The London Chargers? In the AFC East? It could happen

[Reed83HOF]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We get the baseball now on BT Sport / ESPN. I mean it is still boring as hell but it's on. 

baseball or cricket?

 

I assume @Gugny would be an Arsenal fan

Edited November 6, 2019 by Reed83HOF

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We get the baseball now on BT Sport / ESPN. I mean it is still boring as hell but it's on. 

 

Says the guy who watches cricket.

 

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Reed83HOF said:

baseball or cricket?

 

I assume Gugny would be an Arsenal fan

 

Live with me you have no choice Reed. 

 

I can take Gug to the cricket. Would be his sort of pace. 

[sherpa]

54 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 I mean it's only a 6 hour flight and might be quicker than your drive into Buffalo? Just curious

 

It isn't a six hour flight.

Its much closer to eight, and without a charter, much closer to 10 minimum.

[Big Turk]

On 11/4/2019 at 11:37 PM, YoloinOhio said:

 

 

For a bit? They told the Chargers they didn't want them loudly and often and they still moved anyway. They literally HATE the Chargers in LA so why would they think moving there would even work??

[Mr. WEO]

Yeah, cheap-ass owners of Chargers will cough up 650 million to move to London....

 

Zero point zero chance this happens. 

34 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

It isn't a six hour flight.

Its much closer to eight, and without a charter, much closer to 10 minimum.

 

Are you flying with Charles Lindbergh?

[BUFFALOKIE]

Nooooo! I want the Chargers in OKC (preferably, but unrealistically Tulsa). Thunder bolts and Lightning, very, very frightening!!!!!

 

PS: I would still be a mother ***** Bill's fan till the day I die! 

[sherpa]

10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Yeah, cheap-ass owners of Chargers will cough up 650 million to move to London....

 

Zero point zero chance this happens. 

 

Are you flying with Charles Lindbergh?

 

Maybe I should have made it clearer.

If it isn't a charter, you aren't getting a flight from Buffalo to London without a connection somewhere.

The the ten hours.

[Cynical]

I found this article from last year:

 

https://www.skysports.com/nfl/news/12118/11522572/london-nfl-franchise-ready-to-go-says-executive-vice-president-mark-waller
 

Quote

"NFL executive vice-president Mark Waller has told Sky Sports that London is still on track to host a franchise by 2022."

 

 

 

Another article talking about some of the challenges with a London franchise:

 

https://www.americanfootballinternational.com/could-a-uk-nfl-franchise-become-a-reality/

 

Quote

It is likely that a London franchise would play its home games in blocks, with a series of home games, followed by a period on the road, and then another block of games in the UK. A London franchise would also need to have a base in the US, to give them a center of operations for training and preparing ahead of their eight games on US soil, as well as any play-off progression.

 

This article also mentions the CBA ending in 2020, and the NFL media deal ending in 2022.

It does sound like there could be a small, but realistic chance for a London franchise in the very near future.

 

[Brit]

18 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Says the guy who watches cricket.

 

Cricket nothing. He supports Arsenal...

 

 

[MAJBobby]

On 11/4/2019 at 11:24 PM, YoloinOhio said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think there is alot of issues with a London Based team, with the Biggest being International Tax Laws.

 

What player would want to sign up for this:

 

As the top pick in 2016, Goff is projected to command $27,946,656 over the course of his rookie contract, including an $18,515,839 signing bonus. Of course, he will never pocket the full amount. Goff will have to pay the Taxman. The U.S. has one of the lowest tax rates in the world for individuals at a maximum of 39.6%. Thus, $11,066,875.78 of Goff’s $27,946,656 salary will be devoted to federal tax.  If that sounds bad, imagine if the Rams had moved to London. The U.S. taxes its citizens and residents on their worldwide income, so any money an American football player makes in London would be taxable by the U.S. The U.K. would also tax Goff’s salary.  The U.K.’s highest individual tax rate is 45%.23 So Goff would also owe an extra $12,575,995.20 to the U.K. If Goff did nothing to mitigate this tax liability via the foreign income exclusion, foreign tax credit, or foreign tax deduction, he would be left with only $4,303,785.02 of his original salary.

 

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dd4c/ae9823ed926d4405290c7e892775af3f2a3e.pdf

Edited November 7, 2019 by MAJBobby

[frostbitmic]

AFC East should be the London Jaguars, patriots, Jests and Ravens.

 

Move the Bills to  the AFC North

 

Move the Bungles to the AFC South.

 

Move the Chargers to Mexico City

Edited November 7, 2019 by frostbitmic

[MAJBobby]

3 minutes ago, frostbitmic said:

AFC East should be the London Jaguars, patriots, Jests and Ravens.

 

Move the Bills to  the AFC North

 

Move the Bungles to the AFC South.

 

Move the Chargers to Mexico City

 

What Player will sign up to be Double Taxed?  The London Franchise will not be a good one.  Goff would have only made 4M of his 27M contract from his rookie year with the International Tax Laws

Edited November 7, 2019 by MAJBobby

[GunnerBill]

16 minutes ago, Brit said:

Cricket nothing. He supports Arsenal...

 

 

 

These days that is a burden I have to carry..... It is certainly not fun. My Arsenal fandom is very different from my Bills fandom in that I already know I could live for another 50 years and not see an Arsenal side as good as one I have already seen in 2004. That will be the best Arsenal side of my lifetime and I am good with that. The Bills fandom is different because there is the hope that the best is yet to come......

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

What Player will sign up to be Double Taxed?  The London Franchise will not be a good one.  Goff would have only made 4M of his 27M contract from his rookie year with the International Tax Laws

 

See this keeps being said but I just do not believe it to be true. Now I am not purporting to be an international tax law expert but I have dabbled in the field and a player playing in London would be subject to the UK tax laws only for the days he works in the UK. The days he works in the US would not be subject to UK tax law. So every day's work would only be taxed once.  

[frostbitmic]

13 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

What Player will sign up to be Double Taxed?  The London Franchise will not be a good one.  Goff would have only made 4M of his 27M contract from his rookie year with the International Tax Laws

I can't even look at your posts with the patriots emblem you're using.

[MAJBobby]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

See this keeps being said but I just do not believe it to be true. Now I am not purporting to be an international tax law expert but I have dabbled in the field and a player playing in London would be subject to the UK tax laws only for the days he works in the UK. The days he works in the US would not be subject to UK tax law. So every day's work would only be taxed once.  

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dd4c/ae9823ed926d4405290c7e892775af3f2a3e.pdf

 

A London Based organisation would get taxed fully on signing bonuses ETC (Double Taxed as well) And then the exemptions are not big enough to get the credit back for those.  Much like the US, the UK also taxes income made Internationally as well.

 

As of 2013, players appearing in International Series games were subject to UK tax on their income and endorsements on a pro rata basis. If expanded to a full slate of regular season games, it has been suggested that unless the government granted exemptions to attract the NFL, which have been applied to some but not all sports/athletes, then the difference between the UK and US tax codes would be sufficient to dissuade players who are free agents from signing for a London franchise.  The talks between the Chancellor and the NFL from 2014 onwards were interpreted by the media as a willingness to offer support in the form of promises of tax exemptions.  - So it looks like the UK Would have to decide essentially to waive the double tax otherwise there is NO player that will sign up for that.  You know the US isnt waiving their Taxes 

Edited November 7, 2019 by MAJBobby

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dd4c/ae9823ed926d4405290c7e892775af3f2a3e.pdf

 

A London Based organisation would get taxed fully on signing bonuses ETC (Double Taxed as well) And then the exemptions are not big enough to get the credit back for those.  Much like the US, the UK also taxes income made Internationally as well.

 

As of 2013, players appearing in International Series games were subject to UK tax on their income and endorsements on a pro rata basis. If expanded to a full slate of regular season games, it has been suggested that unless the government granted exemptions to attract the NFL, which have been applied to some but not all sports/athletes, then the difference between the UK and US tax codes would be sufficient to dissuade players who are free agents from signing for a London franchise.  The talks between the Chancellor and the NFL from 2014 onwards were interpreted by the media as a willingness to offer support in the form of promises of tax exemptions.  - So it looks like the UK Would have to decide essentially to waive the double tax otherwise there is NO player that will sign up for that.  You know the US isnt waiving their Taxes 

 

So the UK would not tax the salary of an NFL player that is not earned in the UK unless they are permanently domicile in the UK. That is our law and I know - because I helped write the last revision of it. What the UK would tax is the earnings earned in the UK. So for all 8 home games and whatever practice days take place in the UK you would be taxed by the British Government. For the 8 games and any practice days take place outside the UK you would not. If a player decided to live permanently in the UK ie. stayed in London in the offseason, moved family here etc, they could then be captured by the rules that apply to a UK domicile person and the UK would then tax all of their earnings whether earned in the UK or abroad. That plain and simple is the UK law.

 

If what you are saying is that the US would also seek to tax the 8 game days and whatever practice days take place in the UK then my understanding of our tax treaty with the US is that would not take place but as I say - that is not my area of expertise. It is just not my understanding of the way the two countries apply the rules as between each other. It may be that only applies to federal taxes though - that is a thought..... I don't know enough about your tax system. But if there is a problem it is caused by the US tax system not the UK one.

[MAJBobby]

46 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So the UK would not tax the salary of an NFL player that is not earned in the UK unless they are permanently domicile in the UK. That is our law and I know - because I helped write the last revision of it. What the UK would tax is the earnings earned in the UK. So for all 8 home games and whatever practice days take place in the UK you would be taxed by the British Government. For the 8 games and any practice days take place outside the UK you would not. If a player decided to live permanently in the UK ie. stayed in London in the offseason, moved family here etc, they could then be captured by the rules that apply to a UK domicile person and the UK would then tax all of their earnings whether earned in the UK or abroad. That plain and simple is the UK law.

 

If what you are saying is that the US would also seek to tax the 8 game days and whatever practice days take place in the UK then my understanding of our tax treaty with the US is that would not take place but as I say - that is not my area of expertise. It is just not my understanding of the way the two countries apply the rules as between each other. It may be that only applies to federal taxes though - that is a thought..... I don't know enough about your tax system. But if there is a problem it is caused by the US tax system not the UK one.

 

Yes I was stationed in the UK as part of my work for a couple years.  I paid Both UK and US tax on my income until my Foreign Income Tax Exemption was approved by the US.  Now when I did my income taxes I also got credits back for all my foreign tax so in essence I got back what I paid in UK Taxes.  However there is a cap to that so I am sure for example when a Signing Bonus is paid it will be taxed both by US and UK, in theory the player Like  myself could use the Foreign income exclusion, foreign tax credit, or foreign tax deduction as well, but likely would be capped, I never made the amount of these players obviously so I would not know about the capping.  Here is the capping on the Foreign Income Exemption so Yeah would not really help the players

 

"The Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEIE, using IRS Form 2555) allows you to exclude a certain amount of your FOREIGN EARNED income from US tax. For tax year 2018 (filing in 2019) the exclusion amount is $103,900. What this means is that if, for example, you earned $118,000 in 2018, you can subtract $103,900 from that leaving $14,100 as taxable by the US."

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/americanfootball/11181223/London-based-NFL-team-receives-boost-with-Chancellor-confirming-he-has-held-talks-over-a-Wembley-franchise.html

 

"As Chancellor, Osborne would have the power to offer financial incentives to any NFL team relocating to the UK and has previously agreed exemptions for visiting sports stars who would otherwise baulk at paying its prohibitively high taxes."

 

Now that seems to point to Chancellor Osborne pointing at Tax Breaks and Exemptions (granted that was for the current series), not sure if he is willing to let the UK not get a bite in taxes at all the Millions those players will make with a full time team based there.  Personally I would love the game to go Internationally.  IMO that is the Biggest Hurdle to an International Franchise (not the travel or such) but the taxes to make sure the International Franchise isn't automatically handicapped when it comes to signing players and such.  It will be the biggest hurdle faced, just look at UFA now, the States with Zero income tax can sign players cheaper than players going to states with High Income Taxes.

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by MAJBobby

[GunnerBill]

22 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Yes I was stationed in the UK as part of my work for a couple years.  I paid Both UK and US tax on my income until my Foreign Income Tax Exemption was approved by the US.  Now when I did my income taxes I also got credits back for all my foreign tax so in essence I got back what I paid in UK Taxes.  However there is a cap to that so I am sure for example when a Signing Bonus is paid it will be taxed both by US and UK, in theory the player Like  myself could use the Foreign income exclusion, foreign tax credit, or foreign tax deduction as well, but likely would be capped, I never made the amount of these players obviously so I would not know about the capping.  Here is the capping on the Foreign Income Exemption so Yeah would not really help the players

 

"The Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEIE, using IRS Form 2555) allows you to exclude a certain amount of your FOREIGN EARNED income from US tax. For tax year 2018 (filing in 2019) the exclusion amount is $103,900. What this means is that if, for example, you earned $118,000 in 2018, you can subtract $103,900 from that leaving $14,100 as taxable by the US."

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/americanfootball/11181223/London-based-NFL-team-receives-boost-with-Chancellor-confirming-he-has-held-talks-over-a-Wembley-franchise.html

 

"As Chancellor, Osborne would have the power to offer financial incentives to any NFL team relocating to the UK and has previously agreed exemptions for visiting sports stars who would otherwise baulk at paying its prohibitively high taxes."

 

Now that seems to point to Chancellor Osborne pointing at Tax Breaks and Exemptions (granted that was for the current series), not sure if he is willing to let the UK not get a bite in taxes at all the Millions those players will make with a full time team based there.  Personally I would love the game to go Internationally.  IMO that is the Biggest Hurdle to an International Franchise (not the travel or such) but the taxes to make sure the International Franchise isn't automatically handicapped when it comes to signing players and such.  It will be the biggest hurdle faced, just look at UFA now, the States with Zero income tax can sign players cheaper than players going to states with High Income Taxes.

 

 

Well Chancellor Osborne is no longer an MP let alone in Cabinet. Who knows who the Chancellor will by next month. If it is John McDonnell then I wouldn't bank on the maximum income tax rate not going up from 50%. 

 

So as I understand what you say above the US taxes you regardless. Even when you are stationed permanently in another country? So the problem isn't the UK or indeed any other country where the NFL may wish to go. It is that the exemption that the US would apply to you and me and the man on the street is chicken feed to the NFL players and the rest of their salary would be double taxed because the US doesn't only want to tax the bits for activity in the US it wants to tax the whole lot. 

 

So either the host country has to agree that it won't tax NFL players on the money earned in the UK for games and practices there as a special exemption under its law. Or the US has to agree that it would forego its right to the tax for those activities carried out by an NFL player in another country. Hence we hit stalemate because neither of those would happen. 

 

Really helpful conversation @MAJBobby - thank you. I understand the issue now and where the concern comes from. It was being presented as a problem with the UK tax system which I didn't understand. 

 

The only remaining source of puzzlement for me is that we have had a treaty on double taxation with the US since 2003. So I don't understand why that doesn't bite here?