An actual breakdown on taxes per team

[DistantThunderRep]

Yep. It does lead to a salary cap. Now show me where it says all teams have to be equal to achieve this.

If you are so against parity.

Why can for example.
Toronto not have a 98 million dollar cap, Tampa have a 78 million dollar cap

And the rest have 88?

You can’t have a problem with this right? It’s every bit as “certain” as all teams having an 88



There does not need to be a perfectly level playing field.

I would personally much rather play in the states regardless of taxes.

The issues is the NHL tried to level the playing field. And screwed it up and needs to fix the system they made

Again this is a false statement and a lie.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhlpa-negotiator-no-bettman-fan-1.466012

A work stoppage has been in effect since Bettman recommended league owners lock out their players once the current collective bargaining agreement expired Sept. 15.

Bettman contends that the NHL needs "cost certainty" because 20 teams operate in the red and the league has lost $1.8 billion US over the life of the last CBA.

He also maintains that 75 per cent of league revenues go to covering player costs.

Noted Saskin: "The owners tend to overstate their losses and understate their revenues."

Bettman's solution is a salary cap, which the NHLPA steadfastly refuses to accept.

 

[Legion34]

Again this is a false statement and a lie.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhlpa-negotiator-no-bettman-fan-1.466012

Ummmmm what?
“A salary cap” is not this specific model of cap. How he implemented it was to achieve parity. I already posted multiple articles where he says that was the goal of his implementation style.

Again.

If all 6 canadian teams got 98 million and All 6 no state tax teams got a 78 million cap.

Is that certain? Are you ok with that?

 

[Legion34]

In the US you don't necessarily withhold taxes against all of your salary and get a refund. Your withholding rate is an estimate of what your post-deduction tax liability will be. That way you don't give the government an interest free loan on your money.

High earners like pro athletes presumably also make extensive use of corporations which allow them to mitigate their tax bills in ways not available to regular employees. Things such as training expenses, unreimbursed travel, lawyers, and possibly even depreciation on homes and vehicles become an expense of Johnny Hockey Inc. Their taxes are not withheld in the same way.

Sure. But that’s not the same in law.

You have to be technically taxed on your income. You have to pay that tax.

Then you can get a refund/reduction based on specifics of your case. But you were actually taxed on that income. Even if no money changed hands because you did it all on the same day. You still were by law taxed

Right?

The government taxes you and you call it reduced or even. Or even a refund.

I got refunds when I was In school. I still was taxed the exact same rate as everyone else.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Ummmmm what?
“A salary cap” is not this specific model of cap. How he implemented it was to achieve parity. I already posted multiple articles where he says that was the goal of his implementation style.

Again.

If all 6 canadian teams got 98 million and All 6 no state tax teams got a 78 million cap.

Is that certain? Are you ok with that?

Pairity in that sense did not mean teams having access to the same thing, it meant pairity between salary costs and revenue. Holy shit.

 

[Legion34]

Pairity in that sense did not mean teams having access to the same thing, it meant pairity between salary costs and revenue. Holy shit.

No. He specifically mentions the competitive balance that is caused by the equal caps he enforced. He mentions different teams in the playoffs and exciting races to the end. It takes 3 seconds to google

You are wrong. Just let it go

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Ummmmm what?
“A salary cap” is not this specific model of cap. How he implemented it was to achieve parity. I already posted multiple articles where he says that was the goal of his implementation style.

Again.

If all 6 canadian teams got 98 million and All 6 no state tax teams got a 78 million cap.

Is that certain? Are you ok with that?

Also WTF are you talking about? Are you refusing to listen or just blatantly not reading. Cost Certainty and the Cap were implemented to reign in wages and tie them to revenue. The owners and league argued that pairity between the two was mandatory to keep the league going. The players argued this was just the owners being greedy. The Cap was NOT INTENDED FOR FAIRNESS. It was solely created for owners to reign in costs, health of the league surviving, and owners to make more millions on top of their millions. Competitive pairity is a by-product of that. Why is this so damn hard for you to understand?

No. He specifically mentions the competitive balance that is caused by the equal caps he enforced. It’ takes 3 seconds to google

You are wrong. Just let it go

BY PRODUCT. He also said consistently the Salary Cap would lower ticket prices, but since 2013 ticket prices are 100%+ higher than before. God damn, are you just void of critical thinking?

 

[Legion34]

Also WTF are you talking about? Are you refusing to listen or just blatantly not reading. Cost Certainty and the Cap were implemented to reign in wages and tie them to revenue. The owners and league argued that pairity between the two was mandatory to keep the league going. The players argued this was just the owners being greedy. The Cap was NOT INTENDED FOR FAIRNESS. It was solely created for owners to reign in costs, health of the league surviving, and owners to make more millions on top of their millions. Competitive pairity is a by-product of that. Why is this so damn hard for you to understand?

Because it wasn’t a bi product. It was literally part of the system. You can have cost certainty without equal caps.

Bettman openly says it in plenty of interviews and articles. That his cap (compared to other caps) created a competitive balance.

You are wrong. There are more than one cap in sports. There are more than one possibility . There were more than one objective.

And making a total league cap of 50% of hrr did not need to lead to the specific cap he imposed for parity

Again.

Would it be technically possible for different teams to have different caps as long as the total league salaries was 50% hrr

I’m not sure if you know what by product means

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Because it wasn’t a bi product. It was literally part of the system. You can have cost certainty without equal caps.

Bettman openly says it in plenty of interviews and articles. That his cap (compared to other caps) created a competitive balance.

You are wrong. There are more than one cap. There were more than one objective.

And making a total league cap of 50% of hrr did not need to lead to the specific cap he imposed for parity

Again.

Would it be technically possible for different teams to have different caps as long as the total league salaries was 50% hrr

I’m not sure if you know what by product means

Technically yes, feasible no. There are way too many factors to include to manage 700+ players accounts. You think if this was an issue, this would be front and centre with ownership? Here's a thought, I will delete my account in 2 years when the CBA is up if they table a discussion on No-State Tax places having an advantage. If they don't you can delete yours.

 

[Legion34]

Technically yes, feasible no. There are way too many factors to include to manage 700+ players accounts. You think if this was an issue, this would be front and centre with ownership? Here's a thought, I will delete my account in 2 years when the CBA is up if they table a discussion on No-State Tax places having an advantage. If they don't you can delete yours.

1.) You don’t know that it’s not. We were told LTIR didn’t matter last year. Now it does.

2.) why is it not feasible? Why would it be hard to have a different cap for different teams moving forward?

what’s so hard about it. It’s not 700 players. The players get 50% of hrr. There is nothing that says it has to be divided equally.

you are switching from
It was a biproduct to the owners don’t care.

If the NHL only cared about cost certainty. Why do all teams have to be the same?

 

[Legion34]

Technically yes, feasible no. There are way too many factors to include to manage 700+ players accounts. You think if this was an issue, this would be front and centre with ownership? Here's a thought, I will delete my account in 2 years when the CBA is up if they table a discussion on No-State Tax places having an advantage. If they don't you can delete yours.

Why isn’t that feasible?

The cap just jumped 144 million. Keep the 6 no state tax teams at 83.5. And spread the 144 million among the 26 remaining.

It’s not hard.
Why wasn’t that in the cap at the time. Rich teams wanted to pay more. Why not let them? As long as it was 50% hrr. What’s wrong with that

Why is it. Not certain? That’s all that matters right?

 

[kook10]

Sure. But that’s not the same in law.

You have to be technically taxed on your income. You have to pay that tax.

Then you can get a refund/reduction based on specifics of your case. But you were actually taxed on that income. Even if no money changed hands because you did it all on the same day. You still were by law taxed

Right?

The government taxes you and you call it reduced or even. Or even a refund.

I got refunds when I was In school. I still was taxed the exact same rate as everyone else.

Not necessarily under a corporation/business entity scenario

 

[Legion34]

Not necessarily under a corporation/business entity scenario

Ok then the NHL could regulate that and say you are a person and not a corporation. I mean if Johnny gaudreau inc dies on ice. He cant sue. Does the NHl have to provide a safe working environment for a corporation?

Corporations can’t die/be murdered/injured. Need meals/hotels etc.

The nhl could just refuse to hire corporations as third party contractors.

Again if this is possible. Ok. Then work the cap out. But NHL agents players gms and accountants have all talked about and given breaks based on the taxes. So I don’t think that would affect it.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Also WTF are you talking about? Are you refusing to listen or just blatantly not reading. Cost Certainty and the Cap were implemented to reign in wages and tie them to revenue. The owners and league argued that pairity between the two was mandatory to keep the league going. The players argued this was just the owners being greedy. The Cap was NOT INTENDED FOR FAIRNESS. It was solely created for owners to reign in costs, health of the league surviving, and owners to make more millions on top of their millions. Competitive pairity is a by-product of that. Why is this so damn hard for you to understand?


BY PRODUCT. He also said consistently the Salary Cap would lower ticket prices, but since 2013 ticket prices are 100%+ higher than before. God damn, are you just void of critical thinking?

It literally is a useless debate, I swear doesn’t read what posters are typing.

All I’m getting is, why can’t the leafs have more cap money,

 

[kook10]

Ok then the NHL could regulate that and say you are a person and not a corporation. I mean if Johnny gaudreau inc dies on ice. He cant sue. Does the NHl have to provide a safe working environment for a corporation?

Corporations can’t die/be murdered/injured. Need meals/hotels etc.

The nhl could just refuse to hire corporations as third party contractors.

Again if this is possible. Ok. Then work the cap out. But NHL agents players gms and accountants have all talked about and given breaks based on the taxes. So I don’t think that would affect it.

Usually workman's comp is covered by the employer's payroll, but can be presented by the corp as well. This is not an exotic arrangement. I work in film and tv - virtually all writers , directors and actors operate as loan-out corporations. I assume it is the case with pro athletes as well.

 

[Golden_Jet]

what’s so hard about it. It’s not 700 players. The players get 50% of hrr. There is nothing that says it has to be divided equally.

The players 50% share has to be divided equally amongst all teams, that’s literally part of the system.

 

[Legion34]

It literally is a useless debate, I swear doesn’t read what posters are typing.

All I’m getting is, why can’t the leafs have more cap money

There is no debate. NHL players gms agents accountants have all said that no state tax teams have an advantage.

There are calculators to prove just how big it is.

Bettman has openly said his specific cap is implemented to create competitive balance.

There are random conspiracy theories about RCAs because of basketball and random fake accountants.

No one has provided a single piece of testimony other than me refuting the clesr
Advantage

 

[Legion34]

Usually workman's comp is covered by the employer's payroll, but can be presented by the corp as well. This is not an exotic arrangement. I work in film and tv - virtually all writers , directors and actors operate as loan-out corporations. I assume it is the case with pro athletes as well.

It could be. I have listened to hundreds of hours on this and I have never once heard this as a possibility.

The NHL is governed by the CBA and you would have to be recognized by them. I don’t know if it’s in there. I can’t say for sure. I think it changes anything as nhl agents gms accountants and media say no state tax teams have an advantage and actually take less money.

But it’s interesting. I will see if I can find something.

You brought something new to the table. So thanks

The players 50% share has to be divided equally amongst all teams, that’s literally part of the system.

That’s not required for cost certainty.
that’s the point.

They made that part of the system for parity.

Now do you finally get it? It was part of the goal
Of the original cap. They specifically made the rule.

If it wasn’t a key part of the system. They wouldn’t need to do it

I think you finally get it. You just proved it to yourself that parity is part of the system

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Why isn’t that feasible?

The cap just jumped 144 million. Keep the 6 no state tax teams at 83.5. And spread the 144 million among the 26 remaining.

It’s not hard.
Why wasn’t that in the cap at the time. Rich teams wanted to pay more. Why not let them? As long as it was 50% hrr. What’s wrong with that

Why is it. Not certain? That’s all that matters right?

So you're too scared to delete your account? Put your money where your mouth is.

It could be. I have listened to hundreds of hours on this and I have never once heard this as a possibility.

The NHL is governed by the CBA and you would have to be recognized by them. I don’t know if it’s in there. I can’t say for sure. I think it changes anything as nhl agents gms accountants and media say no state tax teams have an advantage and actually take less money.

But it’s interesting. I will see if I can find something.

You brought something new to the table. So thanks



That’s not required for cost certainty.
that’s the point.

They made that part of the system for parity.

Now do you finally get it? It was part of the goal
Of the original cap. They specifically made the rule.

If it wasn’t a key part of the system. They wouldn’t need to do it

I think you finally get it. You just proved it to yourself that parity is part of the system

Yes it f***ing is. Do you not understand words?

 

[Legion34]

So you're too scared to delete your account? Put your money where your mouth is.


Yes it f***ing is. Do you not understand words?

Nope. You just admitted that some teams having different caps as long as all 32 teams got to 50% hrr in total is also technically possible. Therefore parity was not required.

It was not a byproduct (incidental and unintended consequence) but an actual core
Rule.

You absolutely could have different hits/buying cap etc.

Bettman wanted parity. So he chose this route.

He said so himself. So did Lemieux. It’s well known and documented

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Nope. You just admitted that some teams having different caps as long as all 32 teams got to 50% hrr in total is also technically possible. Therefore parity was not required.

It was not a byproduct (incidental and unintended consequence) but an actual core
Rule.

You absolutely could have different hits/buying cap etc.

Bettman wanted parity. So he chose this route.

He said so himself. So did Lemieux. It’s well known and documented

How idiotic is it to think that the owners locked out because the league wanted parity. Like that is so ridiculously asinine it's laughable. Yeah sure, the owners locked out players because they thought the league wasn't balanced in competitiveness, so they created a hard cap to balance it so it was fair competition for everyone...what's the weather like in Narnia?

 

[Legion34]

How idiotic is it to think that the owners locked out because the league wanted parity. Like that is so ridiculously asinine it's laughable. Yeah sure, the owners locked out players because they thought the league wasn't balanced in competitiveness, so they created a hard cap to balance it so it was fair competition for everyone...what's the weather like in Narnia?

No one said that’s why they locked out.

First
-no human decision beyond 3 years old is based on one thing
Just like players don’t ONLY for the most part pick teams based on taxes/weather/family/media/hometown.

You don’t pick your house solely on sq ft.
This is childish thinking. No billion dollar organization wants just one thing.

The owners wanted many things. Absolutely they wanted cost certainty. For sure. No question. But they also wanted parity. They wanted teams to be able to compete with the big market teams. Of course they did. Lemieux said it in great detail. Bettman said it.

IF all you wanted was cost certainty. You had it. Ultimately. If you only had 1 million to spend. You had one million to spend. You could ice a team. It would just probably be terrible. You can find 700 people to play hockey for peanuts.

But that’s no good for a league to have 6 great teams. So they also as part of the cost certain league. Instituted parity by equal caps.

It’s not a Bi product. Because it’s in the founding rules.

You can easily make a 50% hrr with unequal caps if parity is not a goal.

You say parity isn’t a goal but won’t even in fake land say you would accept 98/78 Canadian/no state tax split.

They are equally certain and acceptable In your model. Not in my parity model

You agree with me. You just like being wrong I think

 

[dekelikekocur]

There is no debate. NHL players gms agents accountants have all said that no state tax teams have an advantage.

There are calculators to prove just how big it is.

Bettman has openly said his specific cap is implemented to create competitive balance.

There are random conspiracy theories about RCAs because of basketball and random fake accountants.

No one has provided a single piece of testimony other than me refuting the clesr
Advantage

So your claim is, and this requires quotes from all 735ish NHL players, 32 GMs, god knows how many accounts and agents indicating this.

So no, not all, a few, stop latching onto outliers thinking they're the norm.

It's a non issue that you're whining about. Even 2 year olds give up the tantrum eventually, learn from them.

 

[Jack Burton]

Games are paid based on where you play. 41 games a year you'll be paying your home state income tax. The other 41 will be based on where game ins played. So I did a calculation on what that actually ammounts to. For example, Dallas players (no state tax) would still pay tax based on away games.

	Tax %	2 Million	5 Million	10 Million	15 Million
Dallas	2.79%	$55,800	$139,500	$279,000	$418,500
Nashville	2.79%	$55,800	$139,500	$279,000	$418,500
Florida	3.18%	$63,600	$159,000	$318,000	$477,000
Tampa Bay	3.18%	$63,600	$159,000	$318,000	$477,000
Vegas	3.50%	$70,000	$175,000	$350,000	$525,000
Philadelphia	4.33%	$86,600	$216,500	$433,000	$649,500
Pittsburgh	4.33%	$86,600	$216,500	$433,000	$649,500
Colorado	4.59%	$91,800	$229,500	$459,000	$688,500
Utah	4.69%	$93,800	$234,500	$469,000	$703,500
St.Louis	4.72%	$94,400	$236,000	$472,000	$708,000
Chicago	4.82%	$96,400	$241,000	$482,000	$723,000
Carolina	4.92%	$98,400	$246,000	$492,000	$738,000
Detroit	4.92%	$98,400	$246,000	$492,000	$738,000
Columbus	5.51%	$110,200	$275,500	$551,000	$826,500
Seattle	6.37%	$127,400	$318,500	$637,000	$955,500
Minnesota	6.83%	$136,600	$341,500	$683,000	$1,024,500
Boston	6.87%	$137,400	$343,500	$687,000	$1,030,500
Ottawa	6.94%	$138,800	$347,000	$694,000	$1,041,000
Toronto	6.94%	$138,800	$347,000	$694,000	$1,041,000
New Jersey	7.48%	$149,600	$374,000	$748,000	$1,122,000
New York I	7.54%	$150,800	$377,000	$754,000	$1,131,000
New York R	7.54%	$150,800	$377,000	$754,000	$1,131,000
Washington	7.54%	$150,800	$377,000	$754,000	$1,131,000
Buffalo	7.65%	$153,000	$382,500	$765,000	$1,147,500
Calgary	8.01%	$160,200	$400,500	$801,000	$1,201,500
Edmonton	8.01%	$160,200	$400,500	$801,000	$1,201,500
Winnipeg	8.28%	$165,600	$414,000	$828,000	$1,242,000
Anaheim	8.95%	$179,000	$447,500	$895,000	$1,342,500
Los Angeles	8.95%	$179,000	$447,500	$895,000	$1,342,500
San Jose	8.95%	$179,000	$447,500	$895,000	$1,342,500
Vancouver	10.26%	$205,200	$513,000	$1,026,000	$1,539,000
Montreal	12.10%	$242,000	$605,000	$1,210,000	$1,815,000

Note:
USA federal tax is 37%, where as in Canada it's 33%. For this reason, I lowered the Canadian teams taxes by 4% to make up the difference. Keep in mind the table below is just State taxes, so players still need to pay way more taxes than that - but this is a half-decent representation of the difference from one team to another, as federal is across the board.

Below is the full table if you want to see the more in-depth numbers. I added some more notes under it as well.

Home (41) Division (13) In-Conf (12) Out-Conf (16) Average 2 Million 5 Million 10 Million 15 Million Anaheim 13.30% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 8.95% $179,000 $447,500 $895,000 $1,342,500 Boston 9.00% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 6.87% $137,400 $343,500 $687,000 $1,030,500 Buffalo 10.90% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 7.65% $153,000 $382,500 $765,000 $1,147,500 Calgary 11.00% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 8.01% $160,200 $400,500 $801,000 $1,201,500 Carolina 4.50% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 4.92% $98,400 $246,000 $492,000 $738,000 Chicago 4.95% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 4.82% $96,400 $241,000 $482,000 $723,000 Colorado 4.40% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 4.59% $91,800 $229,500 $459,000 $688,500 Columbus 3.50% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 5.51% $110,200 $275,500 $551,000 $826,500 Dallas 0.00% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 2.79% $55,800 $139,500 $279,000 $418,500 Detroit 4.25% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 4.92% $98,400 $246,000 $492,000 $738,000 Edmonton 11.00% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 8.01% $160,200 $400,500 $801,000 $1,201,500 Florida 0.00% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 3.18% $63,600 $159,000 $318,000 $477,000 Los Angeles 13.30% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 8.95% $179,000 $447,500 $895,000 $1,342,500 Minnesota 9.85% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 6.83% $136,600 $341,500 $683,000 $1,024,500 Montreal 21.75% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 12.10% $242,000 $605,000 $1,210,000 $1,815,000 Nashville 0.00% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 2.79% $55,800 $139,500 $279,000 $418,500 New Jersey 10.75% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 7.48% $149,600 $374,000 $748,000 $1,122,000 New York I 10.90% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 7.54% $150,800 $377,000 $754,000 $1,131,000 New York R 10.90% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 7.54% $150,800 $377,000 $754,000 $1,131,000 Ottawa 9.16% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 6.94% $138,800 $347,000 $694,000 $1,041,000 Philadelphia 3.07% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 4.33% $86,600 $216,500 $433,000 $649,500 Pittsburgh 3.07% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 4.33% $86,600 $216,500 $433,000 $649,500 San Jose 13.30% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 8.95% $179,000 $447,500 $895,000 $1,342,500 Seattle 7.00% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 6.37% $127,400 $318,500 $637,000 $955,500 St.Louis 4.70% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 4.72% $94,400 $236,000 $472,000 $708,000 Tampa Bay 0.00% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 3.18% $63,600 $159,000 $318,000 $477,000 Toronto 9.16% 8.03% 7.20% 7.96% 6.94% $138,800 $347,000 $694,000 $1,041,000 Utah 4.65% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 4.69% $93,800 $234,500 $469,000 $703,500 Vancouver 16.50% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 10.26% $205,200 $513,000 $1,026,000 $1,539,000 Vegas 0.00% 10.68% 7.96% 7.20% 3.50% $70,000 $175,000 $350,000 $525,000 Washington 10.90% 7.20% 7.20% 7.96% 7.54% $150,800 $377,000 $754,000 $1,131,000 Winnipeg 13.40% 5.24% 7.96% 7.20% 8.28% $165,600 $414,000 $828,000 $1,242,000 Some notes: - Home tax numbers taken from Turbotax. - I realise this isn't perfect. For example, single people pay a different rate vs married with children. That and this is based on their entire income, but the first ~200k is often in a lower bracket. It's just a rough guide. - Schedules are based on 41 home games, 13 divisional games, 12 inner-conference games, and 16 outer-conference games. The 'average' tax column is based on this (41xHome + 13xDiv + 12xIn + 16xOut) - Other average such as 'Division' is just an average of every team in that category.

NEWS FLASH TO ALL CANADIAN CITIZENS:

If you are out of the country for 6 months - less 1 day- you will not have to pay your federal income tax.

If your a canadian citizen who plays on a NHL team in canada then it's in your best interest to miss the playoffs.

 

[Golden_Jet]

It could be. I have listened to hundreds of hours on this and I have never once heard this as a possibility.

The NHL is governed by the CBA and you would have to be recognized by them. I don’t know if it’s in there. I can’t say for sure. I think it changes anything as nhl agents gms accountants and media say no state tax teams have an advantage and actually take less money.

But it’s interesting. I will see if I can find something.

You brought something new to the table. So thanks



That’s not required for cost certainty.
that’s the point.

They made that part of the system for parity.

Now do you finally get it? It was part of the goal
Of the original cap. They specifically made the rule.

If it wasn’t a key part of the system. They wouldn’t need to do it

I think you finally get it. You just proved it to yourself that parity is part of the system

Like you’ve been told 1000x already
The cap was about cost certainty for owners, parity has become a by-product of fixing the broken system , to some degree.

But you fail to acknowledge it.
Cost certainty was literally a buzz word at the time.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Will Bettman stick to the demand for cost certainty, a strategy the union said would cancel the season

Bettman was lauded as one of the best in 2005 for his role in bringing "cost certainty" to the NHL

The other chore was to get 'cost certainty' regarding rising player salaries

In locking out the players, he got the cost certainty that was desired

he got the cost certainty that was desired and that’s something other sports don’t have.”
— Steve Ryan, former Pittsburgh Penguinspresident and former NHL Enterprises president/COO

The league has said it doesn't believe in a luxury tax because
it's not predictable and doesn't guarantee cost certainty

Rather, Bettman said, the league has proposed a linkage between revenues and player salaries, which he refers to as "cost certainty."

At the heart of the CBA debate is what NHL commissioner Gary Bettman has called cost certainty,

Bettman and the league office wanted to implement “cost certainty,” a system that linked player salaries to the league’s revenue

Bob Goodenow, the executive director of the NHLPA, called the idea of “cost certainty” a euphemism for a salary cap,