|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1
|
Orange Blooded [2958]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3193
Joined: 8/29/05
|
|
|
|
 |
Freshman [-99]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 3740
Joined: 9/5/20
|
Re: New players union
Jul 27, 2021, 12:54 PM
|
|
These kids are getting ready to learn about taxation and big government with NIL. In a few years they will quash any talk of getting salaries rather than scholarships and being paid as employees.
Southern Cal will get a few players because of NRL like foreman and the guys from the portal, but when they realize they’re paying 13 1/2 percent to the state of California Plus nearly 40% of the feds, more if Joe Biden had his way.
States like Tennessee, Texas, and Florida could have a recruiting advantage because of NIL and no state income taxes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1370]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1502
Joined: 11/20/05
|
Re: New players union
Jul 27, 2021, 1:08 PM
|
|
You pay income taxes to the state you call home. So technically unless Foreman(if he stayed with commitment to us) changed his permanent address to SC before he enrolled he would still have paid taxes in California.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8047]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6805
Joined: 10/16/09
|
Re: New players union
Jul 27, 2021, 1:44 PM
|
|
I wonder if the states (and local tax jurisdictions) would take the same stance they do with pro athletes too. In addition to where you live, they also take into account where your games are played. Those states and localities would have their hand out too.
In Louisville for example, you pay a state tax, a county tax, a city tax and guess what, where Churchill Downs is located they also have a Churchill tax! I lived their once, I got a new tax bill every day it seemed like.
Message was edited by: baker5801®
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1370]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1502
Joined: 11/20/05
|
Re: New players union
Jul 27, 2021, 1:53 PM
|
|
Either way you can bet players from FL and TX have more incentive to stay in State now that there is NIL if other states are going to tax you too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [-99]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 3740
Joined: 9/5/20
|
Re: New players union
Jul 27, 2021, 2:08 PM
[ in reply to Re: New players union ] |
|
Actually you do not. You pay state taxes where you make the money. I’m from South Carolina but I lived in Florida for a while and I still had to pay South Carolina taxes on money I made in South Carolina.
Greedy states like California got smart about this about 30 years ago. States that have professional sports teams saw players coming into their state and realized they could tax that money.
Here’s how it works, you get taxed on your signing bonus the year you get the signing bonus, the rest of your money each year is divided by the number of games you play. If the Houston Texans play the San Francisco 49ers in San Francisco that 1/16 of their salary will get taxed by the state of California at 13.5 percent.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jock_tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22353
Joined: 4/24/04
|
I don't see why an out of state player couldn't just base
Jul 27, 2021, 3:17 PM
|
|
their licensing business out of their home rather than their dorm room or apartment. If necessary, they could just give an official title to a family member back home. If they were being paid a salary it would be a different story as the college would be their place of work, but I'm not sure that's true in regards to NIL income.
Maybe there are clearer rules out there for that situation, but it seems like a fairly complex issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24890]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14799
Joined: 10/12/08
|
Re: New players union
Jul 27, 2021, 2:51 PM
|
|
Another reason for the top teams to join together and form a new conference. Maybe that's the SEC long term goal. If the top teams are all in the same conference and are all joined for the good of protecting their revenue sources, they can make this union or any union of players irrelevent. Just don't recruit any union members and if they join later, just don't play them. There's no law stating who a college has to recruit nor play. Player still gets all scholly benefits, just no playing time.
A better deal might be for colleges to quit offering schollys and have players pay the college to play on that team. After all, the player is really benefitting from getting coached and trained to have a career in the NFL if good enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
