OT: CBA Discussion (All tax discussion goes here).

GeorgeKaplan

Registered User
Dec 19, 2011
9,094
8,376
New Jersey
This needs to be addressed in the cba. Canadian teams getting killed on this loophole they’ll cry about it the most.
The one thing that works for the Canadien teams is the players get paid in US dollars and then spend Canadian dollars, so they get to make up sooome of that lost ground there
 

Gardner McKay

RIP, Jimmy.
Jun 27, 2007
25,693
14,554
SoutheastOfDisorder
Not when going up against teams in no state income tax states

It isn't as big of a deal as people think it is.

This needs to be addressed in the cba. Canadian teams getting killed on this loophole they’ll cry about it the most.

No, it really doesn't. You're neutering the minor advantage some small market teams have. How do you address cities that are desirable destinations? Do you charge them a cap penalty for that advantage?

The Bolts, Panthers and Stars have had this "advantage" for years. Now that one of the teams is wildly successful it is suddenly a problem?

I don't care if Canadian teams get killed by it. That is their own fault.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,716
11,933
parts unknown
It isn't as big of a deal as people think it is.



No, it really doesn't. You're neutering the minor advantage some small market teams have. How do you address cities that are desirable destinations? Do you charge them a cap penalty for that advantage?

The Bolts, Panthers and Stars have had this "advantage" for years. Now that one of the teams is wildly successful it is suddenly a problem?

I don't care if Canadian teams get killed by it. That is their own fault.

Then get rid of the cap or allow teams to spend above the cap and pay a luxury tax. The purpose of the cap is to put teams on the same page in a strictly financial setting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wicked Backhand

Brooklyn Rangers Fan

Change is good.
Aug 23, 2005
19,237
8,238
Brooklyn & Upstate
It isn't as big of a deal as people think it is.



No, it really doesn't. You're neutering the minor advantage some small market teams have. How do you address cities that are desirable destinations? Do you charge them a cap penalty for that advantage?

The Bolts, Panthers and Stars have had this "advantage" for years. Now that one of the teams is wildly successful it is suddenly a problem?

I don't care if Canadian teams get killed by it. That is their own fault.
Well, and the Canadian teams also have some advantages: 1) their cities are home to some players / the teams they grew up rooting for (see: Tavares, John), and 2) if the rockstar lifestyle appeals to you, you're a much bigger deal in a Canadian city than you are anywhere in the States.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gardner McKay

Gardner McKay

RIP, Jimmy.
Jun 27, 2007
25,693
14,554
SoutheastOfDisorder
Then get rid of the cap or allow teams to spend above the cap and pay a luxury tax. The purpose of the cap is to put teams on the same page in a strictly financial setting.
While I don't want to get off topic, I don't disagree about changing the system. I'd prefer a luxury tax type system. We have had the cap now for 14 years. If it was that big of an advantage the Bolts, Stars or Panthers should have had at least one cup by now...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCRanger

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,716
11,933
parts unknown
While I don't want to get off topic, I don't disagree about changing the system. I'd prefer a luxury tax type system. We have had the cap now for 14 years. If it was that big of an advantage the Bolts, Stars or Panthers should have had at least one cup by now...

I don't think poor management should be an excuse for not addressing a root issue with a financial system based on financial parity that ends up doing the opposite of that, though.

The goal was for financial parity. Why not just have a luxury tax and give out welfare funds to the poor teams? Have a salary floor with no true, hard cap.
 

Crease

Chief Justice of the HFNYR Court
Jul 12, 2004
24,106
25,577
I don't think poor management should be an excuse for not addressing a root issue with a financial system based on financial parity that ends up doing the opposite of that, though.

The goal was for financial parity. Why not just have a luxury tax and give out welfare funds to the poor teams? Have a salary floor with no true, hard cap.

I thought the goal was capping the player's share of league revenue, not parity. Parity was the PR spin when fans started getting angry there were no games. If the league really wanted parity, it would have set the bands much closer to the cap midpoint.

Welcome back, by the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: patnyrnyg

nyrage

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
2,084
1,901
Houston, TX
Not when going up against teams in no state income tax states

It's certainly a factor, but not as much as some people cite. I often see people say that X dollars in Florida (or other no-tax state) is better than X+Y dollars in NY, but you get taxed for the games played in a state , so the advantage is only for the home games plus or minus a few games depending on the schedule of Florida team vs NY team. There are also other tax differences between states not related to income that can play a factor, too, but can mostly be ignored for simplicty's sake.

One esteemed poster here has used an example a couple of times that mathematically wasn't correct. I'm assuming he used his tax break on all 82 games instead of just the home games when comparing which contract would be better or just chose bad math examples.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,716
11,933
parts unknown
I thought the goal was capping the player's share of league revenue, not parity. Parity was the PR spin when fans started getting angry there were no games. If the league really wanted parity, it would have set the bands much closer to the cap midpoint.

Welcome back, by the way.

Yeah, but there are plenty of teams that would spend a higher amount. The small market and middle market welfare teams really drove the hard cap point of view.

Not really back, to be honest. Just that time of year.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,716
11,933
parts unknown
It's certainly a factor, but not as much as some people cite. I often see people say that X dollars in Florida (or other no-tax state) is better than X+Y dollars in NY, but you get taxed for the games played in a state , so the advantage is only for the home games plus or minus a few games depending on the schedule of Florida team vs NY team. There are also other tax differences between states not related to income that can play a factor, too, but can mostly be ignored for simplicty's sake.

One esteemed poster here has used an example a couple of times that mathematically wasn't correct. I'm assuming he used his tax break on all 82 games instead of just the home games when comparing which contract would be better or just chose bad math examples.

If 50% of your games are played in a no income tax state, it's a pretty damn big factor, still. There are a lot of intricacies that go into this, but the f***ing with the SALT deductions nonsense on the tax cut bill has also made it an even bigger issue.
 

Kovalev27

BEST IN THE WORLD
Jun 22, 2004
21,446
25,699
NYC
It isn't as big of a deal as people think it is.



No, it really doesn't. You're neutering the minor advantage some small market teams have. How do you address cities that are desirable destinations? Do you charge them a cap penalty for that advantage?

The Bolts, Panthers and Stars have had this "advantage" for years. Now that one of the teams is wildly successful it is suddenly a problem?

I don't care if Canadian teams get killed by it. That is their own fault.

Suddenly? Tampa has been signing guys like crazy to cap friendly deals. As has Dallas for years. Panthers are just bad. But there’s a reason players put Canadian teams on their do not trade list and it’s not just cause of the media
 

nyrage

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
2,084
1,901
Houston, TX
If 50% of your games are played in a no income tax state, it's a pretty damn big factor, still. There are a lot of intricacies that go into this, but the ****ing with the SALT deductions nonsense on the tax cut bill has also made it an even bigger issue.

Yeah, it definitely is without a doubt. For example, Stone would make save about $400k in taxes on his $9.5m (half earned in Vegas). I see people use examples in excess of a million per year.

Yeah there are lots of other factors involved (your examples/property tax, local sales tax, other income potential such as endorsements, etc), but people just want a quick salary comparison .

You can estimate taxes on this calculator. Just remember not to use the full amount of salary.

United States (US) Salary Tax Calculator - Good Calculators
 

Beer League Sniper

Homeless Man's Rick Nash
Apr 27, 2010
4,736
1,545
City in a Forest
Then get rid of the cap or allow teams to spend above the cap and pay a luxury tax. The purpose of the cap is to put teams on the same page in a strictly financial setting.
I wish there was some middle ground. A luxury tax would favor big market teams, but the tax situation right now is a big part of the reason Tampa is running away with the league. Nobody wants to be the NBA, in which only 5 teams are relevant.

Is there any real way to calibrate the cap to post-tax dollars?
 

Shesterkybomb

Registered User
Dec 30, 2016
15,754
16,610
I wish there was some middle ground. A luxury tax would favor big market teams, but the tax situation right now is a big part of the reason Tampa is running away with the league. Nobody wants to be the NBA, in which only 5 teams are relevant.

Is there any real way to calibrate the cap to post-tax dollars?

There is but they will never do it. It would be a "after tax adjustment" salary cap.
Also I dont want there to be a soft cap like baseball because all you get are the haves and the have nots. I like the way it is, but the tax thing kinda sucks. Problem is that theres all kinds of advantages New York has attracting talent but we arent concerned about that I guess, imagine a team like Winnipeg or Calgary compared to NewYork trying to compete for UFA players.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,716
11,933
parts unknown
I wish there was some middle ground. A luxury tax would favor big market teams, but the tax situation right now is a big part of the reason Tampa is running away with the league. Nobody wants to be the NBA, in which only 5 teams are relevant.

Is there any real way to calibrate the cap to post-tax dollars?

A luxury tax with a 100% penalty would enable small market teams to spend the exact same as large market teams. It would be a $1-for-$1 trade. If the welfare mooches want to just coast and not spend, they'd have zero excuse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gardner McKay

YoSoyLalo

me reading HF
Oct 8, 2010
79,325
16,781
www.gofundme.com
change title to “threads for nerds”

seriously though during the last lockout I knew wayyyyy more about the CBA than any sane human being should, and the same goes for a lot of other people who post here

hopefully i won’t be needing the cba knowledge i’ve repressed since then
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richard Banger

Gardner McKay

RIP, Jimmy.
Jun 27, 2007
25,693
14,554
SoutheastOfDisorder
Suddenly? Tampa has been signing guys like crazy to cap friendly deals. As has Dallas for years. Panthers are just bad. But there’s a reason players put Canadian teams on their do not trade list and it’s not just cause of the media
Where are the results? Where are the cups? Tampa is the powerhouse this year. Next year things aren't going to be so great for them.

Cities like LA and Chicago have how many cups in the last decade? They aren't exactly located in tax friendly states (especially LA).

Not all cities in Canada are as bad as Montreal (tax wise).
 

patnyrnyg

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
10,875
887
Then get rid of the cap or allow teams to spend above the cap and pay a luxury tax. The purpose of the cap is to put teams on the same page in a strictly financial setting.
I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. The purpose of the cap is to make sure the owners get their share of the revenues.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,716
11,933
parts unknown
I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. The purpose of the cap is to make sure the owners get their share of the revenues.

That's only true to an extent. I can tell you for a fact that numerous teams would spend above it if allowed. Our team included. The luxury tax would limit the amount spent over it, but teams would absolutely do it.
 

Gardner McKay

RIP, Jimmy.
Jun 27, 2007
25,693
14,554
SoutheastOfDisorder
There is but they will never do it. It would be a "after tax adjustment" salary cap.
Also I dont want there to be a soft cap like baseball because all you get are the haves and the have nots. I like the way it is, but the tax thing kinda sucks. Problem is that theres all kinds of advantages New York has attracting talent but we arent concerned about that I guess, imagine a team like Winnipeg or Calgary compared to NewYork trying to compete for UFA players.

This is the real problem. There are always going to be advantages in certain markets that you can't fix in a CBA. People are only pissed because Tampa has a bunch of our former players and are en route to a cup, even those some of the states with the highest tax rates in the US have been recent cup winners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shesterkybomb

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad