After Tax Salary Caps

[Jeune Poulet]

People think of the salary cap as some sort of tool to level the playing field. It does that a little, but it's not why it was adopted. The cap is about the owners collectively looking out for themselves, adding some stability and cost control. In the 90s I couldn't wait for the NHL to have a cap because I felt the playing field was very unfair. In retrospect, it's really not as great as I thought it would be, even though it's probably better than no cap.

But it doesn't really level the playing field that much if at all. And as others have pointed out, no system can, because players could have a million reason for why they choose one city over another. There are trends but you can't really quantify all that. What would be next? 500k extra cap for each celsius below the league average, -500 for each degree above the average? Recessions? House market?

Giving out extra cap room to certain teams wouldn't fix everything like magic either. What's a team like Ottawa going to do with it? They're just going to be further disadvantaged compared to tax-heavy markets with more money.

TL;DR You can't really use the salary cap to make unattractive markets more attractive, mostly because there isn't a real, objective consensus on what constitutes an attractive market or not, how to quantify that and how long that label should last. The salary cap needs hard data and facts.

 

[Legionnaire]

The point is that there are numerous other factors that play into where a player chooses to sign. State taxes is just the low-hanging fruit that any 12 year old can latch onto.

Why are you telling me the point like I'm five? When I know?

I was only trying to dismiss the concept of taxes where games are played.

 

[Legionnaire]

It is my understanding that the massive signing bonuses are where the actual tax advantages reside.

The tax advantages are "income" period.

 

[Legionnaire]

By the way, I would guess that the lot of you are complaining because of "athlete tax" in your market. That is on you and your state or province representitives.

 

[glovesave_35]

The tax advantages are "income" period.

Point was that signing bonus is paid at the state income tax rate of the team. Shielding from the salary paid at the state level, etc. on a per game basis.

 

[Legionnaire]

Point was that signing bonus is paid at the state income tax rate of the team. Shielding from the salary paid at the state level, etc. on a per game basis.

Ok. Let me re-read. That was not clear at first read

I obviously missed that. This post didn't help to clarify things.

 

[Legionnaire]

yes it is just random coincidence that teams in low tax jurisdictions happen to luck out and have players sign contracts which are notably below market value.

even more amazing is the Tampa Bay times even wrote an entire article about this but you can keep your fingers in your ears and head in the sand as long as you want if it makes you happy

Tax tricks: How an $8.5M Lightning contract keeping Steven Stamkos in Tampa is better than $10.5M to leave

And...? Toronto's extremely high tax rate is on you to reduce.


You want a Cup? If you reduced taxation it would already be done - cap or no.

 

[Legionnaire]

Pretty sure I didn't miss anything.

 

[glovesave_35]

Ok. Let me re-read. That was not clear at first read

I obviously missed that. This post didn't help to clarify things.

You don't understand the difference in take home $$ of Player A residing in Texas with a salary of 9m versus Player B on the same team with a salary of 2m and signing bonus of 7m?

 

[Legionnaire]

You don't understand the difference in take home $$ of Player A residing in Texas with a salary of 9m versus Player B on the same team with a salary of 2m and signing bonus of 7m?

Uhh. Total income end of year. I can't be anymore clear.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

My intention was never to turn this into a pissing contest between States/Countries. It was to create discussion about quantifying the pros and cons of each market to make it even for every team. Winnipeg is not on the same playing field as Vegas or Tampa. I would like to think we can all agree on that.

 

[Legionnaire]

My intention was never to turn this into a pissing contest between States/Countries. It was to create discussion about quantifying the pros and cons of each market to make it even for every team. Winnipeg is not on the same playing field as Vegas or Tampa. I would like to think we can all agree on that.

No. of course not. You're an innocent victim.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

No. of course not. You're an innocent victim.

How am I not innocent? I want the NHL to make UFA equal for all. That involves quantifying all the advantages and disadvantages of each market. What posts do I engage in any politcal or internation pissing wars?

 

[Legionnaire]

How am I not innocent? I want the NHL to make UFA equal for all. That involves quantifying all the advantages and disadvantages of each market. What posts do I engage in any politcal or internation pissing wars?

You're an adult. Not reading any further than the first question. Everything was answered there

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

You're an adult. Not reading any further than the first question. Everything was answered there

For creating a topic that focuses on leveling the playing field, sure whatever makes you feel good about the poison you have spewed in this thread.

 

[Legionnaire]

For creating a topic that focuses on leveling the playing field, sure whatever makes you feel good about the poison you have spewed in this thread.

That is the precise. If athletics were about being equal...

...Otherwise take a hike with your murderous communist ideals.

 

[glovesave_35]

Uhh. Total income end of year. I can't be anymore clear.

Sweet, have a great day.

 

[Gamimenos]

Imagine if taxes was the only factor players used to weigh their options. I don't think Canada would have a team.

 

[I am Canadian]

Imagine if taxes was the only factor players used to weigh their options. I don't think Canada would have a team.

You realise Canadian teams can pay more to make up the difference?

With a league so obsessed with parity and shooting down teams that look to better themselves it's sad that this issue persists.

Leafs aren't allowed to hire refs to run their games in training camp or have paid coaching for players in the offseason yet they hold 10+ teams from folding with revenue sharing.

It's pathetic.

 

[tucker3434]

You realise Canadian teams can pay more to make up the difference?

With a league so obsessed with parity and shooting down teams that look to better themselves it's sad that this issue persists.

Leafs aren't allowed to hire refs to run their games in training camp or have paid coaching for players in the offseason yet they hold 10+ teams from folding with revenue sharing.

It's pathetic.

The cap is about cost certainty, not parity. Parity is just a byproduct.

 

[Butch 19]

Does anyone have an excel spreadsheet with state taxes (over 500 000) to get a better idea what each team's actual salary cap is.

NYR and NJD have roughly 6 to 8 million less per season to bargin with than Vegas or Tampa. Is this something that can be changed in the CBA?

Are you already snowed in?

 

[I am Canadian]

The cap is about cost certainty, not parity. Parity is just a byproduct.

The cap is 100% for parity. Low budget teams would be terrible and would attract zero fans. Leafs, Habs, Rangers, Chicago, Philly, Detroit etc would buy out the league.

If it wasn't about parity they would let teams exceed it who have excellent finances

 

[North Cole]

Oh great...more talk about taxes. Most people don't even want to do their own taxes, let alone something as complicated as a international worker, with static and migrating income...

I'm going to go with - stop worrying about some you cant calculate for 1000, Alex.

Daily double.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

The cap is 100% for parity. Low budget teams would be terrible and would attract zero fans. Leafs, Habs, Rangers, Chicago, Philly, Detroit etc would buy out the league.

You realize there didn't use to be a salary cap for most of the league's existence, right? Yet there were still fans of small market teams.

The owners didn't suddenly decide out of the goodness of their hearts to make things more fair for small market teams. The owners were willing to sacrifice a season, and then a again half a season in order to get cost certainty on their largest expense, players' salaries. They wouldn't have done that if the primary issue was parity because large market owners would never be on board.

The cap is directly linked to hockey related revenue. It couldn't be more clear that it's about cost certainty. If revenue doesn't go up, the cap doesn't go up.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Oh great...more talk about taxes. Most people don't even want to do their own taxes, let alone something as complicated as a international worker, with static and migrating income...

I'm going to go with - stop worrying about some you cant calculate for 1000, Alex.

Daily double.

But where do you live?

Just wondering if they're going to adjust your Jeopardy winnings based on your local tax rates. It's only fair.