IBatch Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 I've been vocal about the difference in take home pay for several years now between teams with no state tax and those that have state tax, plus jock tax and of course the Canadian teams. To me it's a bit of a joke really, players on Dallas, Vegas, Tampa Bay, Panthers and now Seattle hold a distinct advantage over other teams. As a case study - Gavingroup offers NHL players a quick and easy way to determine their take home pay compared to any other team - and has the tax rates visibly available and they adjust them every year. Vancouver, TO, MTL, and OTT are all at the highest bracket. 53%. The aforementioned teams are all at 36.29%. What does that mean? Well look at this: 5,000,000 deals $817,500 variance. 6,000,000 deals $982,200 variance. 7,000,000 deals $1,148,000 8,000,000 deals $1,312,000 9,000,000 deals $1,477,800 10 deals $1,643,000 81.5 - 13,439,350 That's a significant advantage. Sure for top echelon stars their could be better places to earn extra income with endorsements. So that's a factor. And these are only the blue chip guys that are play drivers too. But the point is, that's a lot of extra players teams can sign and build with and they have and are doing that. TB roster in particular. They kept Stamkos - who was offered a lot more in TO and SJ. That extra year however made up for it as did the extra couple million in tax savings each year. Should the NHL and NHLPA work on making this more balanced in the next CBA? Or are things fine the way they are? Have to add when the Sedins peaked we actually were in the bottom third of least taxed teams, same with Alberta. Jock and different state tax does make quite the bracket difference. Alberta teams are taxed a little more but are still hanging in ok. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.