Taxes on UFAs signing in Montreal.

[bsl]

im sorry if I’m missing something when I say this, but if the league truly wants parity, then why don’t they make adjustments to the cap based on taxes? How is it fair for Montreal to have the same cap as Vegas, when the state has no tax? That’s an unfair advantage under the cap system. You truly are not playing with the same money when you think about it. To a free agent, it’s more attractive to sign in Vegas because they’ll save on taxes. That could work out to quite a bit of money. Montreal would need to offer more to level the playing field. Why not adjust Vegas cap down and Montreal’s up in this case? I believe there are other States in there as well. It’s not a level playing field.
I’m just speaking financially btw. not climate, history, competitiveness or other attractions.

This has been suggested before. Makes perfect sense. No idea why high tax region teams have not lobbied for this.

The nhl is a small club of 31 owners. They meet every year. This must have come up.

I think it might be that owners in high tax regions have been slow to react.

Molson being the prime example.

This will come up again. A cap does not help Habs. It hurts the club hugely. I’m sick of it.

 

[bsl]

Because there isn't a strong enough push by owners to get it. Even if you had an after-tax cap, the actual taxes players pay is wildly different based on their tax planning. That varies based on counsel, income, nationality, how much they play in each country, etc.

And "true parity" means more than that. True parity means, to start, spending limits along with a cap. In all of the team's operations.

If enough of the owners push for it, it'll happen. But its not really likely any time soon.

Good. It’s not actually player costs alone we are talking about. It is team operation costs total.

 

[bsl]

There will always be an excuse, we can't compete for FA because it's cold and they want to go to California or Florida where it's warm. We can't compete for FA because they don't want to send their kids to French school, etc...

Bottom line is if you have a great organization that treats it players well, and is always in contention players will want to come here.

And for the record the goal of the salary cap was Cost Certainty, that's what the NHL said every day leading up to and during the lockout. Parity was never the primary aim.

I highly doubt that foreign millionaire players have to send their kids to French school unless they want to.

And this is not about player cost. It is about overall ownership cost.

 

[bsl]

You want to stick to dollars, fine.

Endorsement opportunities aren't the same in every city, and that directly impacts money. Should the NYR have a smaller cap because they'll make more money on endorsements in the big apple?

Do you have to factor in housing? It's cheaper to buy a mansion in Winnipeg then one in Tampa. If Stamkos has to spend an extra couple million on housing then he isn't actually ahead is he. Prices in New York are going to be even worse, should they have a higher cap to compensate them. Should we adjust the cap for cost of living, or as people have already pointed out the fact that they are paid in US dollars but buy things in CAD, do we have to adjust for currency fluctuations

How do you deal with states that tax players for the number of games they play in that state? How do you deal with european players who can defer their taxes and pay a lump sum after they retire and go back to their home country?

Sigh. No one is getting this. It is not about player salary at all. It is about total tax to oprerate an nhl team. I would bet that Habs player costs are less than half the operating cost. Because all of their other costs are 100 percent federal and provincial taxable.

That should be addressed. Again. This is not just about player costs.

 

[Schwang]

Taxes have very little to do with it.
Other teams like Anaheim, Ney york (both teams), Toronto, Los Angeles or San Jose (Who can compete for Tavares apparently despites high taxes) have just as high taxes as Montreal.

I disagree. It gets mentioned every time there's free agent discussion.

 

[LeHab]

Before worrying about taxes, habs may want to address what they control -> hire better staff for one.

 

[bsl]

1- Habs don't only lose out on FA's to California or Florida. A lot of players still sign in Buffalo (Okposo), Minnesota (Staal), Detroit (Green) and those have similar weather and are taxed, as well.

2 - If one of the reasons players don't come here is because they don't want to send their kids to French school, that says more about them than Montreal.

Yeah right. Its a big world out there mate and most foreign players play here for say 6 years. Cool if they want their children to learn French I agree. But they have longer term interests. They are internationals. Unlike you obviously. What a provincial attitude. You should travel more.

 

[bsl]

But if someone doesn't want their kids going to certain language schools that is their right, what does it say about them exactly?

You have hit the sorest spot since 1976. Don’t go there. It’s the worst.

 

[ECWHSWI]

I highly doubt that foreign millionaire players have to send their kids to French school unless they want to.

And this is not about player cost. It is about overall ownership cost.

would be fun to know how many exactly HAD to... chances are it's very close to 0.

and IF it ever happens in the future, so be it... not gonna cry over it, not gonna start kissing asses to get decent players in Montreal.

 

[Sorinth]

Sigh. No one is getting this. It is not about player salary at all. It is about total tax to oprerate an nhl team. I would bet that Habs player costs are less than half the operating cost. Because all of their other costs are 100 percent federal and provincial taxable.

That should be addressed. Again. This is not just about player costs.

Aren't the top 3 richest franchises Toronto, NYR, and Montreal?

If two of the top 3 biggest revenue generators are Canadian, then I'm sorry but the argument that the cost of ownership is too high for Canadian teams is nonsense. And seriously why the F should I care about the cost of ownership when the guy is raking in money hand over fist.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Yeah right. Its a big world out there mate and most foreign players play here for say 6 years. Cool if they want their children to learn French I agree. But they have longer term interests. They are internationals. Unlike you obviously. What a provincial attitude. You should travel more.

trying to care about people who have zero care for mine here, not working out so far, their interest ? pouet

kissing ass isnt any more international.

people living in Quebec (both french and english speakers) are actually living in the most taxed province in one of the most taxed country in the world... so yeah, I'd love for Couillon to make exception for the poor little hockey players and would love even more for Plante to shed hundreds of millions for the next Mundial or help the starving ball players who'd be playing in the snowy Montreal...

me and my fellow Montrealers/Quebecers (ahatever language they speak) are clearly not doing enough for those millionaire-before-25.

 

[CHfan1]

Montreal isn’t in the position they are in because of taxes and a lack of free agency signings.

Teams don’t win Cups through free agency. They win it through drafting, developing players, making good trades, and good coaching.

Look at the last winners Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA, and now Washington have all won because their main core came from either the draft (Crosby, Malkin, Kopitar, Doughty, Quick, Toews, Kane, Keith, Ovi, Kuznetsov, Backstrom, Carlson) or trades (Kessel, Carter, Eller).

Most of the time it seems like the big free agency signing turn into cap nightmares in the future, Alzner, Lucic, Eriksson.

I almost wish Montreal sat out the first few days of free agency.

 

[Stoneburg]

Let's agree to NOT discuss the language issue, debating it will not change it, and it is too divisive.

I am aware you can make the same argument about taxes, and that issue is debated almost every year. But I think that issuer is less divisive.

 

[Pickles]

It say that they want their kids to haven the best school experience possible in their mother tongue, and not to have some foreign language crammed down their throat.....

Exactly. You want to start a kid in French school at an early age fine but some kids have a hard time adjusting to a new language when they're older.

 

[MTL-rules]

trying to care about people who have zero care for mine here, not working out so far, their interest ? pouet

kissing ass isnt any more international.

people living in Quebec (both french and english speakers) are actually living in the most taxed province in one of the most taxed country in the world... so yeah, I'd love for Couillon to make exception for the poor little hockey players and would love even more for Plante to shed hundreds of millions for the next Mundial or help the starving ball players who'd be playing in the snowy Montreal...

me and my fellow Montrealers/Quebecers (ahatever language they speak) are clearly not doing enough for those millionaire-before-25.

In North America, yes, in the developped world, not even on par with the mean. We are far from overtaxed if we compare with Europe.

 

[psychonaut]

Sigh. No one is getting this. It is not about player salary at all. It is about total tax to oprerate an nhl team. I would bet that Habs player costs are less than half the operating cost. Because all of their other costs are 100 percent federal and provincial taxable.

That should be addressed. Again. This is not just about player costs.

Pretty sure the Habs were linked in the Panama papers or the other leak like that. So not 100% they have there own tax avoidance like the players do too. I don't think the taxes play a big part in the decision for coming here or not.
We could look at the last 10 years and the top 10 teams in the years compared with the tax rate see if there really an advantage.

 

[Lshap]

Not sure about this...

Isn't the tax based on the city in which the games are played, not the actual team you play for? Habs players only 'work' in Montreal for 41 games, therefore they're taxed at Quebec rates for only those 41 games. The other half of the season, players are taxed at the rate of whatever city they're visiting.

I remember reading this, but again, I'm not sure if it's right.

 

[Lshap]

In North America, yes, in the developped world, not even on par with the mean. We are far from overtaxed if we compare with Europe.

True, but this discussion is less about global relativism than it is about the slight edge some NHL teams have over others.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Those damn taxes, they made us lose Radulov.

One of the reasons why we lost Radulov. Wasn't the only one. The Stars recruited him very well and they had a better group of forwards for him to play with. On our team, he was beat up by the mid way point cause he was driving puck possession and dishing the puck to Patch in open space. He knew that our team was soft and bolted

 

[Habs Halifax]

Tax difference between cities should be talked about in the next CBA to try to even the playing field a bit. The higher the salaries get, the more the problem. Tavares for example. $13M in Montreal is equal to #10M in Nashville.

 

[Laurentide]

Not sure about this...

Isn't the tax based on the city in which the games are played, not the actual team you play for? Habs players only 'work' in Montreal for 41 games, therefore they're taxed at Quebec rates for only those 41 games. The other half of the season, players are taxed at the rate of whatever city they're visiting.

I remember reading this, but again, I'm not sure if it's right.

It goes beyond just what the tax rate is in one city versus what it is in another. There are also some huge differences in how US-based players can "hide" money from the IRS compared to what Revenue Canada allows Canadian-based players. Just one example: country club fees. If you're playing in the US and you join a hoity-toity country club to play golf, the IRS allows you to write off the cost of that membership on your taxes (which would be 5 or 6 figures per year depending on how exclusive the club is) and claim it as a "health benefit". Not surprising, since the US tax code is written by rich white guys for rich white guys. Revenue Canada, on the other hand, is having precisely none of that. Everybody pays and exemptions are few and far between. So not only are the tax rates generally lower in the US (and in a lot of states which have no taxes, very much lower) but the amount of money you can stash away from the prying hands of the taxman is greater also.

 

[Tighthead]

Canada also has tax advantages. Set your endorsements up through a holdco, invest the money, spit it out as dividends at reduced tax rates.

Every jurisdiction and every player is going to be different. The marginal tax rate is only a starting point.

As for housing costs, those are more of an investment than an expense.

 

[Tighthead]

It goes beyond just what the tax rate is in one city versus what it is in another. There are also some huge differences in how US-based players can "hide" money from the IRS compared to what Revenue Canada allows Canadian-based players. Just one example: country club fees. If you're playing in the US and you join a hoity-toity country club to play golf, the IRS allows you to write off the cost of that membership on your taxes (which would be 5 or 6 figures per year depending on how exclusive the club is) and claim it as a "health benefit". Not surprising, since the US tax code is written by rich white guys for rich white guys. Revenue Canada, on the other hand, is having precisely none of that. Everybody pays and exemptions are few and far between. So not only are the tax rates generally lower in the US (and in a lot of states which have no taxes, very much lower) but the amount of money you can stash away from the prying hands of the taxman is greater also.

Source on the deductibility of country club dues?

What are some clubs that you think run 6 figures per year?

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

No excuses. Do your job . Be competant. We've had a plethora of garbage GM's and staff run this team into the ground over and over again. The high tax is the least of our worries with these dinosaurs in charge

 

[Laurentide]

Source on the deductibility of country club dues?

What are some clubs that you think run 6 figures per year?

The country club scenario was put forward by a tax lawyer who was interviewed about this very issue of NHL players and the tax implications. It was a few years ago but I doubt that US tax laws have been tightened up since then. More than likely they're even more lax now.

I'm quite sure that there are country clubs out there who charge into the six figures. My rich uncle the banking executive joined a country club in West Vancouver about 25 years ago and at that time associate memberships (not even full memberships, mind you, just associate memberships which only entitled you to limited benefits) were selling for close to $50,000 so full memberships were likely close to six figures even back then.

This is why if you see a black guy golfing at a country club, he's probably Tiger Woods, Denzel Washington or an NBA player. In the most exclusive clubs in the US, they have one or two token minority members in order to keep the ACLU off their case but other than that the only non-white faces you'll see there will be waiters, gardeners or caddies. And some clubs still discourage women from being members. As the old saying goes, the word "golf" stands for "Gentlemen Only, Ladies Forbidden".