Jump to content
Rosegreen

NBA to Las Vegas? Ownership lined up

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

I think the new stadium will help boost attendance over the course of this season.  But that's pretty much it. 

UNLV just doesn't seem to GAF about football.   And they're getting that way in basketball too.  Other than a couple of good years, including a swt 16, they've been mediocre or worse for the better part of 30 years.  

San Jose St hired a better BB coach than UNLV did.  They are getting better recruits too.  When we have a preseason "Rank Um" thread, I think San Jo should be ranked higher than vegas. 

Yeah. I think the new stadium gives them a window that they've never really had before. But if UNLV plays football like UNLV has always played football, that spike in interest will be gone faster than a Rebel basketball recruit. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NVGiant said:

Yeah. I think the new stadium gives them a window that they've never really had before. But if UNLV plays football like UNLV has always played football, that spike in interest will be gone faster than a Rebel basketball recruit. 

Yeah. People will come out to see the new stadium.  If vegas can't put a decent product on the field, they won't come back.

Rebel football probably has a smaller fan base  than Gorman HS. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, renoskier said:

 

 

Rosegreen's "double the pay" is a ridiculous exaggeration.

Especially when you consider that fact that professional athletes must file tax returns and pay state income taxes in all the states where they play games. So yes, players based in California would certainly be paying higher taxes but probably not enough to base a free agency decision on.

Yeah. I've seen these sorts of filings for those dudes. It's a royal pain in the ass for all involved, I'm sure.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

Yeah. People will come out to see the new stadium.  If vegas can't put a decent product on the field, they won't come back.

Rebel football probably has a smaller fan base  than Gorman HS. 

and yet still more fans than UNR. With the new stadium, UNLV will probably easily exceed north of 30-40k fans. 

Imagine being a UNR fan. Your program exceeds far passed it's budget---even in seasons where you go bowling you can't even muster more than 16,200 lousy fans. It must suck to have so little potential. 

image.png.130606d84f43d42eb708b15c40bd2bf5.png

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, renoskier said:

 

 

Rosegreen's "double the pay" is a ridiculous exaggeration.

Especially when you consider that fact that professional athletes must file tax returns and pay state income taxes in all the states where they play games. So yes, players based in California would certainly be paying higher taxes but probably not enough to base a free agency decision on.

Correct.  Every player must pay tax in each state they play a game in on a pro-rata basis of their annual compensation.  Many cities with pro sports teams reside in high tax states like CA, NY, IL, etc.  So even though a player lives in a no-income-tax state they will still be subject to state income tax on up to half of their compensation.

Funny story from back in my days in pro sports.  Our team was playing in a large east coast city that had both a state and city income tax.  Our HR department had previously forgotten/failed to remit state and city tax withholdings over the previous year.  That state tax authorities would not let our team's plane depart the airport until the withholdings for the prior year and current year were paid.  It's late at night and we had to get the HR person out of bed and into the office to file the forms and wire the money.   

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, renoskier said:

 

 

Rosegreen's "double the pay" is a ridiculous exaggeration.

Especially when you consider that fact that professional athletes must file tax returns and pay state income taxes in all the states where they play games. So yes, players based in California would certainly be paying higher taxes but probably not enough to base a free agency decision on.

This is true - Adding LV into the league gives every NHL or pro sports player an instant tax credit for the games they play in NV 

Plus the NHL has a escrow thing where like 10% of every players salary goes into an escrow account that used in some fashion to even the leagues salary cap or something as it's adjusted almost every year 

The few states that do not have state income tax doesn't give those teams any huge advantage over the rest of the teams in the league 

 

https://hockeyanswered.com/what-is-escrow-in-the-nhl/

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

This is true - Adding LV into the league gives every NHL or pro sports player an instant tax credit for the games they play in NV 

Plus the NHL has a escrow thing where like 10% of every players salary goes into an escrow account that used in some fashion to even the leagues salary cap or something as it's adjusted almost every year 

The few states that do not have state income tax doesn't give those teams any huge advantage over the rest of the teams in the league 

 

https://hockeyanswered.com/what-is-escrow-in-the-nhl/

There is no tax credit in most states with income taxes for players when they play in no-tax states.  A CA player will be taxed on their full income and credits for taxes paid to other states will be granted.  So a CA player will pay full CA state tax on income earned playing games in Vegas.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NVGiant said:

There has never been any interest in UNLV football. And it had nothing to do with the weather. Sam Boyd's location certainly played a part, especially in its early days when it was really out in the middle of the desert. Lack of success has been part of the problem, too. But even when Cunningham was at UNLV, the best Rebel football team in my lifetime, interest was marginal and completely overshadowed by the basketball program. (I remember going to watch them play a ranked SMU team near the end of that season, and the stadium was maybe 2/3 full.) Nobody is dying to go to a UNLV game, with or without a new stadium. Now, if they have a little sustained success, something the program never has been able to do, they might be able to turn it around. But unlike basketball, UNLV football never really has been some sort of sleeping giant. From my earliest memories, that program has been met with nothing more than apathy.

UNLV FB was in the shadow of UNLV BB from 1973 on - UNLV FB was a top 10 D-II program with former NFL & SMU coach Meyer as HC and UNLV went D-I in 1978 when ASU & UA moved from the WAC to the PAC-8/10 and the WAC was looking at schools to fill the ASU UA void........by that time UN:LV BB was coming off a final four season & the BB program was on the national scene & that was the focus of the athletic department and local fan base for the next 15 years..........also what dinged UNLV FB was that the WAC didn't extend the full invite to UNLV after the 1978-1981 partial WAC membership where UNLV played a full WAC schedule in FB & BB but wasn't an "official" member...........when the WAC turned down UNLV in 1982, FB & BB were relegated to joining the PCAA ..........for BB it wasn't a factor but for FB it was a step down..........and from 1982 on for 10 years BB excelled while FB bumbled along and could never match BB as the two were on complete different levels 

I still say to this day that UNLV FB might have been in much better shape over the 40 years had the WAC let UNLV join - UNLV FB was competitive in the WAC from 1978 to 1981 & even beat #8 BYU .......the local fan base might have been more involved if UNLV FB could have sustained & maybe built from that initial start as a D-I program 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Fowl said:

Correct.  Every player must pay tax in each state they play a game in on a pro-rata basis of their annual compensation.  Many cities with pro sports teams reside in high tax states like CA, NY, IL, etc.  So even though a player lives in a no-income-tax state they will still be subject to state income tax on up to half of their compensation.

Funny story from back in my days in pro sports.  Our team was playing in a large east coast city that had both a state and city income tax.  Our HR department had previously forgotten/failed to remit state and city tax withholdings over the previous year.  That state tax authorities would not let our team's plane depart the airport until the withholdings for the prior year and current year were paid.  It's late at night and we had to get the HR person out of bed and into the office to file the forms and wire the money.   

holy shit that's funny.

I never realized they took it that seriously.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Fowl said:

There is no tax credit in most states with income taxes for players when they play in no-tax states.  A CA player will be taxed on their full income and credits for taxes paid to other states will be granted.  So a CA player will pay full CA state tax on income earned playing games in Vegas.

That might be, but there's also no tax to NV for games played in NV 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, renoskier said:

 

 

Rosegreen's "double the pay" is a ridiculous exaggeration.

Especially when you consider that fact that professional athletes must file tax returns and pay state income taxes in all the states where they play games. So yes, players based in California would certainly be paying higher taxes but probably not enough to base a free agency decision on.

It is nearly doubled his pay when you include the bigger contract than what a CA team offered.
 

Athletes do pay a jock tax and it’s a small amount, like 3% of your income on average but in California’s case, if you are a high earning professional athlete, you will be paying a 13.3% marginal tax rate no matter where you play. For example, Lebron and the Lakers still had to pay their income tax regardless of playing in the bubble in Orlando, FL. On the flip side, if you were an Athlete from Nevada or FL, you don’t have to pay income tax. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rosegreen said:

It is nearly doubled his pay when you include the bigger contract than what a CA team offered.
 

Athletes do pay a jock tax and it’s a small amount, like 3% of your income on average but in California’s case, if you are a high earning professional athlete, you will be paying a 13.3% marginal tax rate no matter where you play. For example, Lebron and the Lakers still had to pay their income tax regardless of playing in the bubble in Orlando, FL. On the flip side, if you were an Athlete from Nevada or FL, you don’t have to pay income tax. 

So an athlete will have to pay state income tax on money he/she made out of state?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

So an athlete will have to pay state income tax on money he/she made out of state?  

Think it works like this - I'll use NFL LV Raiders because of less games

When the LV Raiders go to play the Chargers, Chiefs & Broncos the players are taxed for the one game they play in those states - When the Chiefs Chargers & Broncos come to play the Raiders in NV they don't pay a NV income tax on that game 

I think it works this way because players are "contract" employees and not like regular employees so when they play in various cities & states they are subject to whatever % is due in the jurisdiction - so every AFC west team that plays a game in LV NV gets a tax break for that game compared to when the Raiders were in Oakland 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

Think it works like this - I'll use NFL LV Raiders because of less games

When the LV Raiders go to play the Chargers, Chiefs & Broncos the players are taxed for the one game they play in those states - When the Chiefs Chargers & Broncos come to play the Raiders in NV they don't pay a NV income tax on that game 

I think it works this way because players are "contract" employees and not like regular employees so when they play in various cities & states they are subject to whatever % is due in the jurisdiction - so every AFC west team that plays a game in LV NV gets a tax break for that game compared to when the Raiders were in Oakland 

 

That's what I thought too.  But reading this thread it seemed some were suggesting a player from a cali team would have to pay st income tax on money earned in NV.  That can't be right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

That's what I thought too.  But reading this thread it seemed some were suggesting a player from a cali team would have to pay st income tax on money earned in NV.  That can't be right.

I wouldn't think they would because they aren't playing that game in CA..........think it might work like some construction contractors or any company that has workers in various states........Wal-Mart workers in CA get hit with state income tax but not their NV workers 

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/pandemic-play-is-complicating-pro-athletes-taxes

Pro Athletes’ Taxes Based on Where Their League Resumes Play

The income professional athletes earn in any opposing team’s state they play in over the course of a season is typically subject to those states’ income taxes, what is known as the jock tax. For states with income taxes such as California, it means hundreds of thousands in additional tax revenue for every game the Los Angeles Lakers or Golden State Warriors host. With Covid-19 forcing the NBA and NHL to play out the rest of their season in select cities, some players will avoid state income taxes altogether while others will be on the hook for much more—all depending on which state they call home.

 

The out-of-state taxes professional athletes typically pay get applied to the total number of days they perform “income-related work” like play in games, team meetings, or practices in a given state. Even if a player lives in a state like Florida that doesn’t have an income tax, they still pay state income taxes for games played outside their home state.

Like many things in sports, jock taxes can be traced to Michael Jordan.

After the Chicago Bulls beat the Lakers in the 1991 NBA finals, California sought to capture some of the pay Jordan earned while playing in Los Angeles. His home-state Illinois retaliated with its own out-of-state tax, and soon the rest of the country was doing it—and the jock tax was born.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

That's what I thought too.  But reading this thread it seemed some were suggesting a player from a cali team would have to pay st income tax on money earned in NV.  That can't be right.

The Lakers (and any CA based team) still pay their tax if they play somewhere like Florida,NV,TX etc.
 

As I said earlier, In the NBA bubble, in Orlando (Florida zero income tax btw), Lebron and his teammates (making over a million) still paid CA income tax at a 13.3 rate. While Jimmy Butler of the Heat paid zero.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Joe from WY said:

holy shit that's funny.

I never realized they took it that seriously.

The city of Philadelphia (in cooperation with the state of Pennsylvania) will go to great lengths to collect their income tax revenue.  Pretty sure one of the auditors in Philly saw this issue come up on their sheets and waited until our team came to town so that they could get an all expenses paid trip to the game.  Unfortunately for them, our guys laughed when they tried to stop the team busses to the airport - hence the reason why the plane was grounded...  

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Fowl said:

The city of Philadelphia (in cooperation with the state of Pennsylvania) will go to great lengths to collect their income tax revenue.  Pretty sure one of the auditors in Philly saw this issue come up on their sheets and waited until our team came to town so that they could get an all expenses paid trip to the game.  Unfortunately for them, our guys laughed when they tried to stop the team busses to the airport - hence the reason why the plane was grounded...  

I'll have to remember this for future reference. Here I always thought NYC were the biggest sticklers.

I work with state/local tax every day. I hear some funny/strange shit regularly, especially in this sort of area, but this takes the cake. Hilarious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

That's what I thought too.  But reading this thread it seemed some were suggesting a player from a cali team would have to pay st income tax on money earned in NV.  That can't be right.

 

TL/DR: It is right.  A player for a California team would likely have to pay California income tax on money earned in Nevada.

Most states tax all of a resident's income, and then offer credits for taxes paid to other states.  So a California resident (like a player for the Lakers) would be taxed on all income earned everywhere at California income tax rates (top rate of 13.3%).  The income that was earned in other states would be subject to tax in those states.  For example, when the Lakers play against the Jazz in Salt Lake City, the earnings for those games are subject to Utah's 4.95% income tax rate.  California then offers a tax credit for the amount paid to Utah so that the same income isn't subject to double-taxation.  But California is still collecting tax for the difference between the allowed tax credit (the 4.95% paid to Utah) and California's rate (13.3%).

For states that don't have a state income tax, California doesn't provide a credit for taxes paid to other states since no income tax was paid to those states.  So California is collecting the full 13.3% state income tax for their residents' earnings in tax-free states like Nevada.

If a player on a California team wants to get around that, he can establish residency in a non-tax state like Nevada.  In theory, that would mean that he would be subject to California tax only to the extent that he played games in California.  That would still account for half or more of his income, but would save him money on the other games.  Unfortunately for the players, the payroll departments for their teams don't always report things correctly.  The teams often report their players as residents of the state in which the team plays, even if they have established their permanent residences in other states.  If the players then argue with the state that the team prepared the W-2 incorrectly, the state can rule that the team probably did it correctly and subject the player to that state's tax anyway.

A player for a team in Nevada doesn't have to deal with that.  They still have to pay tax to other states as a nonresident (to the extent they play games in those states), but at least half of their games (the home games) are not subject to any state tax.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2021 at 12:41 PM, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

Twolves aren’t going anywhere.  Memphis maybe but Nash would put up a huge fight for them.  New Orleans is most likely possibility.

I think the NOLA smoked cleared when Benson bought the team 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...