An idea to remove the cap advantage for no tax states

[Beezeral]

What's the cap change for teams that play in attractive cities? What's the cap change if you sign a FA at a discount who grew up a fan of your team? What if he had bed sheets with your team's logo on them?

Stop crying and manage your organization better.

 

[Dr Quincy]

A lot of talk lately about certain teams without income tax having an unfair advantage with the salary cap as they're able to sign players at a discount. Not much talk about how to fix it but I have one fairly simple idea (in theory). Fans of these teams won't like it but how about no tax teams don't get the cap increase that is going to be taking place over the next few seasons? It's expected to go past $100 million in 3 seasons or so, well how about no tax teams stay at $88 million or at least have a reduced cap increase compared to every other team.

Eventually the league settles on a certain percentage, whether it's 15-25% less than other teams - at least this advantage will be taken away from them. It might be complicated to have two different salary caps but perhaps its worth a try. Thoughts?

Also, build domes over all cities with an NHL team so that no team gets a benefit from having a climate.

And force all players to enroll their kids in NHL owned and run schools.

 

[JPT]

Also, build domes over all cities with an NHL team so that no team gets a benefit from having a climate.

And force all players to enroll their kids in NHL owned and run schools.

Going to have to have the exact same amenities at each arena/training facility. Honestly we might as well go ahead and have the same strength and conditioning program across the board.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Also, build domes over all cities with an NHL team so that no team gets a benefit from having a climate.

And force all players to enroll their kids in NHL owned and run schools.

Yeah but the dome would require higher taxes!

 

[Kaners PPGs]

Kucherov makes 9.5m and the contract went into effect in the 19-20 season, not sure how you're getting "under market value" from that.

So that is your response? I'm goint off the top of my head. Besides, Kuch had 128 points in 18-19. Kane and Toews already signed 10.5 M deals 4 seasons earlier. Seemed at the time that he left money on the table. My bigger point was to do a comprehensive study on this. I said it "feels" that tax-free states get an advantage with under-market contract with star players. Maybe it isn't that big of an advantage.

Is this actually a serious post? You realize that players paid taxes prior to the salary cap, right? Like state, local, and federal taxes didn't get added when the cap went in. For players that are concerned about after tax income, they were concerned about it before the cap as well.

The expansion draft was something brand new, and Vegas played GMs apprehension towards losing players perfectly. Tax differences are not new.

Pasta has a pretty reasonable contract. Bergeron signed a reasonable contract. Marchand has a reasonable contract.

Well it's incredibly common, you are working from a conclusion and then using that to drive your evidence. Over the last few pages, multiple posters and posts have provided hard evidence that tax differences are, at best, marginal to team success.

I did say it "feels" like the tax-free state teams are getting an advantage and a study needs to done. I'd be surprised if it was proven to not be an advantage for those teams.

 

[Kaners PPGs]

Strongly agree and disagree with the bolded.

"This isn't hard to do" - 100% false. Tax law is incredibly nuanced, and you can't make assumptions about YOUR taxes and project it on NHL players. You have to be an expert on international tax law, and understand the local requirements for 32 seperate municipalities, which can have VERY different requirements. Spend 5 minutes looking on Youtube and you can identify SME's discussing tax differences that are HUGELY impactful.

"This is about fairness" - One of the secondary benefits of the CBA with the hard cap was to improve competitive balance. The goal was NEVER to achieve 100% parity. I say that because if it was, every team would be required to spend to exactly the midpoint of the cap, and every team would also have limitations spend on scouting and coaching/development staffs. The CBA understood that there were significant external impacts that impact the league, and it doesn't try to address all of those factors. Some things you can't distill down to dollars and cents. Things like general "attitude" towards certain locations due to a combination of climate, cost of living, media coverage, night life, travel requirements for geographic location, etc. Some things you can distill down to dollars and cents - front-loading contracts with signing bonuses, potential for endorsements, etc. The NHL/NHLPA put all of those into "the juice isn't worth the squeeze" bucket, and everyone knew that it was incumbent on the organizations to deal with those the best that could.

The issue we have is that some people in this thread believed what some shady people published where they intentionally and knowingly DOUBLED the impact of the no-income tax states. There is an advantage - but we're probably talking about roughly 5% in most cases. It should be noted that there are some other differences (CAN highest federal tax rate at 33% vs. 37% for the US) that never get brought up in these discussions.

Oh please! Do you also think the LTIR issue can't be solved either?

I think you're the fifth or sixth person to come in talking about how it's a simple fix without proving there is an actual problem, much less describing their simple fix.

And I also said do a study. I said it "feels like" the tax-free states are getting an advantage. It might not be as big as an advantage as it appears. lol- no I'm not going to spend a lot of energy coming up with some hypothetical fix to post on this forum.

 

[Beezeral]

And I also said do a study. I said it "feels like" the tax-free states are getting an advantage. It might not be as big as an advantage as it appears. lol- no I'm not going to spend a lot of energy coming up with some hypothetical fix to post on this forum.

How would your study analyze John Tavares turning down 13x7 with the Sharks to take 11x7 with the Leafs?

Why don't we really solve the "problem"?

Instead of Free agency, it's an auction system. Highest bidder wins. no matter what. Players play out their contract and become a free agent no matter what. No re-signing's allowed. July 1 becomes one big silent auction where every player whose contract is up can be bid on.

look at that. every advantage is now gone.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Oh please! Do you also think the LTIR issue can't be solved either?


And I also said do a study. I said it "feels like" the tax-free states are getting an advantage. It might not be as big as an advantage as it appears. lol- no I'm not going to spend a lot of energy coming up with some hypothetical fix to post on this forum.

LTIR issue is simple - a team's roster has to be cap compliant before a game can be played for both the regular season and the play-off's.

From a tax situation - there is a ton of nuance and the actual details depend on the individuals tax situation. I'm a CPA, and I think that I could probably come up with a "close enough" calculation of the benefit - but that's pandora's box. Do you also take into account other quantifiable factors? The NHL & NHLPA intentionally excluded factors that they could have included because the CBA was already complicated enough. If the difference is really about 5% (as I would estimate) in most extreme cases for UFA contracts - is that significant enough to justify adding more complexity?

 

[Kaners PPGs]

How would your study analyze John Tavares turning down 13x7 with the Sharks to take 11x7 with the Leafs?

Why don't we really solve the "problem"?

Instead of Free agency, it's an auction system. Highest bidder wins. no matter what. Players play out their contract and become a free agent no matter what. No re-signing's allowed. July 1 becomes one big silent auction where every player whose contract is up can be bid on.

look at that. every advantage is now gone.

Why jump to whataboutisms? This is obviously a nuanced conversation. But if you haven't seen enough undermarket contracts to star players in tax-free states to think it needs to be looked to see if all teams are operating on an equal playing field then I don't think you've been paying attention to contracts the last few seasons.

LTIR issue is simple - a team's roster has to be cap compliant before a game can be played for both the regular season and the play-off's.

From a tax situation - there is a ton of nuance and the actual details depend on the individuals tax situation. I'm a CPA, and I think that I could probably come up with a "close enough" calculation of the benefit - but that's pandora's box. Do you also take into account other quantifiable factors? The NHL & NHLPA intentionally excluded factors that they could have included because the CBA was already complicated enough. If the difference is really about 5% (as I would estimate) in most extreme cases for UFA contracts - is that significant enough to justify adding more complexity?

See as an accountant you can get close enough. I knew smart people could figure it out if they wanted to!

 

[dirtydanglez]

the kings won with one of the highest tax rates. taxes aren't the reason whatever team you root for can't win.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

I did say it "feels" like the tax-free state teams are getting an advantage and a study needs to done. I'd be surprised if it was proven to not be an advantage for those teams.

I posted data earlier in the thread, there is no relationship between effective tax rates and team success.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

So that is your response? I'm goint off the top of my head. Besides, Kuch had 128 points in 18-19. Kane and Toews already signed 10.5 M deals 4 seasons earlier. Seemed at the time that he left money on the table. My bigger point was to do a comprehensive study on this. I said it "feels" that tax-free states get an advantage with under-market contract with star players. Maybe it isn't that big of an advantage.


I did say it "feels" like the tax-free state teams are getting an advantage and a study needs to done. I'd be surprised if it was proven to not be an advantage for those teams.

You're just plain high on the taxes that you can't even use an ounce of critical thinking. Next thing you are going to say some shit about percents or calculators. Or better yet, why don't you say the line? You know "Just base it off net salary".

I posted data earlier in the thread, there is no relationship between effective tax rates and team success.

These people don't like facts and actual data. They need excuses that confirm their beliefs. You are now the devil

Oh please! Do you also think the LTIR issue can't be solved either?

Are you trolling or just not quite there?

You think solving international taxation for millionaires salaries is simple enough....ok genius. Solve the problems. Lay it out. Why do you think not a single Corporation, Business, or Sports League does not even approach or address taxes? Or are you the smartest person on the planet?

 

[Kaners PPGs]

You're just plain high on the taxes that you can't even use an ounce of critical thinking. Next thing you are going to say some shit about percents or calculators. Or better yet, why don't you say the line? You know "Just base it off net salary".


These people don't like facts and actual data. They need excuses that confirm their beliefs. You are now the devil


Are you trolling or just not quite there?

You think solving international taxation for millionaires salaries is simple enough....ok genius. Solve the problems. Lay it out. Why do you think not a single Corporation, Business, or Sports League does not even approach or address taxes? Or are you the smartest person on the planet?

Critical thinking? I'm quite clear in saying that this needs to be studied that it "feels" like it's an advantage. By saying that I'm conceding that I might be wrong but I'd like a deep statistical analysis of this. Solving the problem is not hard if it determined that tax-free states have a tangible advantage. And are you always so abraisive when you don't agree with someone?

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Critical thinking? I'm quite clear in saying that this needs to be studied that it "feels" like it's an advantage. By saying that I'm conceding that I might be wrong but I'd like a deep statistical analysis of this. Solving the problem is not hard if it determined that tax-free states have a tangible advantage. And are you always so abraisive when you don't agree with someone?

Feelings aren't fact, data already exists across all major sports league, that not a single other one complains or deals with it. You are basing your assertion on feelings. Good on you. Go hide behind your "feelings" some more and do an ounce of leg work for yourself.

 

[tucker3434]

Critical thinking? I'm quite clear in saying that this needs to be studied that it "feels" like it's an advantage. By saying that I'm conceding that I might be wrong but I'd like a deep statistical analysis of this. Solving the problem is not hard if it determined that tax-free states have a tangible advantage. And are you always so abraisive when you don't agree with someone?

There’s probably a reason not a single accountant agrees with you on that.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

I do think they could fix it easily if it was a competitive balance problem

But it's not a problem, and you thinking there's an easy solution only highlights how little you know about taxation.

 

[JPT]

But it's not a problem, and you thinking there's an easy solution only highlights how little you know about taxation.

This is never going to end, is it?

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

This is never going to end, is it?

I'm convinced we're arguing with a fleet of regenerating AI bots.

 

[Viqsi]

I'm convinced we're arguing with a fleet of regenerating AI bots.

Start asking questions about the Byzantine Empire and see how they respond.

 

[Kaners PPGs]

I'm convinced we're arguing with a fleet of regenerating AI bots.

Is LTIR and no cap on playoff rosters a problem?

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Is LTIR and no cap on playoff rosters a problem?

Not a problem, no. All teams have access to this loophole.

 

[Ligue]

There’s probably a reason not a single accountant agrees with you on that.

As someone who is pretty well versed in taxes and work with a few tax lawyers/accountants that have multiple high profile NHL players as clients, it would indeed be extremely difficult to implement.

At first glance, the easiest way would be to move over the whole NHL payroll to an incorporated entity by the NHL. You would need all contracts to be pretty much all signing bonuses. Then players would have the opportunity to all have a similar take home pay. Note that I said the opportunity, cause its also gonna depend on where the players actually want to live.

 

[T REX]

20?

lolololol

 

[Pablo El Perro]

I'm convinced we're arguing with a fleet of regenerating AI bots.

Welcome to HFBs

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I have good news - it's not AI bots.

I also have bad news about the number of actual users there are on this site: