An actual breakdown on taxes per team

[Tanknation]

Didn’t Dadonov sign that UFA deal with the senators, one of the highest taxed teams in the league?

“Circumvent” lol. Most of them are taking less money to stay the place they’ve called home for 7 years, which has never been all that uncommon.

LA won a couple cups being one of the highest taxed markets in the league. Get better management and quit making excuses.

It's not about making excuses. Most of us know it's mostly on the players your draft and aquire, and a lot to extent how high you draft. But that's another separate argument.

Fact is, it should be an even system and can easily be implemented into the salary cap to make things fair and even for everyone. Why people need feel to argue this or get upset? Because they are in the lower taxed states and now feel need to get defensive for some odd reason when they should just agree. Yea, let's make it fair and even. Very simple.

And nobody is saying it's going to automatically help anyone get a cup. But at least it's a level playing field no matter how small or Insignificant you lower taxed state people like to make it out to be. I rather have that extra 3 to 5 million that lowered taxes teams get to spend on an extra player. That's huge.

 

[tucker3434]

It's not about making excuses. Most of us know it's mostly on the players your draft and aquire, and a lot to extent how high you draft. But that's another separate argument.

Fact is, it should be an even system and can easily be implemented into the salary cap to make things fair and even for everyone. Why people need feel to argue this or get upset? Because they are in the lower taxed states and now feel need to get defensive for some odd reason when they should just agree. Yea, let's make it fair and even. Very simple.

And nobody is saying it's going to automatically help anyone get a cup. But at least it's a level playing field no matter how small or Insignificant you lower taxed state people like to make it out to be. I rather have that extra 3 to 5 million that lowered taxes teams get to spend on an extra player. That's huge.

The only way it could be easily implemented is a soft cap. That’s it. The end. Trying to incorporate tax law into the salary cap would be an absolute nightmare/boondoggle. The only people that would advise the NHL to do that are the CPA’s and attorneys that would make millions in fees to make it happen.

Truth is, not even the high tax areas are in a rush to expand expense categories for fairly obvious reasons. Profit is good.

 

[Golden_Jet]

The only way it could be easily implemented is a soft cap. That’s it. The end. Trying to incorporate tax law into the salary cap would be an absolute nightmare/boondoggle. The only people that would advise the NHL to do that are the CPA’s and attorneys that would make millions in fees to make it happen.

Truth is, not even the high tax areas are in a rush to expand expense categories for fairly obvious reasons. Profit is good.

Soft cap could work, but would have to be, if 3 million over, then costs 6 million, to be escrow neutral.
If a little more maybe could bring escrow down really low.
Maybe some variance of single digit % over the cap as a soft cap.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Ok cool. And what does that have to do with a teams salary cap structure and salaries that can be spent exactly? It still does not make it fair for teams to be even on salary cap spenditures. This applies to any high taxed city and no matter what team you are on, It should be a fair system across the board. Not sure what the point of throwing out these useless takes are other than just throwing shit on a wall.

Taxes and contracts are separate business from endorsements that are done on players own time and side businesses.

You think he gets that deal playing anywhere else other than Toronto? He's on the Canucks now and he has exactly zero endorsements? You think Toronto bringing in the Canadian Tire CEO to negotiate with Stamkos is a thing a team in Dallas is privy to? There is being oblivious then there is being ignorant.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Bettman clearly said it created parity. Multiple times. He brags about it.
It was featured in every press conference.

He consistently said a salary cap brings parity. That's not the same thing as being created FOR parity. Like holy hell man, just give it up. You can't consistently push a false narrative and expect it to be accepted. You aren't Donald Trump.

 

[Xerloris]

Am I the only one that thinks this is needlessly convoluted? Not the post but just how many different categories there are for how much tax is paid.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Am I the only one that thinks this is needlessly convoluted? Not the post but just how many different categories there are for how much tax is paid.

Governments want their money. At any cost. Unless you're a millionaire, then you can do tons of things to avoid paying taxes and then the government sucks you off.

 

[Legion34]

Didn’t Dadonov sign that UFA deal with the senators, one of the highest taxed teams in the league?

“Circumvent” lol. Most of them are taking less money to stay the place they’ve called home for 7 years, which has never been all that uncommon.

LA won a couple cups being one of the highest taxed markets in the league. Get better management and quit making excuses.

1.) yes. He did. He took the highest net income he could. Ottawa way overpaid. Then he went to tax free markets. No one is saying players will ONLY play for no tax teams. But they clearly sign for less gross aav. You can still over pay

2.) LA did win cups. They also did it prior to the NHL moving to the limited term system. Teams can over come disadvantages. Even with the weather. The pre newsome life. The celebrities. Their stars Still took more. They aren’t winning now

I guess rich teams had no advantages in 2002 because Tampa won?

3.) get better fans and business strategies and we wouldn’t need a cap or revenue sharing? Am I doing it right?

The only way it could be easily implemented is a soft cap. That’s it. The end. Trying to incorporate tax law into the salary cap would be an absolute nightmare/boondoggle. The only people that would advise the NHL to do that are the CPA’s and attorneys that would make millions in fees to make it happen.

Truth is, not even the high tax areas are in a rush to expand expense categories for fairly obvious reasons. Profit is good.

Why? The cap isn’t real. It’s not based on 1-1 dollars.

A player could make 5 million in actual usd. Be charged a cap hit of 6 in Vegas and 4 in Florida.

The exact same money changed hands. That’s just one option.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

1.) yes. He did. He took the highest net income he could. Ottawa way overpaid. Then he went to tax free markets. No one is saying players will ONLY play for no tax teams. But they clearly sign for less gross aav. You can still over pay

2.) LA did win cups. They also did it prior to the NHL moving to the limited term system. Teams can over come disadvantages. Even with the weather. The pre newsome life. The celebrities. Their stars Still took more. They aren’t winning now

I guess rich teams had no advantages in 2002 because Tampa won?

3.) get better fans and business strategies and we wouldn’t need a cap or revenue sharing? Am I doing it right?



Why? The cap isn’t real. It’s not based on 1-1 dollars.

A player could make 5 million in actual usd. Be charged a cap hit of 6 in Vegas and 4 in Florida.

The exact same money changed hands. That’s just one option.

Everything you said is wrong or untrue. Amazing.

 

[DuklaNation]

No it’s about cost certainty for the league and teams.
Leafs love the cap, but you can paint it however you want.

LOL. Without that cap, these bottom end revenue teams would get crushed in salary competition. Not unlike many other industries.

 

[tucker3434]

1.) yes. He did. He took the highest net income he could. Ottawa way overpaid. Then he went to tax free markets. No one is saying players will ONLY play for no tax teams. But they clearly sign for less gross aav. You can still over pay

2.) LA did win cups. They also did it prior to the NHL moving to the limited term system. Teams can over come disadvantages. Even with the weather. The pre newsome life. The celebrities. Their stars Still took more. They aren’t winning now

I guess rich teams had no advantages in 2002 because Tampa won?

3.) get better fans and business strategies and we wouldn’t need a cap or revenue sharing? Am I doing it right?



Why? The cap isn’t real. It’s not based on 1-1 dollars.

A player could make 5 million in actual usd. Be charged a cap hit of 6 in Vegas and 4 in Florida.

The exact same money changed hands. That’s just one option.

1. Aside from Dubas being a terrible negotiator, I don’t know that it is clear.

2. LA has cycled down. Happens to everyone eventually.

3. You’d end up with <$1b valuations for Toronto and Montreal. Everybody benefits from a league with more reach.

4. How do you get team to agree on those numbers? You don’t.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

LOL. Without that cap, these bottom end revenue teams would get crushed in salary competition. Not unlike many other industries.

Is it hard to understand the cap has nothing to do with parity but the fact owners were spending upwards of 70% of their profits on player salary? And that the cap was imposed to get that in control so they would only spend 50% max. No...that's impossible...impossible to understand that billionaires would much rather keep as much money as they can, rather than pay their employees.

 

[DuklaNation]

Is it hard to understand the cap has nothing to do with parity but the fact owners were spending upwards of 70% of their profits on player salary? And that the cap was imposed to get that in control so they would only spend 50% max. No...that's impossible...impossible to understand that billionaires would much rather keep as much money as they can, rather than pay their employees.

Is it so hard to understand players would demand higher salary to compensate for higher taxes? Apparently so. A team like Toronto could spend a LOT more than the hard cap and could easily absorb the costs.

 

[Tanknation]

You think he gets that deal playing anywhere else other than Toronto? He's on the Canucks now and he has exactly zero endorsements? You think Toronto bringing in the Canadian Tire CEO to negotiate with Stamkos is a thing a team in Dallas is privy to? There is being oblivious then there is being ignorant.

Once again. Nobody cares about players side hustles. Salary cap should be structured even. Period

 

[dekelikekocur]

They also said parity.

Again. You can easily give different teams different cap ceilings and floors and still have certainty.

5+5 and 9+1 both = 10

2004–05 NHL lockout - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

0 results for parity, 5 for cost certainty. They didn't care about parity, they cared about getting player costs down. Prior to the cap teams were on average spending 76% of revenue on player salaries.

So don't, "Trust me, Bro" on your claims, either post some links reflecting what you claim or stop making the claim. (And it should be NHL execs/NHL Team execs making the claim, not random bloggers).

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Is it so hard to understand players would demand higher salary to compensate for higher taxes? Apparently so. A team like Toronto could spend a LOT more than the hard cap and could easily absorb the costs.

Yes...players can make decisions based on that. Do they? Sure. Do players also take hometown discounts in high tax locations? All the f***ing time. It's like it barely means anything to a lot of players. Not all, but a lot.

Also I'm sure the Leafs organizations now making more money than their 100+ year history are really crying about not spending $150M on players to fail again.

Once again. Nobody cares about players side hustles. Salary cap should be structured even. Period

And no one cares what a player's take home pay is. Only whiny crybaby Canadian fans who need a new excuse.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

2004–05 NHL lockout - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

0 results for parity, 5 for cost certainty. They didn't care about parity, they cared about getting player costs down. Prior to the cap teams were on average spending 76% of revenue on player salaries.

So don't, "Trust me, Bro" on your claims, either post some links reflecting what you claim or stop making the claim. (And it should be NHL execs/NHL Team execs making the claim, not random bloggers).

Some Canadian fans just refuse to understand that parity was/is/could have been a by-product by having cost certainty. By the primary and only goal of the lockout and salary cap was what the freaking name implies, a Cap on Salaries.

 

[DuklaNation]

Yes...players can make decisions based on that. Do they? Sure. Do players also take hometown discounts in high tax locations? All the f***ing time. It's like it barely means anything to a lot of players. Not all, but a lot.

Also I'm sure the Leafs organizations now making more money than their 100+ year history are really crying about not spending $150M on players to fail again.


And no one cares what a player's take home pay is. Only whiny crybaby Canadian fans who need a new excuse.

Thanks for a response that confirms you believe an imbalance does indeed exist.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Thanks for a response that confirms you believe an imbalance does indeed exist.

Have I once said otherwise that players take less in no tax states? Wtf are you even claiming a win on? The argument has always been it's not as big or as important or unfair that you whiny Canadian fans cry about constantly. That the cap has no bearing on fairness or parity. That if you take this location and market advantage into account, then you must take every market advantage into account. f***ing hell, it's like I'm talking to children.

 

[DuklaNation]

Have I once said otherwise that players take less in no tax states? Wtf are you even claiming a win on? The argument has always been it's not as big or as important or unfair that you whiny Canadian fans cry about constantly. That the cap has no bearing on fairness or parity. That if you take this location and market advantage into account, then you must take every market advantage into account. f***ing hell, it's like I'm talking to children.

Its a financial fact at this point. And yes you in fact did.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Its a financial fact at this point. And yes you in fact did.

Where did I say there is no difference? I said the advantage never applied until those teams got good. Like there were other factors aside from just tax. Like if you seen it, show me. Also it's a financial fact, big markets offer better opportunities to players to make money. For god's sake, Nick Suzuki and Darnell Nurse are amongst the top players in the league for endorsements.

 

[Tanknation]

Have I once said otherwise that players take less in no tax states? Wtf are you even claiming a win on? The argument has always been it's not as big or as important or unfair that you whiny Canadian fans cry about constantly. That the cap has no bearing on fairness or parity. That if you take this location and market advantage into account, then you must take every market advantage into account. f***ing hell, it's like I'm talking to children.

Dude do you need an Ativan? Your points or pointless. Keep it on topic and maybe you won't need to jump up and down like a toddler.

The fact is, regardless of you making this a Canada thing is. TAXES SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN DETERMINING SALARY CAP TO MAKE IT EVEN WITH ALL TEAMS. nothing more nothing less. Once again lower tax people like you keep needed to get defensive. We are not attacking your teams little cup win, so take it easy. We just want cap fairness. Especially when our teams pay most of those US states teams salaries

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Dude do you need an Ativan? Your points or pointless. Keep it on topic and maybe you won't need to jump up and down like a toddler.

The fact is, regardless of you making this a Canada thing is. TAXES SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN DETERMINING SALARY CAP TO MAKE IT EVEN WITH ALL TEAMS. nothing more nothing less. Once again lower tax people like you keep needed to get defensive. We are not attacking your teams little cup win, so take it easy. We just want cap fairness. Especially when our teams pay most of those loser US states teams salaries

Why? This where you have a hard time understanding basic logic. THE CAP IS NOT DESIGNED TO MAKE IT EVEN FOR ALL TEAMS. God damn it, why can't you get this through your head. Cap fairness isn't a league priority and it never was. Stop your crying, actually f***ing listen. Cap fairness, parity, all this stupid shit is Canadian fans making up things that don't actually exist in reality. I know all you f***ing watch is RDS, TSN, and Sportsnet, but do some actual critical thinking.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Just saw on Twitter. Last10/16 cup finalists are teams from no tax states.

I'm kinda watching hockey from a distances these days.

What's the point...

 

[x Tame Impala]

Just saw on Twitter. Last10/16 cup finalists are teams from no tax states.

I'm kinda watching hockey from a distances these days.

What's the point...

Instead of blaming taxes why don’t you blame your front office, GMs, and President? They signed Tavares to an unnecessary UFA contract that further bloated the 3 superstar forward contracts twice over now. Eliminating their roster depth and abilities to make susbsequent and necessary changes.

The Leafs would arguably, IMO very easily, have more playoff wins if they had better contract structure on their team and less underperforming cap space.

Or just pout, take your ball and go home, watching less hockey