9 States with No Income Tax - NHL CAP

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

TheFinalWord

Registered User
Apr 25, 2005
2,234
876
Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wyoming — have no income taxes "state".

Kraken, Knights, Panthers, and the Lightning.

Each of these teams have a clear advantage over the rest of the league. Each of these teams work within CAP framework plus added room when one factor's tax break to negotiate contracts.

Is this something the NHL will consider next collective agreement?
And what about other costs? Property taxes? Federal income tax rates between Canada/US? Provincial/State sales tax? And what about cost of living? Should New York get a break because the cost of living in Manhattan is significantly more than living in Phoenix?
 

LightningStrikes

Champa Bay Lightning
Nov 24, 2009
26,437
10,380
Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wyoming — have no income taxes "state".

Kraken, Knights, Panthers, and the Lightning.

Each of these teams have a clear advantage over the rest of the league. Each of these teams work within CAP framework plus added room when one factor's tax break to negotiate contracts.

Is this something the NHL will consider next collective agreement?
How about Dallas and Nashville then?

How about federal or property taxes? Cost of living? General quality of life and attractiveness (NYC, LA vs say Edmonton or Winnipeg), should the league compensate for them too?
 

Celtic Note

Living the dream
Dec 22, 2006
17,234
6,167
Good for Delaware. Keeping more money out of the hands of politicians that cry "think of the children" when they really want to line their own pockets is a good thing.
And making citizens pay a greater share of taxes because companies who funnel money out of tax coffers and to the top 1% in an elitist corporate welfare scheme (yes the gift of corporate loopholes is a form of welfare) is so much better?

My question is why don’t more businesses like NHL teams do this?

I am sure there are local corporate welfare acts locally that are advantageous like tax subsidies to build stadiums that don’t really require the subsidies for profitability. Maybe the local benefits are greater?
 

HisNoodliness

Good things come to those who wait
Jun 29, 2014
3,864
2,303
Toronto
It's certainly the case that no state income tax is an advantage, but every team has advantages. Why did Tavares sign in Toronto, he grew up in Mississauga. Having most of the best players come from Toronto or Montreal is a huge advantage for those teams. They're also awesome, big cities to live in. The Rangers just got a rookie Norris winning defenseman because they're in New York City. I don't see free agents lining up to sign in tax-free states. I see them lining up to play in Toronto, LA and NY. Original 6 teams like my Wings have a big advantage because of their history. Everyone has advantages and some teams unfortunately do get the short end being in areas that most hockey players don't really want to live.

If you think that players in Tampa are taking less solely because of taxes, I think you're dead wrong. It's because the team is really good and Yzerman was a great GM. Stamkos tried to get market value. Yzerman was willing to let him walk unless he took a discount. That established the culture of taking less to keep the team together. Hedman signed at a big discount a few days later. Do you think Kucherov could then walk into that locker room with a $12 million deal and not feel embarrassed? That's why he signs for less. They're a great team with cup aspirations and Yzerman built the culture of taking less to keep the team together. If Dubas could have convinced Matthews to sign for $9 million, I guarantee that Marner wouldn't be making $11 million right now.

Panthers players sign for market value and then have slightly higher take home pay. Dallas players sign for market value. Vegas players sign for market value. Players on every team in the league sign for market value except for Tampa. It's because of culture, not taxes. Did Yzerman and does Brisebois use the tax situation in negotiations? I'm sure they lay out the Lightning take-home pay vs TO take-home pay. But I'm sure the players would rather use that advantage to just make more money. "If I'm worth 10% of Toronto's cap, I'm worth 10% of Tampa's cap" is the reply. That reply works in Miami, Dallas, Nashville and everywhere else. It doesn't work in Tampa because they have a great team with a culture of star players taking less to increase their odds of winning.

The Lightning have built a really good team because of solid drafting and development, shrewd trades and letting anyone go that won't buy into their culture. If you're mad that they're better than you, blame your GM, not your taxes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bocephus86

BrokenFace

Registered User
Aug 15, 2010
1,622
1,972
STL
Why do people who complain about the no tax states only want to adjust the rules for that? If you're going to change the cap because some teams have the advantage of being in a no tax state, then why not change the cap for teams with other advantages? Most players in the league are Canadian, so don't Canadian teams have an advantage in signing players who want to play close to where they grew up? Should we adjust the cap for that advantage too? Don't forget that tax free states typically have higher property taxes to make up for it. Shouldn't we factor that in too?
 

Docgonzo

Triple Crown Line
Jan 9, 2010
2,462
2,354
Chino, Ca
Please please stop saying FA line up to play in LA. Our last big free agents were Scuderi, they overpaid, and Mitchell, offered more years than anybody was willing to go.

The last big free agents the Kings went after were Chara( picked Boston), Brad Richards( picked NYR) and Kovy(who picked the Devils)

So no LA doesn’t attract FAs, in fact we more so lose players because their families want to move back closer to home/families and go back east.
 

Amazing Kreiderman

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
44,956
40,579
Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wyoming — have no income taxes "state".

Kraken, Knights, Panthers, and the Lightning.

Each of these teams have a clear advantage over the rest of the league. Each of these teams work within CAP framework plus added room when one factor's tax break to negotiate contracts.

Is this something the NHL will consider next collective agreement?

You forgot the Stars there. I am sure this has been discussed at length but it's not as big a deal as fans make it out to be.

First off: Players pay state income tax on a game by game basis. The state income tax advantage for a Dallas Stars player only applies to:

41 home games
2 games in Florida (TBL & FLA)
1 game in Nevada (VEG)
1 game in Washington (SEA)

The players still pay income tax for the remaining 37 games, and federal income tax for all of those games. The avg state income tax is roughly 10%. If we take that as a number of comparison:

Dallas Stars player: 45 tax-free games
Arizona Coyotes player: 7 tax-free games

The difference? 38 taxed games out of 82 which is 45% of games. So realistically, a player would only lose 4.5% of his base salary to the state income tax advantage.*

It's an advantage, but not a huge one. And why should the NHL change their rules for this? They didn't create the tax system.

Tampa isn't winning back-to-back Cups because of a favourable tax situation. They are winning because they developed players the right way in Syracuse, turning 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th round piicks into top-6 contributors.


*Of course the actual numbers are a bit more nuanced, but just to explain the taxes, they're not a flat fee based on where the team is located.
 
Last edited:

Sol

Smile
Jun 30, 2017
24,071
20,073
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.

Which free agents have been the Kings gotten. I must have been in a coma.
 

Legionnaire11

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 12, 2007
14,184
8,302
Fort Wayne
atlantichockeyleague.com
You forgot the Stars there. I am sure this has been discussed at length but it's not as big a deal as fans make it out to be.

First off: Players pay state income tax on a game by game basis. The state income tax advantage for a Dallas Stars player only applies to:

41 home games
2 games in Florida (TBL & FLA)
1 game in Nevada (VEG)
1 game in Washington (SEA)

The players still pay income tax for the remaining 37 games, and federal income tax for all of those games. The avg state income tax is roughly 10%. If we take that as a number of comparison:

Dallas Stars player: 45 tax-free games
Arizona Coyotes player: 7 tax-free games

The difference? 38 taxed games out of 82 which is 45% of games. So realistically, a player would only lose 4.5% of his base salary to the state income tax advantage.*

It's an advantage, but not a huge one. And why should the NHL change their rules for this? They didn't create the tax system.

Tampa isn't winning back-to-back Cups because of a favourable tax situation. They are winning because they developed players the right way in Syracuse, turning 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th round piicks into top-6 contributors.


*Of course the actual numbers are a bit more nuanced, but just to explain the taxes, they're not a flat fee based on where the team is located.

OP also left Nashville off of their initial list, so you have to factor them in as well. I am in no way disagreeing with you, i've tried using the same logic before but it falls on deaf ears.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amazing Kreiderman

Gil Gunderson

Registered User
May 2, 2007
31,601
17,509
Ottawa, ON
And big markets benefit from their environment by having the ability to throw massive signing bonuses that teams in smaller cities can't. Can the NHL do something about that too?
 

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
19,041
18,055
Whether the market is completely unregulated, or a revenue sharing cap system, there will always be teams that benefit, and teams that lose out.

You just have to accept that this is always going to be the case, and there is no such thing as a level playing feild, and there never has been.
 

CupsOverCash

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
16,515
7,252
I blame the media this is constantly explained to people and seems like nobody pays attention.
 

easton117

Registered User
Nov 11, 2017
5,115
5,788
There should be a social study done to solve this. Team Winnipeg can pay 2 million per player and provide a mansion for them to live in. Team Tampa can pay 5 million tax free but they have to live under a bridge for the year.

See who can draw more free agents.
 

yort2010

Registered User
Dec 28, 2016
157
77
Man there must be a tissue shortage up North with all these Canadian tears.

What a great way to show off your surface-level intelligence of taxes and the salary cap. OP has zero mention of…

-sales tax
-property tax
-cost of living
-tax loopholes available to athletes
-revenue disparities between teams
-free agency attraction based quality of life in different cities

…to name a few. Nope just straight up “these teams don’t pay income taxes and it’s unfair!” Very detailed and nuanced understanding of the situation.

I honestly look forward to Tampa knocking a Canadian team out of the Finals just for people who whine about this incessantly. We’ve been bickering about this for years, fellas. There are MANY factors that go into roster construction. Income taxes are a small factor among many and it would be impossible to regulate between 2 countries and what…25 different states/provinces.

Deal with it, brah

TLDR…brah….
 

Sens

Registered User
Jan 7, 2016
6,086
2,550
Toronto has the most money for facilities and player development, let's do something about that.

The nhl actually did two years ago… did not allow Toronto players to use leaf facilities to train in the off season
 

Look Up

Let me tell you about my Celica again
Oct 3, 2013
1,389
1,367
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.
That's because the state leaders can think two steps ahead and have a "rainy day fund" where they sock away money during good times to cover revenue shortfalls during down times.
 

Look Up

Let me tell you about my Celica again
Oct 3, 2013
1,389
1,367
Want to talk about unfair? The Predators, Panthers, Lightning and Stars all in the same division this year. No state income taxes for games played there. How could the league allow this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoneyManny

ninetyeight

Registered User
Jun 3, 2007
2,075
3,101
Finland
Lets just force players to play for their draft team till they retire :naughty:

Or have a freeagent draft, so that when a player finally breaks free of his horrible drafting team, he has to sign to an even worse team :mad:
 

Geardedandbearded

Registered User
May 29, 2019
336
261
Isn’t there an accounting trick for a player’s home residence that makes the advantage less? Still an advantage but not as drastic as it appears at first glance
 

jfhabs

Registered User
May 21, 2015
5,085
2,532
The salary cap is a failure anyway. Tampa are making it very obvious this year, but a lot of other teams like Toronto are trying very hard too. Others have taken bad contracts to make it to the floor in the past too like Arizona (constantly) and Ottawa. Or just tank in general which the floor is suppose to prevent (Oilers, Toronto, Buffalo, Ottawa, New Jersey, New York, Tampa etc. etc. etc.).

There are now known mechanismes to circumvent the cap, teams are using it very openly and the league isn't doing anything (not sure they can anyway)
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad