9 States with No Income Tax - NHL CAP

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
But in the NBA, MLB, NFL etc you have a luxury tax...they don't take taxes into account in those leagues which is what everyone is saying to disregard in this thread while ignoring the luxury tax that exists in the other 3 major sports leagues.

Yea, but....The luxury tax structure in MLB makes being competitive in a small market nearly impossible. MLB has only a luxurt tax. Come on. There is a reason its the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers almost every season. That is true to different degrees in the NBA. The NFL is a hard cap.
 
Yea, but....The luxury tax structure in MLB makes being competitive in a small market nearly impossible. MLB has only a luxurt tax. Come on. There is a reason its the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers almost every season. That is true to different degrees in the NBA. The NFL is a hard cap.


What about the franchise tag in NFL?
 
Ugh, k, SO the taxes associated with 'no tax' states are only applicable to home games. Ie. 50% +/- of your games are taxed differently (dont ask how the intricacies of its construction as I am not a CMA). Furthermore, teams that have state-tax advantages certainty dont have the ability (or at least as MUCH ability) to construct contracts in ways that would be considered more advantageous to a player (yes, I am aware of the maximum amount a contract can be front-loaded, and how much it can drop year over year). Theres also hockey operations related expenses like scouting, development, management, coaching, medical staff; it goes on. Whatever 'advantage' smaller-cap teams in state tax havens might (or might not) have is certainly offset by leauge juggernauts (financially speaking only) like the rangers, canadians, and leafs getting the advantage of printing infinite money to spend everywhere else.
 
People from Michigan aren't moving to North Carolina for the tax rate considering ours is already a full percent lower in MI. They're moving there to get away from the snow and cold hehe.

Income tax, yes, but the overall tax burden is lower in NC when you include property tax, sales tax, etc. Weather is of course a very real factor as well. Honestly though, the single biggest driver as far as I can tell is simply people relocating for jobs. They care less about saving half a percent on taxes than they do about avoiding unemployment.

In any case, MI is no longer a major driver of transplants to NC or anywhere else for that matter. It ranks pretty close to the middle for people leaving, which is a huge difference from where things were 20 years ago when a bunch of them moved here.
 
Income tax, yes, but the overall tax burden is lower in NC when you include property tax, sales tax, etc. Weather is of course a very real factor as well. Honestly though, the single biggest driver as far as I can tell is simply people relocating for jobs. They care less about saving half a percent on taxes than they do about avoiding unemployment.

In any case, MI is no longer a major driver of transplants to NC or anywhere else for that matter. It ranks pretty close to the middle for people leaving, which is a huge difference from where things were 20 years ago when a bunch of them moved here.

During the 2006-2010 time frame we had a serious issue with exporting the labor force (skilled jobs like engineers, IT, and so on). Things have been rebounding for a while now that the Big 3 aren't the major driving force in job creation now. Medical and other fields are filling in the gaps and the job market is better.

All in all, state income tax rate of a flat 4.25%, sales tax of 6% (doesn't apply to food groceries unless it's prepared food). Property tax is entirely dependent on your locale. A few municipalities have their own income tax like Detroit(not sure of others, think Pontiac?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheelhockey
It doesn't matter if a player is paid as a signing bonus or periodically throughout the year. They'll still need to pay jock taxes based on where they played games.
Unless laws have changed I believe Signing bonuses would be taxed in state of issue only.

Endorsement deals also are taxed on residency
 
No idea how accurate. But using three metrics

gives an interesting view on tax burden for some states
 
And the Rangers and Kings have an advantage over the rest of the teams in the league because they attract the most free agents. Let’s do something about that too.
WTF?

What planet is this. Please detail the free agents the Kings have signed

Andreas Athanasiou does not equal Panarin in anyone's world but yours
 
  • Like
Reactions: Little Psycho
Austin Matthews gets most of his pay through signing bonuses in the summer while he’s at home in Arizona. How do address this issue?
 
I would think a random 2nd pair defensive defenseman can probably make more in endorsements in the Greater Toronto Area or Vancouver than a guy like Huberdeau could playing for the Panthers. Like I bet some rando like Luke Schenn was probably doing commercials for pencil companies in Toronto with his whole "eraser" schtick and Jay McClement was advertising for some random burger chain or whatever. Mason Raymond even got a plug on How I Met Your Mother (with the joke being how passionate Canadians are about hockey that he was supposedly a "big celebrity") back in the day. That alone has to be worth more for a player's bottom line than the state income tax.
 
Unless laws have changed I believe Signing bonuses would be taxed in state of issue only.

Endorsement deals also are taxed on residency

Could you point me to the laws you are referencing? I was doing some reading on the jock tax and I don't think that would matter. The tax man would view the income as "earned" when the player played in games, and not necessarily on where they were paid.

Jock tax - Wikipedia

Brock Osweiler[edit]

A 2018 Sports Illustrated story on NFL players' tax situations began by examining the unusual 2017 tax situation of Brock Osweiler. In 2016, Osweiler played for the Houston Texans in the income tax-free state of Texas, giving him what writer Andrew Feldman called a "tax filing [that] was about as simple as you can get for an NFL player", paying other states only for the days he actually spent in those jurisdictions. At the time, he maintained his residency in Texas. During the 2017 offseason, he was traded to the Cleveland Browns, but was cut after the team's last preseason game and picked up by the Denver Broncos, with the Browns paying almost all of his $16 million contract for that season while he played in seven games for the Broncos. Feldman added, "So what did his tax bill come to? The experts say ... they’re not sure. (emphasis in original)[1]
In 2017, Osweiler was indisputably liable for about $150,000 in Ohio state income tax for the time he spent in the Browns' preseason training camp at Baldwin Wallace University in Berea. However, even though the Browns paid almost all of his season salary, an attorney with the Ohio Department of Taxation told SI that even though almost all of his income that year came from an Ohio source, the state could not tax him on income that was earned while he was not present in the state (assuming that Osweiler did not become an Ohio resident). According to several tax accountants consulted by SI, Osweiler was liable for $600,000 in Colorado income tax based on his time spent in that state, plus another $150,000 to the other states in which he played in 2017. One accountant suggested a different possibility:[1]
One CPA suggests that Ohio and Colorado could both claim they deserve that $600,000, forcing an appeal and possible federal court case. The result could depend on whether the Browns paid Osweiler a lump sum before he left Ohio, or if he continued getting weekly payouts.(emphasis in original)​
 
Every team has advantages and disadvantages in attracting players we should not go down a road to make salary cap changes because of any thing like that.
 
This seems like more of a political issue and less of a hockey issue. The NHL shouldn't cater to taxes from state to state or currency between Canada and United States, that'd be a logistical nightmare
 
I know this complaint is so stupid. One cup in the cap era has been won in a no tax state
Using Cups won has the measuring stick for success is pretty dumb. 1 out of 31 teams win the Cup every year. To measure success by that measure has zero meaning.
 
That only helps them for half the games, because players are paid per game for a total salary and have to pay taxes in states they played outside their own. Inverse is true in some states, if Detroit plays in Tampa or Florida, for those games Detroit players don't pay a state income tax. In the end it is a break, but its not nearly as much of a break you think it is. And this is doubly true for foreign players who pay income taxes to their home countries with higher income taxes, that usually get prorated based on taxes they paid to their host country. So a Canadian player plays in Florida, they aren't paying income taxes to Florida, but that means that more of their income is taxable by the Canadian government.
 
Using Cups won has the measuring stick for success is pretty dumb. 1 out of 31 teams win the Cup every year. To measure success by that measure has zero meaning.
Going by conference finals appearances doesn't really tell us anything else either. The last two years are an outliter where 50% of team in them were no tax states, but in years prior it was 0 or 25% (which is the expected amount)
 
Going by conference finals appearances doesn't really tell us anything else either. The last two years are an outliter where 50% of team in them were no tax states, but in years prior it was 0 or 25% (which is the expected amount)
Points Percentage is the way to do it. We are wondering which teams are "good" and do the tax advantages give those teams a better chance at being good. Huge sample size looking at overall wins-losses.
 
Why is this always the go-to midwit response? Those things represent a vanishingly small portion of the tax dollars collected.

Especially when talking about Florida which doesn't need an income tax because they make so much money from tourism. Even with their disaster spending from hurricanes, the state always had a surplus.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad