Punching Bag Posted July 18 Author Share Posted July 18 5 hours ago, Utah John said: I've been suggesting that the salary cap for all teams should be adjusted upward to compensate for state income taxes, where they apply. This would allow all the teams the same actual dollars available to pay players. Players and agents know that playing in a state with, say, a 5% state income tax, means their paycheck is 5% lower right off the bat than they could get in a no-tax state. Why should a sports team in a state with income taxes be at a disadvantage? The whole idea of parity is that all the teams have the same resources to compete, and that's not the case now. If this was sone as I suggested, the total amount of the salary cap would be greater than it is now. And the poor miserly NFL (/s) and the actually poor NHL would have to come up with more money overall. So the solution is to figure out what the total would be with the sales tax plus-up, then proportionally reduce the amount going to across the board so the total remains the same. It is not so simple since it depends on schedule team plays what states they are playing away games and do overseas teams also require income tax payments? It is not just players who are affected by this - the staff who goes to games also need to pay and as well as most of the coaches, trainers and assistants also need to pay income tax when state charges it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 None of what he wanted to do would work anyway since the NFL (and other leagues) collective bargaining agreements) classify athletes as "employees" and not "contractors". This requires that payment be made to a "person" and not a "company" or "contractor". One of the main reasons that the players' union like this is for the health insurance and medical coverage. Also for the pension benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 something tells me this guy bet save every penny from this rookie contract.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 On 7/18/2024 at 12:21 PM, Utah John said: I've been suggesting that the salary cap for all teams should be adjusted upward to compensate for state income taxes, where they apply. This would allow all the teams the same actual dollars available to pay players. Players and agents know that playing in a state with, say, a 5% state income tax, means their paycheck is 5% lower right off the bat than they could get in a no-tax state. Why should a sports team in a state with income taxes be at a disadvantage? The whole idea of parity is that all the teams have the same resources to compete, and that's not the case now. If this was sone as I suggested, the total amount of the salary cap would be greater than it is now. And the poor miserly NFL (/s) and the actually poor NHL would have to come up with more money overall. So the solution is to figure out what the total would be with the sales tax plus-up, then proportionally reduce the amount going to across the board so the total remains the same. The salary cap is "adjusted upward" every year. Teams in no income tax states play a good amount of games in income taxed states and vice versa. No players pay no state taxes. Teams in no tax states (Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Washington, Nevada), other than maybe the Bucs, have not sniffed a SB in years. Teams from heavily taxed states dominate (Cali, Missouri, Pennsylvania-- even throw the Bills in there for NY). There is no competitive advantage to having no state income tax. It's how you manage your budget/roster that matters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pennstate10 Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 On 7/17/2024 at 9:08 PM, Orlando Buffalo said: Look at the way that NHL salaries are paid for the no tax states. All the stars on TB are paid the whole salary except for league minimums in signing bonus that is paid out over time. Basically they are paid the exact same amount of.money but keep much more of it. The Josh Salary alone is $4 million a year to state of NY, they would be pissed to lose it. This was discussed a while back. Bonus Money is taxed based on the state where you team is located. NY for Bills. But salary is taxed by the state in which the game is played. The interesting twist here is that we hear about players converting salary to bonus,and it’s a wash. Not quite. This could lead a Bills player to receding more of his income in a high tax state, and a lower % in low tax (TX, FL) states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 On 7/18/2024 at 11:00 AM, KDIGGZ said: Boo hoo pay your taxes millionaires I don't mind them trying to use the rules and regs creatively. The business guys do. Why shouldn't the football players? But nearly 80% of pro athletes go broke within three years of retirement. And it ain't because of the state taxes they did or didn't pay. It's because of the squandering spendthrift tax, the believe-the-sycophants tax, the unsophisticated tax, the bad financial advice tax, the don't-worry-about-the-future tax, the wanna-live-like-a-star tax, the splurging spendthrift tax, the start-a-business-without-studying-how tax, the trust-Uncle-Roger-to-be-your-financial-advisor tax ... These are the things they need to worry about, not so much state taxes. But again, if they want to try to be creative, why not? Everyone else tries. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soflabillsfan1 Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 On 7/18/2024 at 1:49 PM, MJS said: Virtually ALL rich people pay taxes, and pay a lot. There are strategies they use to lower how much they pay, but they still pay a boat load of taxes no matter what they do, unless they are breaking the law. Well, those who break the law, rich or poor, need to be held accountable. For sure. The rich pay most of the taxes and then get told by people who pay very little that, they're not paying enough or their "fair share". I'm honestly for a flat tax rate. It's funny how "equality" leaves the equation when we're talking about taxes. 1 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSBill Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 (edited) On 7/18/2024 at 7:00 AM, RangerDave said: They still pay federal income taxes, OASDI taxes, health insurance premiums (I assume?), etc. They don't get 100% of their salary in their paychecks like I do. (My salary is so low for two of my jobs, that they do not take state or federal taxes out. But at the end of the year, I have to lump all income from my various parttime jobs together and pay taxes if the combined total is over the standard deduction.) I can save you a lot of money on your taxes: Because you have multiple jobs, they probably won’t find you. So just don’t pay it. You’ll be fine. To all TBD, I can help you and my rates are very cheap. Call 867-5309 anytime for advice like this. Edited July 21 by CSBill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Darragh Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 On 7/18/2024 at 7:40 AM, Old Coot said: Tua & Dak are laughing all the way to the bank. FLA & TX have no personal income tax (also Nevada, Washington state and Tennessee) They pay state taxes for all their out of state road games though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerDave Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 11 hours ago, CSBill said: Call 867-5309 anytime for advice line this. Jenny, Jenny, is that you? Are you the one I can turn to?? 😄 I don't think so, but thanks! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 On 7/18/2024 at 8:19 AM, SoCal Deek said: Is that true? Are you sure? I know it didn’t work that way when I traveled for business. Technically it's supposed to, although it's typically not well tracked or enforced I had heard that players are paid per game, and therefore basically if there are 17 games they are supposed to allocate / pay 1/17 taxes per location they play in. But to me (especially if I played in a low / no income tax state) I feel like it would be worth making the argument that all of the required practices, training camp, etc. are part of the job and the days I'm actually in the other states account for a lower percentage of income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 On 7/18/2024 at 1:49 PM, MJS said: Do you have a source for this? Why do you believe that a lot of rich people don't pay their fair share? The numbers I saw was that of the 45% who don't pay income taxes, only 0.1% of them made $200k or more per year. Virtually ALL rich people pay taxes, and pay a lot. There are strategies they use to lower how much they pay, but they still pay a boat load of taxes no matter what they do, unless they are breaking the law. Well, those who break the law, rich or poor, need to be held accountable. For sure. I think the folks you are writing to are upset by articles such as this: https://itep.org/amazon-avoids-more-than-5-billion-in-corporate-income-taxes-reports-6-percent-tax-rate-on-35-billion-of-us-income/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted July 21 Author Share Posted July 21 1 hour ago, Captain Caveman said: Technically it's supposed to, although it's typically not well tracked or enforced I had heard that players are paid per game, and therefore basically if there are 17 games they are supposed to allocate / pay 1/17 taxes per location they play in. But to me (especially if I played in a low / no income tax state) I feel like it would be worth making the argument that all of the required practices, training camp, etc. are part of the job and the days I'm actually in the other states account for a lower percentage of income. And what if you are inactive or injured week teams plays in California? It may be worth it to have a tax laywer argue that since you were not IN that state you owe no taxe$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wppete Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 BUST incoming! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 Oh, look a bunch of people I wouldn't trust with a grocery budget trying to solve taxation. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 2 hours ago, Einstein said: I think the folks you are writing to are upset by articles such as this: https://itep.org/amazon-avoids-more-than-5-billion-in-corporate-income-taxes-reports-6-percent-tax-rate-on-35-billion-of-us-income/ That's why I said the tax system needs to be thrown out and completely redone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyBatty is alive Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 On 7/17/2024 at 7:58 PM, DaggersEOD said: And it has to last them the rest of their lives. Really so for the rest of his life he can’t get a job? always hated this argument . On 7/20/2024 at 12:55 PM, soflabillsfan1 said: The rich pay most of the taxes and then get told by people who pay very little that, they're not paying enough or their "fair share". I'm honestly for a flat tax rate. It's funny how "equality" leaves the equation when we're talking about taxes. Flat tax is too easy and cost effective, never happen. imagine all the tax consultants and overpriced lawyers would be put out if business . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoTier Posted July 23 Share Posted July 23 On 7/18/2024 at 12:04 PM, BigAl2526 said: I assume that like most people who come into wealth suddenly, Williams probably hired a financial advisor. Not to do so would be foolish. That would mean any strategy to structure his contract for tax advantages would have been run through the advisor, who would presumably have some tax expertise. I don't blame him for trying. I'm guessing nobody here voluntarily pays more taxes than he/she has to. If anything, I'm guessing he just got some bad advice. You do realize that "financial advisors" are not required to be licensed by anyone, right? Just about anybody can hang out a shingle claiming to be a "financial advisor" or "wealth manager", including convicted criminals. Following the advice of incompetent or shady "financial advisors" is why so many successful people end up in trouble with the IRS or land in bankruptcy court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Claude Posted July 23 Share Posted July 23 On 7/21/2024 at 3:43 PM, RoyBatty is alive said: Really so for the rest of his life he can’t get a job? always hated this argument . Flat tax is too easy and cost effective, never happen. imagine all the tax consultants and overpriced lawyers would be put out if business . A flat tax has nothing to do with simplifying the tax code. Plugging your income into a website and having it spit out a number presents no difficulties. What tax simplification involves is getting rid of all the various deductions and credits that people are addicted to. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 23 Share Posted July 23 16 hours ago, Billy Claude said: A flat tax has nothing to do with simplifying the tax code. Plugging your income into a website and having it spit out a number presents no difficulties. What tax simplification involves is getting rid of all the various deductions and credits that people are addicted to. You're aware that it's all of those deductions and credits that make the tax code complex.....right? (Asking for a friend.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.