 2025 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

ESPN reports that the TKO Group is soliciting support to amend the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act. The federal law was put into place in 2000 to protect the health and safety of boxers.

The news of the Ali Act amendment comes several weeks after TKO announced that it would start a new boxing promotion with the help of Turkui Al-Sheikh, the head of Riyadh Season and the General Entertainment Authority of Saudi Arabia.

The news should not be of much surprise as the UFC actively lobbies for its purpose in D.C. and this past February during an interview with Pat MacAfee, Ari Emanuel made a subtle not that he did not like the Ali Act.

While news of the Ali Act amendment(s) has spread, only speculation of what the changes would be are occurring. But, based on the presumption that Dana White is involved, its likely to favor the promoter-side of the issue.

Payout Perspective:

The UFC actively lobbied against the Ali Act Amendment to include MMA fighters years ago. Ironically, the guy who drew up the Amendment is now a staunch opponent of it as we all knew that the Ali Act Amendment was just a PR stunt. Certainly, this time around any amendment to the Ali Act would favor TKO. One would speculate that one of the things it would go after would be the “firewall” between manager and promoter.

From our “friend” AI: A “firewall” between a manager and a promoter in the sports world…refers to a legal separation or restriction that prevents conflicts of interest. This means, a promoter, who is responsible for organizing fights and promoting the sport, cannot simultaneously act as a manger, who represents and negotiates for a fighter’s career. The goal is to ensure fairness and prevent the potential favoritism or bias that could arise if a promoter was also managing fighters they were promoting.

Eliminating this from the Ali Act would “streamline” the process of making fights. It also would suppress wages of the fighters if a manager also promotes the fighter and vice versa. It is one of the important issues of the Ali Act. In addition, ranking of fighters would be another issue that I could see TKO trying to eliminate. Not dealing with “mandatory” title fights or “step-aside” money would be something that TKO would benefit from while the fighters would not.

MPO will continue to follow.

Filed Under: Ali Act, boxing, Boxing vs. MMA, TKO, UFC

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Featured

UFC Freedom 250 kits revealed

Dominance responds to Plaintiffs’ Fee Request

Senate makes mockery of Ali Act hearing

Wrestlemania 42 attendance dips from 2025

How will WWE’s big weekend turn out?

UFC 327 attendance, gate and bonuses

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout

UFC Freedom 250 kits revealed https://mmapayout.com/2026/05/11/ufc-freedom-250-kits-revealed/

Unpopular opinion: Kevin Harlan just yells #NBA #Lakers #FOKC

Marcus Smart with a play #Lakers

The guy sold the team to OKC claiming they’d build something in Seattle

Wall Street Journal Opinion @WSJopinion

Seattle turns hostile to the great businesses it made. Starbucks is moving jobs from Washington state to Tennessee, and it isn’t alone in looking elsewhere, writes @HowardSchultz
https://on.wsj.com/4uCiVCD

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

How did Loeffler/360 Promotions rebuild interest in Bohachuk after he lost to Adams the first time?
Why does any promoter, if they still have the rights to the fighter, continue their agreement after a loss?
An attorney and former boxing manager's thoughts (archived):

Load More

Copyright © 2026 · MMA Payout: The Business of Combat Sports