Broncos, Seahawks must pay NJ taxes

[OrangeHoof]

Indeed, every member of the two Super Bowl teams coming here this week will take a tax hit during their brief stay in New Jersey — every player, every coach and trainer and anyone else who regularly travels with two organizations.

Unlike Florida — which has hosted 15 Super Bowls and had been vying for this one too, will see temperatures this week in the 70s and has no personal income tax for National Football League players (or anyone else for that matter) — New Jersey imposes an 8.97 percent tax bite on all out-of-state athletes that come here to play. :eek::shocked:



http://www.nj.com/super-bowl/index.ssf/2014/01/not_even_the_broncos_and_seahawks_can_evade_the_ta x_man_when_super_bowl_2014_comes_to_nj.html#incart _river_defaul


(http://www.nj.com/super-bowl/index.ssf/2014/01/not_even_the_broncos_and_seahawks_can_evade_the_ta x_man_when_super_bowl_2014_comes_to_nj.html#incart _river_default)

[Dzone]

wow..thats nuts. Should have had the game in florida , no doubt about it. Plus 70 degrees vs a snow storm and 10 degrees. Come on

[OrangeHoof]

Of the 25 states with professional teams, only Texas, Washington and Florida have no personal income tax and do not collect jock taxes. While Tennessee does not have an income tax, the state does impose a "privilege tax" on visiting athletes of $2,500 a game, up to a maximum of three games, to play the NBA’s Memphis Grizzlies and the NHL’s Nashville Predators. The state statute, however, exempts NFL teams who play the Tennessee Titans.

You have to play in the cold and snow *and* get ass-raped by the state of New Jersey. Thanks, Goodell!

I remember Bud Adams complaining once that when you factor in the cost of travel, hotels, taxes, etc. for 50 large men and their entourages that it cost him more money to make the playoffs than it did to miss them, particularly as a wild card team. That's one reason he got the nickname "Bottom Line Bud".

[BroncoWave]

Players have to pay taxes in ever road state they play in during the season. This is a complete non-story.

[Tned]

One thing to take note of is that for most professional athletes this isn't about paying more taxes but who you pay it to. Assuming CO and WA have state income tax, then a portion of their income will be taxed at NJ rates and paid to NJ, and not paid to CO and WA.

Now, athletes that play in tax free states really get hammered, because they aren't just paying the difference.

[Tned]

Players have to pay taxes in ever road state they play in during the season. This is a complete non-story.

Not every, but many/most states. Agreed, it is a non story, or at least a decades(s) old story.

[BroncoWave]

Not every, but many/most states. Agreed, it is a non story, or at least a decades(s) old story.

Well obviously not in the states with no income tax, but that goes without saying.

[OrangeHoof]

The Broncos were already on the hook for this in 2013 because they'd played a road game against the Giants there. But this is 2014 so it means they are getting hit again.

The Broncos and Seahawks both have road games in California every year which is one of the worst. Someone once did a story about pitcher Darren Oliver and how many state income taxes his accountants had to pay just because he was an MLB pitcher that travels all over the country.

And most states are NOT giving up their own tax money because you have to pay some to another state. It is the federal government that lets you claim state taxes paid against the taxes you'd have to send to them.

[Tned]

Well obviously not in the states with no income tax, but that goes without saying.

That's not what I was referring to. It might have changed by now, but a few years ago not all states with pro teams had passed laws taxing visiting athletes.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

[MOtorboat]

The Broncos were already on the hook for this in 2013 because they'd played a road game against the Giants there. But this is 2014 so it means they are getting hit again.

The Broncos and Seahawks both have road games in California every year which is one of the worst. Someone once did a story about pitcher Darren Oliver and how many state income taxes his accountants had to pay just because he was an MLB pitcher that travels all over the country.

And most states are NOT giving up their own tax money because you have to pay some to another state. It is the federal government that lets you claim state taxes paid against the taxes you'd have to send to them.

They aren't "on the hook twice" because they make more money for the playoffs. It's not like they aren't making more and they are getting taxed double.

Plus, the bonuses they receive I would imagine are taxed in accordance with where the check is written, so I'm sure the bonuses for playoffs written by the teams will be written in Colorado, whereas the game check that they receive plus the Super Bowl bonus they receive will be written in New Jersey.

I've heard athletes in the NBA talk about this quite a bit, but not much in football.

Imagine their accountant fees for figuring all this crap out.

[Tned]

.

And most states are NOT giving up their own tax money because you have to pay some to another state. It is the federal government that lets you claim state taxes paid against the taxes you'd have to send to them.

Yes they are. You see confusing to separate issues. What happens among the states is more along the lines of what happens when someone works seven months a year in London and five months in US. The salary from those seven months is taxed by the UK, and the remaining five months by the U.S.

In the case of athletes, they allocate their income to be taxed by different states based on the amount of working days spent in each state.

So, take Manning's $20 million, he might only report $15 million as taxable by CO, and then show a schedule where the other $5 million was taxed by (divided up among) 9 other states.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

[Tned]

They aren't "on the hook twice" because they make more money for the playoffs. It's not like they aren't making more and they are getting taxed double.

Plus, the bonuses they receive I would imagine are taxed in accordance with where the check is written, so I'm sure the bonuses for playoffs written by the teams will be written in Colorado, whereas the game check that they receive plus the Super Bowl bonus they receive will be written in New Jersey.

I've heard athletes in the NBA talk about this quite a bit, but not much in football.

Imagine their accountant fees for figuring all this crap out.
Actually, it's worse than that. Since they will be in NJ for 8 days, they will pay NJ taxes using a formula along lines of (8/total football working days)*2014 football salary. It will probably be about 1/20th of their salary that will taxed by NJ.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

[MOtorboat]

Actually, it's worse than that. Since they will be in NJ for 8 days, they will pay NJ taxes using a formula along lines of (8/total football working days)*2014 football salary. It will probably be about 1/20th of their salary that will taxed by NJ.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

They don't get paid for practice though, they only get paid for the game, though. I'm not saying I don't believe you, as I'm not an accountant by any means, but that doesn't seem to make sense.

[Tned]

They don't get paid for practice though, they only get paid for the game, though. I'm not saying I don't believe you, as I'm not an accountant by any means, but that doesn't seem to make sense.

States make the case that their game check covers more than just their "game" and therefore do their calculations on essentially working days. This approach was probably driven mostly by home states, because other wise half of the player's salary/game checks would be taxed elsewhere.

You should remember, there is little about our federal or state tax codes that make sense. So, you can't use common sense as your guide to how they likely tax people.

[BroncoWave]

States make the case that their game check covers more than just their "game" and therefore do their calculations on essentially working days. This approach was probably driven mostly by home states, because other wise half of the player's salary/game checks would be taxed elsewhere.

You should remember, there is little about our federal or state tax codes that make sense. So, you can't use common sense as your guide to how they likely tax people.

That kinda does make sense though. While the NFL technically only pays you "game checks" you are still working 6 or 7 days a week. In the government's eyes, you have to be paid for all hours you work, so it makes sense that you are taxed accordingly.

[Tned]

That kinda does make sense though. While the NFL technically only pays you "game checks" you are still working 6 or 7 days a week. In the government's eyes, you have to be paid for all hours you work, so it makes sense that you are taxed accordingly.

Yep

[Dapper Dan]

I really didn't know states did this. Thanks for making the thread.

[Dzone]

Players have to pay taxes in ever road state they play in during the season. This is a complete non-story.
If its a complete non -story then why is there an article about it. People are talking about it. Why make a comment like that about someones thread

[Tned]

If its a complete non -story then why is there an article about it. People are talking about it. Why make a comment like that about someones thread

Why were there dozens of stories about Manning saying Omaha, as if he did it for the first time in the San Diego game? Reporters are looking for "unique" topics, and while this is old news, not everyone knows states have been doing this for a long time.

[Dzone]

Yep, theres a ton of super bowl articles. Some interesting, some not, but I have read every single one Ive come across LOL

[BroncoWave]

If its a complete non -story then why is there an article about it. People are talking about it. Why make a comment like that about someones thread

It wasn't a shot at the thread starter. I just meant it's a non-story in that it's the norm in how things work. People seemed to interpret it as something unique to the Super Bowl, so I was just clearing that up.

[BroncoWave]

New Orleans and San Diego, two of everyone's favorite Super Bowl locations, have state income tax as well but I don't remember this story ever being written when the game was in those cities. It just seems like at this point people are looking to pile on the location of the game in any way they possibly can. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good location for the game, but stories like this aren't really a valid reason for why it's not.

[Joel]

Yes they are. You see confusing to separate issues. What happens among the states is more along the lines of what happens when someone works seven months a year in London and five months in US. The salary from those seven months is taxed by the UK, and the remaining five months by the U.S.

In the case of athletes, they allocate their income to be taxed by different states based on the amount of working days spent in each state.

So, take Manning's $20 million, he might only report $15 million as taxable by CO, and then show a schedule where the other $5 million was taxed by (divided up among) 9 other states.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner
In that international example, the US taxes all of it, because (unlike most countries) the US doesn't care WHERE citizens get their income; I had to file last year, even though I haven't set foot in the US since 2010. There'a a foreign income exclusion credit for permanent overseas residents (last year it was capped at $95,000) but they have to pay US income tax on everything above that. I read a story a while back about a woman who'd been living in Sweden for 20 years and just found out about that, called the IRS and they said she owed millions in interest and penalties.

Note also that doesn't apply to corporations, who only pay US income tax on US profits and foreign profits brought back to the US.

I agree with your main point, but, if anyone's doing any work in another country (or will,) declare it on your taxes, incorporate yourself or hope the IRS never finds out about it.

[Nomad]

Players have to pay taxes in ever road state they play in during the season. This is a complete non-story.

I agree. When you travel working on the road in any trade (I'm an electrician), you have to pay that state's taxes you are working in, not sure why the NFL would be exempt. I'm sure the players would never had known. it just happens the BRONCOS next job is in NJ.

[MOtorboat]

Here's an interesting one out of Tennessee...

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/paying-to-play-in-memphis-the-strange-case-of-tennessees-jock-tax/

[Tned]

In that international example, the US taxes all of it, because (unlike most countries) the US doesn't care WHERE citizens get their income; I had to file last year, even though I haven't set foot in the US since 2010. There'a a foreign income exclusion credit for permanent overseas residents (last year it was capped at $95,000) but they have to pay US income tax on everything above that. I read a story a while back about a woman who'd been living in Sweden for 20 years and just found out about that, called the IRS and they said she owed millions in interest and penalties.

Note also that doesn't apply to corporations, who only pay US income tax on US profits and foreign profits brought back to the US.

I agree with your main point, but, if anyone's doing any work in another country (or will,) declare it on your taxes, incorporate yourself or hope the IRS never finds out about it.

And the know it all who shall not be named is back again.

I never said you didn't have to file or declare foreign income. There are exclusions and tax credits for taxes paid overseas on foreign earned income. As the topic was about states, I didn't go into nauseating "Joel" detail, because it was simply unnecessary for the example.

[Joel]

And the know it all who shall not be named is back again.

I never said you didn't have to file or declare foreign income. There are exclusions and tax credits for taxes paid overseas on foreign earned income. As the topic was about states, I didn't go into nauseating "Joel" detail, because it was simply unnecessary for the example.
You DID say if someone works (roughly) half a year in the UK and the other in the US each country only taxes them for the money earned there: That's just not true, generally nor specifically.

I don't know it all, but DO know THAT, that many people DON'T know it and that the ignorance has bankrupted more than a few. So I said so, carefully avoiding any sarcasm, since you've made valid criticisms of sarcasm in the past. You were still sarcastic in this response though, and that's not sarcasm either, it's a fact.

[OrangeHoof]

My younger brother used to live in the Caymans working for the Cayman government. The Caymans are a British territory. As a non-British citizen, he did not have to pay British taxes and, by not living in the U.S., he did not have to pay U.S. taxes. He hated it.

[Joel]

My younger brother used to live in the Caymans working for the Cayman government. The Caymans are a British territory. As a non-British citizen, he did not have to pay British taxes and, by not living in the U.S., he did not have to pay U.S. taxes. He hated it.
Um... again, as a US citizen he should've been on the hook for US taxes. The Foreign Earned Income Exclusion reduced and may have eliminated his US income tax liability, but otherwise I know no way he could've legally avoided US income tax entirely. If there is one, feel free and welcome to elaborate on it here or in a PM, because I'm still living and working in Norway. ;)

Come to think of it, maybe it was because it was the Caymans, since they have an unusual relationship with US tax law.

[Tned]

You DID say if someone works (roughly) half a year in the UK and the other in the US each country only taxes them for the money earned there: That's just not true, generally nor specifically.

I don't know it all, but DO know THAT, that many people DON'T know it and that the ignorance has bankrupted more than a few. So I said so, carefully avoiding any sarcasm, since you've made valid criticisms of sarcasm in the past. You were still sarcastic in this response though, and that's not sarcasm either, it's a fact.

Joel, you are once again completely derailing a thread with your know it all rants. Is there any wonder so many people feel you are ruining the Broncos Talk forum?

If you would like to have a discussion about US tax policy and/or laws, why don't you start one and I will be more than happy to continue the discussion, and explain it to you very slowly and in small words you can understand.

Please stop ruining threads with your petty argumentative tripe.

[Joel]

Joel, you are once again completely derailing a thread with your know it all rants. Is there any wonder so many people feel you are ruining the Broncos Talk forum?

If you would like to have a discussion about US tax policy and/or laws, why don't you start one and I will be more than happy to continue the discussion, and explain it to you very slowly and in small words you can understand.

Please stop ruining threads with your petty argumentative tripe.
I'm being neither petty nor argumentative; trying hard to avoid both is part of why I don't resort to name-calling or call peoples arguments "tripe" or "rants" (even when I think they are.) It's hypocritical to criticize someone as "condescending," then offer to explain something to them "very slowly and in small words you can understand."

It's a thread on SB players paying out-of-state taxes, and someone used a completely inaccurate example of out-of-country taxes; all I did was say an inaccurate statement was just that.

[Tned]

Back on topic, Teboi. Make your US international taxation thread if you would like me to explain it to you.

[Joel]

Back on topic, Teboi. Make your US international taxation thread if you would like me to explain it to you.
I wouldn't. Nice irony in that first sentence though: As previously explained, I will NEVER discuss THAT topic again on these forums EVEN if SOMEONE ELSE yet again insists on raising it.

[ShaneFalco]

Gotta love the judgement from some people on this forum.

[bcbronc]

Gotta love the judgement from some people on this forum.

hey it's tned's board and he can be as big a hypocrite as he wants to. It's do as he says, not as he posts.

[Tned]

hey it's tned's board and he can be as big a hypocrite as he wants to. It's do as he says, not as he posts.

Whatever floats your boat.

Shane took a shot at me due to a difference of opinion in P&R and you because of a disagreement two or three years ago.

I guess if the passive aggressive stuff works for you guys, I'm glad to help by being a target. I should send you as bill for therapy services.

Anything to add to the topic?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner