Should the NHL permit tax gross ups in the cap to level the playing field across jurisdictions?

[saffronleaf]

Players demand more money to play in high tax jurisdictions because their take home pay is lower.

Should the NHL try to level the playing field?

Tax gross ups can be complex and I'm not a tax lawyer but, at a general level, it would work as follows:

- The NHL identifies the lowest tax jurisdiction in the NHL (presumably a place like Tampa?)

- Teams in higher tax jurisdictions would be able to offer players an extra amount in salary. That extra amount would be capped at the amount that would need to be paid to the player to ensure that such player receives the same take home pay as they would have if they played in the lowest tax jurisdiction.

- The extra amount is the "tax gross up" and it would not be counted toward the cap hit of the team offering the tax gross up.

Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[LT]

For god's sake, how many times are we going to have this argument?

No no no no no, it doesn't make sense. I feel like I need to post this every time:

I feel like I should post this every time the tax argument comes up:

"People realize income tax is not the only kind of tax, right? If you adjust the salary cap per team for income tax, why not property tax as well? Or sales tax? Or just generic cost-of-living?

What about the endorsement potential for major cities or more famous franchises? Where’s the adjustment there?

These things are far more complex than being portrayed here. There are plenty of pro’s and con’s to most every franchise. Some franchises may lean toward one direction, but that’s the nature of business when it’s spread across nearly the entirety of two countries.

Adjusting the cap for any team-specific measure opens a giant can of worms that the owners and players will never be able to agree upon. Look at how difficult it is for them to come up with agreements in the current arrangement. And people want to add even more complexity to it just so they percieve the various franchises’ abilities to court free agents as the same?"

 

[Butch 19]

already with the taxes??

 

[StrangeVision]

Solution to a "problem" that doesn't need a solution.

 

[BannedFromCDC]

I'm sure the weather is factor in why players would rather play in certain cities. Not to mention the women.

 

[JaegerDice]

No.

Every team has advantages and disadvantages, and the tax advantage is hilariously overstated on this forum.

 

[Individual 1]

Throw in a cap on management, staff and facilities so the rich teams can't spent way more in these areas. Things like coaches, scouts, trainers, other team personnel, practice/training facilities and so on, these are all big advantages that some teams get compared to others, why doesn't the NHL level the playing field while also saving themselves money?

 

[BlueDream]

Income tax is just the newest catch-phrase for people to sound smart when they don’t actually know anything about it. It’s really not a big deal.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

Oh dear god. This again?

 

[Pia8988]

How many wins did the tax savings get Tampa?

 

[EdJovanovski]

We should scrap all the different cities from team names and have every team play in the same city, in the same arena. Make the players all live in one big condo so we can alleviate any issues caused by cities being different.

 

[KinCornKarn]

Maybe try to vote people into office who will lower the income tax?

 

[LT]

We should scrap all the different cities from team names and have every team play in the same city, in the same arena. Make the players all live in one big condo so we can alleviate any issues caused by cities being different.

That would probably be the smelliest condo to ever exist.

 

[DanM]

No.

Every team has advantages and disadvantages, and the tax advantage is hilariously overstated on this forum.

While that is true, why does every poster bitch and moan that Toronto can pay 70 million up front in signing bonuses, and lockout proof contracts?

Posters say it's not fair, but it's not our fault we have that advantage, as every market has disadvantages and advantages.

 

[yukoner88]

i feel like Im in Ground Hog Day again

 

[me2]

Players shouldn't be able to sign with their favourite teams as kids or provinces/states were they grew up UFAs.

Too much advantage.

 

[Guided by Veseys]

Absolutely. It seems ridiculous otherwise. Things like endorsements are so obviously arbitrary and have no real quantifiable comparison to an obvious income tax discount.
Teams will be taking full advantage of this disparity and it will create an imbalanced playing field.
Can you imagine, Tampa and Edmonton courting a free agent: Tampa says come play for 7 million and lay on a beach for your days off. Edmonton says play for 6 million after tax is imposed and hopefully we can find you some gigs where you can pretend to sell TD insurance and sell Tim Hortons coffee.
This is a complex issue but that doesn’t mean you don’t chip away at it one variable at a time. Income tax is the most identifiable unfair competitive advantage that is exploited in this league.

 

[Spirit of 67]

I'm not a tax lawyer

Got it,

Thanks.

 

[Spirit of 67]

No.

Every team has advantages and disadvantages, and the tax advantage is hilariously overstated on this forum.

TBH, calling it "hilariously overstated" is hilariously understating how overstated it is.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

sure.

but to truly make it fair you need a cap penalty based on fanbase size and team prestige

and any $ a player earns in sponsorships counts against the cap.

after all, we are looking to eliminate all advantages a team might have in attracting players and not just the ones your team cant take advantage of, right?

 

[ScaredStreit]

What happens when a player is traded? If a region's taxes increase or decrease? If a market provides more sponsorship opportunities? If a market is cheaper to live in? Do we count all taxes (property, sales, etc.), or just income?

If only the NHL had a "fair" salary cap...maybe a team like Toronto would have had a chance at signing the biggest free agent last summer...

 

[Spirit of 67]

sure.

but to truly make it fair you need a cap penalty based on fanbase size and team prestige

and any $ a player earns in sponsorships counts against the cap.

after all, we are looking to eliminate all advantages a team might have in attracting players and not just the ones your team cant take advantage of, right?

Yep.

Don't forget weather, facilities and, "free" health insurance in Canada.

 

[tucker3434]

For god's sake, how many times are we going to have this argument?

No no no no no, it doesn't make sense. I feel like I need to post this every time:

That pretty much nails it.

Not like any of the high tax markets have struggled to lure in big name talents recently anyway.

 

[drktmplr12]

opens thread

clicks back

i don't know what i expected

 

[Unspecified]

This again?