Players pay the tax rate of whatever city they’re in for away games. Joe the article you linked even states the tax rate is only for home games. Did you read it?
So do you think the NHL should put a handicap on the salary cap for teams based on local income tax? Is that your solution here?
How about cost of living too. I mean housing, whether renting or buying is going to be double in San Jose compared to somewhere like Winnipeg.
How about local endorsement deals? Pretty sure Toronto and New York players have a big advantage over Columbus in that aspect.
Every market has its pros and cons… some a lot more of one than the other. It’s like that in every major sport and no one cared until this weird herd thinking vibe took over NHL fans where they all need to complain about Tampa Bay being too good.
yes, I see my $ values were off as I assumed the chart was factoring in the road games, but that doesn’t change the advantage, just the amount of advantage… Yes, I think handicapping capspace based on state income tax should happen, it’s free capspace…My argument is/has been all about capspace, it’s a locked value that 4 teams are allowed to basically exceed by signing lower contracts than 28 other teams that carry the same value (some more than others)
I don’t want to get into other possible factors like endorsements/living expenses, etc (because they are unique/different for every single individual person and their personality) but the home state income tax rate is something everyone but 4 states deal with… I don’t have the answer on how to solve it, just saying it’s enough of a factor that it matters…
I remember when Point signed his recent extension and the NHL Network guys joked “He loves that no income tax in Florida” It would be nice to see a breakdown of a total team payrol based on income tax rates…I’m guessing it’s probably around a $2-$3,000,000 savings for each of the 4 teams against the remaining league average…