Idea re taxes and salary cap

[Legion34]

Your premise is flawed.

The league didn't create fairness with the cap. They created cost certainty for the owners.

If it were about creating fairness then teams would have to spend the exact same amount.

“parity” was absolutely a selling point. It wasn’t just about cost certainty. If it was then other teams could spend different amounts as long as it adds up to 50% of HRR

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

“parity” was absolutely a selling point. It wasn’t just about cost certainty. If it was then other teams could spend different amounts as long as it adds up to 50% of HRR

different amounts like the difference between the cap floor and ceiling?

 

[Legion34]

different amounts like the difference between the cap floor and ceiling?

sure. They absolutely could. IF there was no parity requirement. Why not?

As long as the players salaries are 50% of HRR at the end of the day. There is nothing that would preclude some teams having higher cap.

 

[ClydeLee]

crying about unfair advantages when something hurts your team but ok when it helps.

you get how hypocritical and embarrassing that is right? You understand how foolish this is

And thats exactly what we have here with several, mostly Leafs fans, going on and on about big markets being disadvantaged when really it's just a lack of having the total control they would prefer to have.

 

[Golden_Jet]

you can’t be serious. The whole reason we have a salary cap is because other teams can’t market their team.

Big market teams keep the lights on.

Small market teams ask for

1.) cap
2.) money because they. STILL can’t market their teams.

crying about unfair advantages when something hurts your team but ok when it helps.

you get how hypocritical and embarrassing that is right? You understand how foolish this is

Why not fix the exchange difference , that would be more fair for Canadian teams?

 

[End on a Hinote]

3 NY teams

You know very well Buffalo is South Southern Ontario

 

[kgboomer]

“parity” was absolutely a selling point. It wasn’t just about cost certainty. If it was then other teams could spend different amounts as long as it adds up to 50% of HRR

I never heard the owners of the Nordiques, Jets and all the others at the first lockout wanting parity. It was always the same things: Players salaries are getting too high, they're rising too fast, we need a system to cap the player's salary. It was always about cost certainty then, it still was in 2004. And never heard in the last lockout they wanted more parity either.

 

[Legion34]

I never heard the owners of the Nordiques, Jets and all the others at the first lockout wanting parity. It was always the same things: Players salaries are getting too high, they're rising too fast, we need a system to cap the player's salary. It was always about cost certainty then, it still was in 2004. And never heard in the last lockout they wanted more parity either.

you must have missed the memo then. It has been discussed a million times.

Cost certainty does not require parity. There is no reason to make the same cap for every team if it’s not about parity.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

sure. They absolutely could. IF there was no parity requirement. Why not?

As long as the players salaries are 50% of HRR at the end of the day. There is nothing that would preclude some teams having higher cap.

But there is no parity requirement beyond the cap floor and ceiling, which forces low spending franchises to ice a team that at least remotely resembles and NHL caliber roster.

There is nothing to preclude some teams having a higher cap because the main goal is not fairness between teams. It's cost certainty for the owners.

Why would the league get into the minutiae of regional taxes when they allow a $20 million leeway in what the franchises can spend? The goal was never to make things as fair as possible.

 

[kgboomer]

you must have missed the memo then. It has been discussed a million times.

Cost certainty does not require parity. There is no reason to make the same cap for every team if it’s not about parity.

How much parity do you read in all of this? It was always about the $$$ or getting new arenas to generate more $$$. If owners really wanted more parity, it would have been solved a long time ago. You wouldn't see teams in the basement of the standings for years, and missing the playoff for close to 10 years. They care mainly about the % of the salaries they're paying the players, and how much they're getting back if they're paying too much.

SMALL-CITY NHL FRANCHISES CRYING POOR, BUT ARE THEY?

 

[Golden_Jet]

Why not fix the exchange difference , that would be more fair for Canadian teams?

hey @Legion34 what about this

 

[triggrman]

How would you even go about this? Let's take Matthews, who gets paid most of his salary in signing bonuses in the summer where his main residence is in Arizona, who has no state income tax. How would his count? In the US you can write off so many things, does each write off count against the cap? You also get deductions for state sales tax, property taxes etc, how are those handled? And then we're not even getting into you have to pay taxes on game day checks where you played the game so now you have to do this entire thing individually for each person for each team for each game played. How does that work?

Also please stop saying there are places with no income tax. Everyone has income tax, they might not have a state income tax but they have federal income taxes. Also states with no income tax tend to have higher property, sales, wheel and business taxes.

The government is always going to take more than their share, no matter where you live, it's just how they collect it.

 

[nbwingsfan]

And thats exactly what we have here with several, mostly Leafs fans, going on and on about big markets being disadvantaged when really it's just a lack of having the total control they would prefer to have.

Toronto still couldnt come close to a Cup even when they could spend as much as they want so I really dont understand why they're complaining so much

 

[DistantThunderRep]

This thread, like all of them divulged into one user who is doing this...

 

[4Twenty]

How many times have the Panthers made the playoffs since the cap became a thing?

Surely if the state taxation was such an advantage they’d have had some semblance of success but nope.

Vegas and Tampa draw because they can give players money, competitive team, the ability to blend into society, weather, cheap housing.

People just seem to be jealous of well run Tampa and Vegas.

 

[ClydeLee]

How many times have the Panthers made the playoffs since the cap became a thing?

Surely if the state taxation was such an advantage they’d have had some semblance of success but nope.

Vegas and Tampa draw because they can give players money, competitive team, the ability to blend into society, weather, cheap housing.

People just seem to be jealous of well run Tampa and Vegas.

There's a mix of the well run. It often happens to be cup favorites who couldn't win yet that gets the lets keep this together discount deals. You do get the occasional great post win deals, but usually side pieces.

Once you win a cup, those guys with a cup on the resume begin asking for that extra boost that their value carries. It seems to be the hot topic now because it conveniently is teams like Tampa or Vegas making that status. But in thr 2010s teams like the Sharks or Ducks were seen as getting extensions on solid value deals because it's that near cup winner path. But just between them LA couldn't pull that since their players did have the cups to bargain for more with.

 

[End of Line]

What if the teams that were in high tax states/provinces were allowed dispensation for a certain number of contracts to add a certain amount to their cap? Say three contracts, they could add 250k each to cover additional taxes (which they would then pay the player presumably)?

How Much Do NHL Players Really Make? Part 2: Taxes

Throw some shit into the harbor as a protest and dress up as a fan of another team while you do so.

 

[majormajor]

What if the teams that were in high tax states/provinces were allowed dispensation for a certain number of contracts to add a certain amount to their cap? Say three contracts, they could add 250k each to cover additional taxes (which they would then pay the player presumably)?

How Much Do NHL Players Really Make? Part 2: Taxes

A simpler, more straightforward, and total fix is to just have the salary cap be on post-tax salary, not pre-tax salary. Solves your problem right there.

I don't know why the Canadian, Californian, and Northeast teams aren't lobbying for that, though perhaps they are and I just don't know about it.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

A simpler, more straightforward, and total fix is to just have the salary cap be on post-tax salary, not pre-tax salary. Solves your problem right there.

I don't know why the Canadian, Californian, and Northeast teams aren't lobbying for that, though perhaps they are and I just don't know about it.

Realistically, if you thought they were, you basically described over half the league and the majority of the biggest teams in the league. Do you think if this was such a big deal to them, they wouldn't implement the simplest solution which you proposed?

The only ones really complaining are fans, because it's our nature to dissect every facet of the sport we love. If it wasn't for hockey, there is absolutely zero f***ing reason I would know the income tax rates in a foreign country by freaking state and every province in my own country.

 

[majormajor]

Realistically, if you thought they were, you basically described over half the league and the majority of the biggest teams in the league. Do you think if this was such a big deal to them, they wouldn't implement the simplest solution which you proposed?

The only ones really complaining are fans, because it's our nature to dissect every facet of the sport we love. If it wasn't for hockey, there is absolutely zero f***ing reason I would know the income tax rates in a foreign country by freaking state and every province in my own country.

It would be a zero sum change leaguewide, so no it's not likely a majority of teams. Bettman and co. hold sway if it's not a clear majority of clubs pushing something.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

It would be a zero sum change leaguewide, so no it's not likely a majority of teams. Bettman and co. hold sway if it's not a clear majority of clubs pushing something.

It's not a zero sum change. There are glaring factors of why doing money after tax is problematic.

A real basic one is the whole league would have to do a refactor of the cap, and Toronto will still cry like babies because their GM doesn't understand the word "Negotiate" when it came to their core.

 

[majormajor]

It's not a zero sum change. There are glaring factors of why doing money after tax is problematic.

A real basic one is the whole league would have to do a refactor of the cap, and Toronto will still cry like babies because their GM doesn't understand the word "Negotiate" when it came to their core.

Re-setting the cap is not a serious obstacle. That's easy. Transition it over like 5 years or something. No idea what you're talking about with respect to the Leafs.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Re-setting the cap is not a serious obstacle. That's easy. Transition it over like 5 years or something. No idea what you're talking about with respect to the Leafs.

Even if you took their actual dollars after tax in the city, they are still paying a huge amount in comparison to most teams.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Realistically, if you thought they were, you basically described over half the league and the majority of the biggest teams in the league. Do you think if this was such a big deal to them, they wouldn't implement the simplest solution which you proposed?

The only ones really complaining are fans, because it's our nature to dissect every facet of the sport we love. If it wasn't for hockey, there is absolutely zero f***ing reason I would know the income tax rates in a foreign country by freaking state and every province in my own country.

Exactly.

I still don't follow why the league should wade into local tax differences among franchises to make things "fair" when they allow a $20 million spread in what teams can spend on players in a given year. The goal has never been absolute fairness.

 

[Spazkat]

Why not fix the exchange difference , that would be more fair for Canadian teams?

What "exchange difference" are you talking about? Players are paid in USD which is actually worth 1.337CAD atm so... not sure what you're getting at with this

A simpler, more straightforward, and total fix is to just have the salary cap be on post-tax salary, not pre-tax salary. Solves your problem right there.

I don't know why the Canadian, Californian, and Northeast teams aren't lobbying for that, though perhaps they are and I just don't know about it.

Odd that its almost exclusively Toronto fans bringing this up eh?