Not so much about Darnold specifically, but how much does CA 12% income tax on income over $750,000 hurt teams in the free agent market? For example, if one of the Florida or Texas teams offers me $10MM and one of the CA teams offers me $12MM, I'd net almost as much playing in TX or FL. Plus I'd get to live in Dallas, Houston, Jacksonville, Tampa or Miami instead of Los Angeles. How much will this hurt USC and UCLA competing in the Big 10 with Ohio's 3.25%, Michigan's 4.25% and Indiana's 2.95% tax rates?
Follow up thoughts on the Darnold CA tax thread.
- Thread starter patdog
- Start date
while I believe we pay to much in taxes on everything, and there is probably way more fraud in the NGO world...... I just can't get wrapped up in an unfair advantage to others as a result of a professional athletes tax burden in CA. I mean, when your income eclipses 5 mil. does it really matter at that point
It matters, but I do think you have a point. If you're making decisions strictly because of the tax impact, you've got your priorities wrong. It's certainly a factor, but if you're letting taxes drive your decisions, you're doing it wrong.
There is a reason why no modern society exists without taxation.
Call it theft if it helps you feel better while you benefit from all the things that collective taxation provides.
Living in Los Angeles isn't the bad part of this equation. There's a reason it costs more than those other cities you mentioned.......it's better.
Living in Dallas or Houston literally sucks by comparison. Jacksonville, Miami and Tampa are better but still not as good. The weather alone puts it in a category by itself.
Yeah...I wouldnt use Houston and Jacksonville as examples of where I would rather live due to lower taxation, but to each their own.
As for whether UCLA and USC will be hurt because too many talented athletes will instead choose to live in Ann Arbor or Bloomington, well I bet there will be some that choose to live in Bloomington because their tax burden will be lower. I also bet there will be some that choose to live in LA despite their tax burden being higher because of...well many reasons that 18-22yo people care about.
As for whether UCLA and USC will be hurt because too many talented athletes will instead choose to live in Ann Arbor or Bloomington, well I bet there will be some that choose to live in Bloomington because their tax burden will be lower. I also bet there will be some that choose to live in LA despite their tax burden being higher because of...well many reasons that 18-22yo people care about.
I prepared a return last year for a high income ($2MM) CA resident and he paid a $15,000 mental health service tax in addition to the 12%.......
Its a 1% tax on taxable earnings over $1MM. So someone that earned $2MM in taxable earnings would pay $10,000.
It is a unique way to address mental health access and services for those unable to pay for it on their own.
Not sure if it is justifiable or not, and not sure if it is effective or not.
What I do know is there are countless comments here on SPS whenever there is a mass shooting, where people are like 'we need more mental health services' or 'we need easier access to mental health services'.
...this addresses those comments.
A thread about players selecting a school that nets them the most money after taxes is shoved toward mass shootings and taxes paying for mental health. I wonder who could have found a way to get us here…hmmm. I wonder.
I think the sport matters. I don't think taxes hurt the Lakers because it comes with endorsement opportunities. I don't think taxes would hurt the Knicks if they were well run, although they may have finally been bad enough for long enough that they don't have the same endorsement opportunities to make up for it. At least nationally. Maybe the local market is big enough that they can make it up on that.
Baseball is hard to say because they don't have the same hard cap. For football I think taxes and high costs probably hurt some, but the skill of the organization is just much more important.
There is some economist that tried to account for how state income tax helped or hurt teams and I think he did find it was a significant factor (in the data sense of "significant", as being seen in the data and likely not due to chance). But I think his findings showed a more significant effect for hockey? Which seems fishy for some reason.
Presumably, when other NFL teams visit the two LA teams and the one San Francisco team, the players, coaches, staff, and other employees on all those teams each have to pay California income tax on whatever they earn on those days, and that amounts to a LOT of money, given the extremely high salaries of players and coaches.
They do. But it's only for 1 week (or maybe just a couple of days). If you're based there vs based in Texas or Florida, that's half of their income that's not taxed at the state level.
You for real with this?
I responded to another poster that brought up the mental health tax and a poster who then asked who the mental health is for.
And while I did mention mass shootings, it was in the context of explaining the funding of mental health.
I didnt shove the thread toward mental health or mass shootings.
Go cry about the person who actually brought up the mental health tax.
Very serious
Why would I cry about someone bringing up yet another tax that might go into the calculation by a person deciding to move to CA? He didn’t say “holy crap these loons have a mental health tax.” He said he prepared a return that had a $15k metal health tax in addition to the 12% tax. His post was 100% on point with the thread.
Your hyper-focus on social issues and politics makes everything look like an opportunity to bring it up. It’s truly a gift.
Last edited:
I wouldn't want to live in LA, but it you'd post me up in Napa area, I'd take a pay cut! I like being somewhere that the wait staff apologizes if the don't have outside seating available.
Add: This fella lives in a LA apartment and his property taxes are $100k.
isn't it where you play the game? So only 1/2 of the games would be taxed at that rate. Still bad but not as bad as all of them.
That actually kind of explains their politics. If it wasn't close to paradise climate wise, the politics couldn't be so corrupt. Stationary bandits can squeeze people a lot more if to escape them the victims have to leave paradise.
Not if you are a resident of said state. So, if you are a CA resident, all of your income is taxed to CA, but you get a credit for tax paid to the other state. So, let's say you are CA resident and play a game in MS. CA taxes you at 12% and MS 5%. Then you get a credit on CA for the 5% paid to MS. You are still out the 7% difference.
It’s duty days. Not sure how that’s calculated in NFL. But if you’re on duty for 180 days & you spend 18 days outside CA for road games, that’s about 90% of income taxed in CA.
I suspect I’d be claiming I was a resident of my home state by only spending the bare minimum days in CA I had to.
You would think if you pay all those taxes you could get your house rebuilt in under a year after it burns to the ground because the fire suppression is sub par.