Controversy Surrounds Proposed Reforms to the Muhammad Ali Act

As TKO Boxing prepares for a show on January 22, 2026, it is advocating for significant reforms to the Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act (MAABRA). TKO, a partner promotion of the UFC, argues that these changes are essential for the health of boxing. However, many fighters and fans express concerns that the reforms could centralize power and limit fighters' contractual freedoms. Former UFC CFO Nakisa Bidarian, now CEO of Jake Paul’s Most Valuable Promotions, has criticized the proposed changes, suggesting they could create a monopoly that disadvantages fighters. He stated, “It’s good for TKO and bad for fighters,” emphasizing that the complexities of the legislation could obscure its true implications.

New York Post

The debate over the MAABRA features prominent voices from the boxing community. Mike Tyson and sports commentator Max Kellerman support the UFC's approach, suggesting that the UFC's successful model could enhance boxing. Kellerman likened UFC President Dana White's influence to that of a transformative figure in sports, stating, “He built something like the NBA.” Conversely, boxing legends like Oscar De La Hoya and promoter Eddie Hearns oppose the reforms, citing concerns over transparency and the reliance on state commissions. Evander Holyfield has also warned that the reforms could lead to exploitative contracts and reduced fighter pay.

New York Post

Bidarian has raised critical questions regarding the financial commitments TKO is willing to make to support boxers under the proposed act. He noted that without a clear revenue-sharing model, the reforms may not benefit fighters adequately. “What percentage of the revenue are you [TKO] willing to commit as a part of this revival act to the boxers?” he asked, highlighting the need for transparency in financial arrangements. He pointed out that TKO reportedly enjoys high profit margins, which raises concerns about the distribution of earnings among fighters.

New York Post

The boxing community remains divided on the proposed reforms. Critics argue that the changes could lead to a lack of independence for fighters and potentially suppress their earnings. The reliance on state commissions for oversight has also been flagged as a significant concern, with opponents advocating for a more transparent and equitable system.

New York Post

• “It’s good for TKO and bad for fighters,” — Nakisa Bidarian, CEO of Most Valuable Promotions

New York Post

• “The people who made ‘business first, fighters last’ a mega-sport,” — Evander Holyfield, Boxing Legend

New York Post

• “‘What percentage of the revenue are you [TKO] willing to commit as a part of this revival act to the boxers?’ And Lawrence Epstein (Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer for UFC), whom I think very highly of, said, ‘We can’t answer that right now, obviously.’ But obviously, you can because almost every startup in a sport or any business burns more than it makes. It’s unheard of if you start a business and right away you’re profitable. So for me, if they were to say, ‘Hey, we’re going to commit 50 percent of revenue to the athletes,’ then it makes the Ali Act change beautiful…. Last time I checked, TKO has 50 percent plus [(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization] margins, which is insanity when you think about other sports. I’m not saying it’s not good for the shareholders, kudos for them. But I’ll tell you who it’s not good for — the fighters who are in there taking damage.” — Nakisa Bidarian, CEO of Most Valuable Promotions

New York Post

The proposed reforms to the Muhammad Ali Act have sparked a significant debate within the boxing community, highlighting the tension between promoting the sport's growth and ensuring fair treatment for fighters. As TKO Boxing pushes forward with its agenda, the outcome of this legislative effort remains uncertain, with many stakeholders closely monitoring its implications for the future of boxing.

New York Post