Bribery?
I'd strongly advise against a TO offering special prizes for not drawing.
The bribery section talks about players and specifically avoids talking about TOs, so the impression is that a TO can “bribe.” This is somewhat true, but not intended as Michael White's TO suggests. TO “bribery” exists so a TO can modify their event operations in order to accommodate circumstances at an event. The most common example is a TO who is running a normal Swiss event, and their venue has hours of operation (or a hours after which the TO pays penalties). The TO might offer to bump up all the prizes for the top whatever so the players draw and don't cause the TO to suffer significant problems with the venue. (1 = 1 box, 2 = 3/4 box, 3 - 4 = 1/2 box, 5 - 8 = 1/4 box all become 1 - 8 = 1 box, for example.)
Be careful of “since the players haven't played the match yet, we're not changing the results of a match.” If a player said, “Yes, I offered him a box to scoop, but we hadn't played the match yet, so there weren't results to change,” I suspect we'd all bounce that guy in a heartbeat. Bribery can occur–among players–before or during matches at any time.
The problem with a TO trying to do what Michael describes is that there's a high potential for the appearance of shadiness that could easily and negatively affect the TO's reputation and the reputation of those who associate with the TO. Does the TO really care if the two undefeateds draw? He shouldn't because they're locked anyway. So he'll only offer bonuses to some of the people who “could ID”? Will these bonuses been seen as favoring his friends or better customers? Will trying to force play and thereby have winners and losers such that some ID folks play and get knocked be seen as favoring friends or better customers who might make the T8 now when they couldn't have with IDs? Are those bonuses legitimately part of the prize pool that the TO keeps for himself if the players refuse to fight? Or is the TO just throwing away profit because draws irritate him?
As Jacob points out, there are ways a TO can incentivize fewer draws. My favorite is by making prize payouts except any byes (GPT) or invites (PTQ) based on the Swiss standings. You want better prizes? Fight!
Additionally, a TO can make a prize structure based purely on Swiss points and round down round. For example using a 5 round event, 15 pts. = X, 13 - 12 pts. = Y, 11 - 9 pts. = Z, etc. This means that a draw effectively knocks you down one level of prize payout. The more a TO wants to hate IDs, the bigger the gap between levels. So in our example, two players at 12 pts. have to think real hard about whether to draw because doing so means neither gets any more packs where playing means one of them gets the difference between X and Y more packs. Two players at 9 (3-1) or 10 (3-0-1) get no more packs if they draw the fifth round.
Do be aware that this Swiss-record-only method incentivizes actual bribery. “Hey, we're going to draw because we're out of time, but if you scoop to me, we can split the extra packs.” Michael's TO's method also induces real bribery.
My suggestion for Michael would be to consider the Swiss results payout for events and have a talk with the TO about the nature of IDs in Magic. We've looked at trying to get rid of IDs, and there's just not a solution. The real issue with people not liking IDs in the last round is that they're only looking at the last round. The ability to ID into the top slots isn't a bonus a player gets in the last round–it's their reward for having played many rounds successfully. Those players earned their slots in the rounds before. If a player doesn't like not getting into the top, then win more.