What are your feelings on the Jock Tax?

[aaron_mag]

An argument by the British against the colonist was that they were shouldering the greater tax burden for defending the colonies with little taxes upon the colonists. By your logic we should all still be colonists since our forefathers were just whining babies at having to pay for taxes they didn't vote on....

As for needing police protection at the stadium etc am I not mistaken that these events MAKE money. Charge the event organizers, stadium owners, etc for these services. There is no logical justification for this tax. The reason so many cities are endorsing such taxes are because they are politically popular. Screw over the visitor and don't tax us (the real beneficiaries of the services). People need to fess up and open their own pocket book rather than looking for a way to screw their neighbor (yes I know they are rich but that does not make it right). I don't feel sorry for these poor athletes (of course) but it is an interesting evolution of a concept that I think is wrong.

[Jack_Dubious]

A jock tax??!?! How could they?


JDub

[1stdeadeye]

How's this?

Originally posted by aaron_mag
An argument by the British against the colonist was that they were shouldering the greater tax burden for defending the colonies with little taxes upon the colonists. By your logic we should all still be colonists since our forefathers were just whining babies at having to pay for taxes they didn't vote on....

As for needing police protection at the stadium etc am I not mistaken that these events MAKE money. Charge the event organizers, stadium owners, etc for these services. There is no logical justification for this tax. The reason so many cities are endorsing such taxes are because they are politically popular. Screw over the visitor and don't tax us (the real beneficiaries of the services). People need to fess up and open their own pocket book rather than looking for a way to screw their neighbor (yes I know they are rich but that does not make it right). I don't feel sorry for these poor athletes (of course) but it is an interesting evolution of a concept that I think is wrong.

How about I come over to your house and set up a lemonade stand for one day. I will just be a visitor using your yard. So I don't need to compensate you for using your location.

[Kevmag]

I heard that states were trying to collect taxes (sales and income) from the airlines for drinks and headphones (movies) that occurred within there borders. Can you imagine the headache for the flight attendants trying to track where the sale occurs???

I really don't understand the rational behind the "Jock Tax". Why single out athletes? Why not have everyone pay taxes in any state they travel to for business. In my last job, I traveled extensively. I would have had to file taxes in 10-15 states in addition to CA.

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by Kevmag
I heard that states were trying to collect taxes (sales and income) from the airlines for drinks and headphones (movies) that occurred within there borders. Can you imagine the headache for the flight attendants trying to track where the sale occurs???

I really don't understand the rational behind the "Jock Tax". Why single out athletes? Why not have everyone pay taxes in any state they travel to for business. In my last job, I traveled extensively. I would have had to file taxes in 10-15 states in addition to CA.

YES!!!! Someone sees my point. I also travel extensively for business. These sort of taxes would add layers and layers of bureacracy onto our efficient system. More bureacracy equals goodbye to economic prosperity (what we have left anyway).

[Potatoboy]

aaron, what you don't seem to realize is that while these events to make quite a bit of money, it isn't all good.

Most of the time the statium is heavily subsidized, if not outright build by government funds, that's right, your tax dollars.

After that, these sports enterprises get all the profits from their events held there (more or less).

Since thses two entites are not the same, with the notable exception of the Green Bay Packers, the government often pays for more than they get.

An Example is the recent occurances with the Detroit Lions.

The city of Pontiac MI, Payed quite a bit to buy land and build the Pontiac Silverdome. A lot of this money came from the taxpayers. Because the Lions decided that it wasn't up to their satisfaction in a few departments, they up and left (convincing the City of Detroit to pay out the behind for a new field to be built.)

The City of Pontiac is screwed, because they had budgeted the money recieved for the Lions games to eventually pay off the stadium (which is measured in Decades, not years)

Now all they can do it lease it out to concerts and other events, or tear it down and sell the land for a loss.

[shartley]

[aaron_mag]

If cities put on a tax on events (events is the key word here) rather than athletes to pay for costs associated with putting on a sporting event I would not have a problem with it. As I have stated time and again I have no sympathy for million dollar athletes. I don't have anything against them either however. They earn money as a highly specialized individual and for whatever reason the market is willing to pay these outrageous salaries...

My point is that this tax in principle is wrong. Is singles out one particular element of society and taxes them without representation. I think it is a dangerous trend.

All the other stuff I am in total agreement. For some reason the city of Portland wants major league baseball and wants to build a stadium. As if we didn't have enough budget shortfalls!!!! It will probably be an economic disaster. This, however, is a separate issue. I do believe the principle of the taxation without representation issue is interesting, relevant for discussion, and a dangerous trend.

[joeyjoe367]

I honestly can't stand professional sports. There are PLENTY of people who would play basketball or baseball professionally for the love of the game. I'd rather watch them.

I can't watch pro sports anymore because of the fact that I know that EVERY single player on the field is making ten times what my father makes. It's disgusting and I can't watch it anymore.

I'm 100% for any law that screws these guys outta any amount of their money.

[shartley]

[aaron_mag]

Yes Shartley does bring up a good point. It cuts right to the heart of the same issue and is a widely accepted tax. Of course I live in Oregon which is one of the only states that does not have a Sales Tax. What can I say

In neighboring Washington we can avoid the Sales tax by producing our Oregon drivers license but few of us go through the trouble. I do feel, however, that this tax is inherently different than a sales tax as one is applied to all visitors while this one specifically targets a specific group.

We've probably exhausted all of the interesting elements of this thread. I did, however, think that it was something of interest to discuss. I'll resist posting any more and let this thread die unless someone else brings up a really good point.

[Kevmag]

Here are some of my thoughts on this subject:
Here are my thoughts on this issue:

The Jock Tax is athletes paying state income tax in the individual states they play in. Why are there so many posts thinking this money is going to go to pay off a stadium that a city/county voted on? I'm not an accountant (my wife is), but is there anything to guarantee this money will go to the specific city/county that the event takes place? I believe (in CA, at least) counties receive a % of state income taxes collected based on population (but there are probably other factors).

Are you conveniently (yes, I say CONVENIENTLY ) forgetting about the BENEFITS the local TAXPAYERS receive by having a pro team in there area? Some of included increased sales taxes, increased business taxes, increased hotel taxes, increased rental taxes, new jobs, ect... This is why it is such a big deal to get the Superbowl or Olympics in your city.

Furthermore, the companies that run stadiums are taxed (I would guess they are also charged fees to hold events as well), that ultimately are paid by the league (or team) directly (as a pass-thru) or through rent (of the stadium).

In any case, it doesn't make sense to me to single out the athletes (the employees) to foot the bill for services that are required during these events. For example, a football game in NJ causes an increase in traffic, which causes an increase in overtime for traffic cops. The solution here is for the athletes should foot the bill?

As for the statement about hating pro athletes and screwing them on taxes, the net taxes they pay will not be significantly increased. In some cases (specifically athletes in states with higher tax rates), net taxes paid will go down. They would be paying taxes on the portion of income they make in that state (and not on there total income). For example, an athlete makes $1M taxable income and plays half his games in CA and half in NY. He'd pay taxes on $500k to CA and $500k to NY (not $1M to each state, as some arguments suggest).

[aaron_mag]

Kevmag is much better at outlining his arguments than aaron_mag. I bow to the master.....

Actually before we do we haven't disagreed in other threads have we

[logamus]

move to texas, we dont have any income taxes, state or local.

god bless that oil.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Kevmag
Are you conveniently (yes, I say CONVENIENTLY ) forgetting about the BENEFITS the local TAXPAYERS receive by having a pro team in there area? Some of included increased sales taxes, increased business taxes, increased hotel taxes, increased rental taxes, new jobs, ect... This is why it is such a big deal to get the Superbowl or Olympics in your city.

Originally posted by Kevmag
Furthermore, the companies that run stadiums are taxed (I would guess they are also charged fees to hold events as well), that ultimately are paid by the league (or team) directly (as a pass-thru) or through rent (of the stadium).

Did you know that all companies are taxed, and then their employees are also taxed? By your argument, if I work of a company, since THEY have already been taxed, I should not be taxed. GREAT! Can you see if you can get that passed in all states?

Originally posted by Kevmag
In any case, it doesn't make sense to me to single out the athletes (the employees) to foot the bill for services that are required during these events. For example, a football game in NJ causes an increase in traffic, which causes an increase in overtime for traffic cops. The solution here is for the athletes should foot the bill?