[Signing] Lightning sign Point (3yrs, $6.75 mil AAV)

[Flamette]

Taking a “tax discount” becomes moot if you’re traded. You can bet any agent worth anything is advising the client of same.

[PepsiFree]

One of the many issues of the “take less in Florida” theory is that if a player takes a discount to sign in Florida and gets traded to a higher-tax city, they’re screwed.

[dino7c]

Taxes aren't the be all end all but they are a factor...looking at their cap page they obviously have a lot going for them and guys will take a little less to be part of it for various reasons

Vezina/Hart...cool but not over 10M buddy

[868904]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

One of the many issues of the “take less in Florida” theory is that if a player takes a discount to sign in Florida and gets traded to a higher-tax city, they’re screwed.

That’s why the player usually gets a NMC with discount deals and the canadian teams are always on NTC lists.

[Enoch Root]

I don't get all this talk that Lightning players are all taking discounts:

Kucherov: $9.5M
Vasilevsky: $9.5M (takes effect next year)
Stamkos: $8.5M (signed 3 years ago)
Hedman: $7.875M (signed 2 years ago)
Point: $6.75M (bridge deal)
McDonough: $6.75M
Palat: $5.3M

That's $54.175M for 7 players, or an average of $7.74M each

Johnson signed for $5M after a 45 point season. Then you have Gourde at $5.166 for 48 points, and Killorn at $4.45M for 40 points

Backlund signed for $5.3 after 53 and 47 point seasons. And Lindholm signed for $4.85 after putting up 44. I don't see any difference.

Adding the other 3, that's 10 players with a $68.8M cap hit, leaving about $13m for 13 other players.

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ I think the goalie cap hit is nuts.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

But it isn't going to cause an RFA to take less money. Period.

I doubt you are in the minds of every RFA and know what they think.

Point’s choice was to accept the TB offer or hold out. It ‘s hard to imagine that the net take home pay isn’t a factor. These guys aren’t stupid.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by New Era

Florida is NOT tax free. Far from it. You don't pay state taxes on personal income, but they get you coming and going on pretty well everything else.

Here's a graph from 2017 of tax rates for players.

Does this chart factor in each team's schedule and how players pay tax in each jurisdiction they play? I have a lot of questions about how that works - salary/82 x GP per jurisdiction = taxable income for that jurisdiction?

If a Flames player misses the one game in Montreal, do they still have to file there?

Originally Posted by 868904

That’s why the player usually gets a NMC with discount deals and the canadian teams are always on NTC lists.

Irrelevant in the case of Point or any other RFA because you can't have those clauses until UFA years

[Northendzone]

good for brayden he is a great guy and deserves this.

it is always mind boggling to wrap your head around how much the bi-mopnthly deposit would change for guys in this situation - at $1m/yr over the length of the regular season (~7m) the gross pay would be $62,500 2x/month - increase the pay to $6m annually the gross paycheque increases to $429,000

that tax chart is surprising in that in california they take slightly more than 50% of your pay. i guess it would be interesting to see the actual tax returns of some of these guys to see all of other tax credits and deductions to get to a net number as it would be interesting to see which combination of sates and provinces provide a player with the most net pay

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Taxes aren't the be all end all but they are a factor...looking at their cap page they obviously have a lot going for them and guys will take a little less to be part of it for various reasons.

See also Calgary.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

good for brayden he is a great guy and deserves this.

it is always mind boggling to wrap your head around how much the bi-mopnthly deposit would change for guys in this situation - at $1m/yr over the length of the regular season (~7m) the gross pay would be $62,500 2x/month - increase the pay to $6m annually the gross paycheque increases to $429,000

that tax chart is surprising in that in california they take slightly more than 50% of your pay. i guess it would be interesting to see the actual tax returns of some of these guys to see all of other tax credits and deductions to get to a net number as it would be interesting to see which combination of sates and provinces provide a player with the most net pay

I'd like to see what they actually take home too, especially as off the top their agents get paid. bet their accountants/financial people do quite well off them, too.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Does this chart factor in each team's schedule and how players pay tax in each jurisdiction they play? I have a lot of questions about how that works - salary/82 x GP per jurisdiction = taxable income for that jurisdiction?

???

Am I missing something? Players get taxed based on the location of the team they play, not the cities they visit. It is income tax and you are taxed based on the federal rate, then the local rate. The chart showed the total "income tax" a player from each municipality is expected to pay. So a player that is on the Panthers has an advantage over a player on the Canadiens because the income tax rate is lower. Where the advantage ends is the other taxes these guys may be exposed to. These are concerns the players must consider and this is why they have managers and money guys to properly inform them of the options.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

2016-2019 Drafts - the only bona-fide draft hit so far was Tkachuk, really. Plus, some promising youngsters in Valimaki and Dube. Everyone else from those 4 drafts are still developing prospects; so it's hard to be overly confident in the new era. If you are, I am curious to hear your thoughts on why?

Very early for sure.

But the Flames have gone through a period of time with less top picks, but a high early return in that many of their recent drafted list keep showing up higher in redrafts, or movers.

Doesn't mean they're bonafied can't miss players, but certainly a good sign.

Andersson
Kylington
Mangiapane
Dube
Fox
Phillips
Valimaki
Ruzicka
Pospisil
Pettersen
Zavgorodniy
Nikolaev
Wolf

would all likely go higher.

That's all a team can do with what they have had in terms of high picks.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by New Era

???

Am I missing something? Players get taxed based on the location of the team they play, not the cities they visit. It is income tax and you are taxed based on the federal rate, then the local rate. The chart showed the total "income tax" a player from each municipality is expected to pay. So a player that is on the Panthers has an advantage over a player on the Canadiens because the income tax rate is lower. Where the advantage ends is the other taxes these guys may be exposed to. These are concerns the players must consider and this is why they have managers and money guys to properly inform them of the options.

It's complicated with jock taxes.

https://hockey-graphs.com/2019/01/08...-part-2-taxes/

Illinois only taxes visiting athletes if their home state taxes Illinois athletes when they play away games – so the Stars don’t owe the state of Illinois a jock tax when in Chicago because the Blackhawks aren’t taxed by the state of Texas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jock_tax

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/04/17/nf...letes-salaries

What makes players’ taxes interesting is the fact that NFLers don’t just pay where they live. They pay where they play and, most notably, where they practice.

The formula is simple: total salary multiplied by days spent in a given state multiplied by that state’s income tax rate, all divided by the number of days in the season. So each for each day Bryant spent in California he owed the state ($13,000,000 x 1 day x 13.3% tax rate / 170-day season).

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

$6.75M is now the highest 3-year deal to date, is it not?

I wouldn't call that a discount. And there is no way Tkachuk is getting more than that on a 3-year deal.

Nope, Point took a discount...was obvious then and is more obvious now

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by New Era

???

Am I missing something? Players get taxed based on the location of the team they play, not the cities they visit. It is income tax and you are taxed based on the federal rate, then the local rate. The chart showed the total "income tax" a player from each municipality is expected to pay. So a player that is on the Panthers has an advantage over a player on the Canadiens because the income tax rate is lower. Where the advantage ends is the other taxes these guys may be exposed to. These are concerns the players must consider and this is why they have managers and money guys to properly inform them of the options.

This is not accurate, at least for US based players. US workers pay taxes when they work in another state even for a short period of time. We deal with it in our firm where our staff are surprised to learn they have another tax return requirement when they get an out of town assignment for a week. Of course we keep them whole if it increases their actual taxes, which pro sports teams obviously don’t do.

I don’t know if the chart factors in the concept of where each team played its games last year but otherwise I don’t know how Florida and Alberta can be so close. And kind of a double whammy for. California teams as they have so many road and home games in the state.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by New Era

Florida is NOT tax free. Far from it. You don't pay state taxes on personal income, but they get you coming and going on pretty well everything else.

Here's a graph from 2017 of tax rates for players.

All things equal, I'd like to think those lowest paid fringe UFA players, would look at Calgary, as the best way to maximize their earnings.

A small advantage + CoL, that Treleving could draw on, when competing against a California club for example.

[Flamenspiel]

This whole discount thing is over rated. Karlsson signed for 11.5 million a year in San Jose, is that a discount?

[cam_wmh]

@ $700k salary;
In Calgary; $431k
in California; $348k

For obvious reasons, and as I already stated, this conversation isn't relevant to the top tier of players and their contracts.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

This whole discount thing is over rated. Karlsson signed for 11.5 million a year in San Jose, is that a discount?

Well if you believe the chart above is accurate, Karlsson's tax situation by signing with San Jose is the worst in the league, therefore requiring a premium to sign there, not a discount.