Schneider on WA income tax affect on FA

Maybe he can convince players based on the sunny weather going forward after 2027

It doesn't take effect until 2028.

HOF Hater said:

It doesn't take effect until 2028.

Click to expand...

Yes, that’s the point of the article

Well, if you look into teams who currently reside in the state with no income tax, outside of Tampa Bay, none of them have been very successful anytime recent. Also, Tampa without Brady wouldn’t have won the Super Bowl.

Las Vegas Raiders, Houston Texans, Dallas Cowboys, Tennessee Titans, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Miami Dolphins and Jacksonville Jaguars.

With 4 or 5 Superbowl rings on their hands, those paid endorsements should cover any financial issues.

RehireMora said:

With 4 or 5 Superbowl rings on their hands, those paid endorsements should cover any financial issues.

Click to expand...

Even with endorsements, I assume players will feel like, I still have to do the work and give away 10%. I’m guessing we will need to be a great team on the field to attract the best players in addition to paying higher salaries than we have had to up to now.

It has nothing to do with success or failure. What it has to do with is factoring in the deal vs another teams deal. We could get away with giving them a little less because they'd get more of their money. That is no longer the case.

You still have to build a good team in the end.

What may be discussed in this thread: whether or not players will be deterred from signing here because of the new tax

What will get you at least a week vacation: anything else

If you can’t only talk about whether or not players will be deterred from signing here, best for you to just stay out of the thread.

Also comments like “will get political in 3 2 1” violate the rules as well, don’t do it.

So this is his excuse for signing two “Who?”s so far?

seabowl said:

New Washington tax law could affect Seahawks, Schneider says

Seattle Seahawks general manager John Schneider said he believed Washington state's new income tax on high earners would eventually have a negative impact on the team's ability to sign free agents.

www.espn.com

Maybe he can convince players based on the sunny weather going forward after 2027

Click to expand...

It will definitely make a difference, the story about the loss of income from winning the Super Bowl by Darnold. The winners share was less than the taxes I believe. That had to do with CA rules.

BTW, nobody is talking about Mike Evans going to SF as a FA. He had an off year because of injury and age, but he is certainly still a top performer in the league. Top 15 at least I would guess.

I don't think it'll have near the impact that some people think. California has the highest income tax in the country and the Rams and 49ers are doing pretty damn well (not to mention the Dodgers).

jeremiah said:

It will definitely make a difference, the story about the loss of income from winning the Super Bowl by Darnold. The winners share was less than the taxes I believe. That had to do with CA rules.

BTW, nobody is talking about Mike Evans going to SF as a FA. He had an off year because of injury and age, but he is certainly still a top performer in the league. Top 15 at least I would guess.

Click to expand...

Personally I believe the Niners overpaid Evans enough to make up any difference in taxes he’ll have to pay. I don’t think many teams were beating down his door for a 3 year deal with his age and recent injury issues

I don't think it will cause players to stay away as a trend. However it could be one of those deciding factors for a guy all else being equal. IMO it's going to be the biggest factor for starts getting their 2nd contracts where they get their big paydays. Guys near the end of the careers who may chase a ring or good franchise may still come, provided the team is there there.

By itself, the income tax rule likely won't push people over the fence. As shared, CA teams still get FAs.

The issue might likely more be that no income tax offset the perceived geographical disadvantage (Remember 'South Alaska'?). Seattle teams travel more, generally.

This will probably factor into the FA math. It will likely impact decisions.
My bigger worry is how it affects potential owners.

Something I had thought I heard which I wanted to check with my Tax accountant friend before posting. He confirmed. Players actually get taxed for road games based on the tax laws of the jurisdiction where that game is played. "State tax is based on performance location" - direct quote. That also lessons the effect of this new law.

Also NFL player are paid based on games the way contracts are structured. The other major sports are game and practice based.

HawkRiderFan said:

I don't think it will cause players to stay away as a trend. However it could be one of those deciding factors for a guy all else being equal. IMO it's going to be the biggest factor for starts getting their 2nd contracts where they get their big paydays. Guys near the end of the careers who may chase a ring or good franchise may still come, provided the team is there there.

Click to expand...

If taxes in WA are similar to those in CA, living in California would tip the scale for me. WA state is not exactly warm and cozy. If I weren't too broke to move, soon AZ or Nevada will be home, but I will love the Hawks forever.

This bill has a long way to go before it actually becomes law. In my opinion, it is almost certainly against the state constitution, which says that any "property" tax be graduated, in other words, that it not apply to a single class of taxpayers. For example, federal income tax is a graduated tax. Unless you are very poor, everyone pays taxes, it's only a question of how much.

Over the past 80 some years, courts in WA have consistently ruled that income qualifies as property. Limiting the tax to a particular bracket, ie $1M+, does not meet that threshold. Traditionally, all courts are very reluctant to go against such long standing precedent unless there is a very compelling argument.

If the courts do rule it unconstitutional, it then the bill needs a constitutional amendment in order to become law, and that requires a 2/3 vote of the state legislature and a vote of the people. Neither of those are likely to happen.

And while it's true that the only other team from a non-income tax state to win a SB in this century besides us is Tampa Bay, it doesn't make John Schneider's job any easier as it removes what is currently a huge advantage in recruiting free agents, that they won't have to pay any income tax. That could make a difference with some players.

@pmedic920, how's that for not talking politics?

Chapow said:

I don't think it'll have near the impact that some people think. California has the highest income tax in the country and the Rams and 49ers are doing pretty damn well (not to mention the Dodgers).

Click to expand...

Dodgers?

MLB is way different than NFL. lol.

Here's what a fan on webzone thought about JS interview on this topic. "Just won a damn Super Bowl and Schneider is ALREADY crying and blaming politics for why they won't be able to keep their team together.

Un-fing-real.

Reminds me of Ray Lewis crying about the black out. Like holy hell YOU WON THE SUPER BOWL STOP CRYING. You sound insecure for a franchise who just won it all. Almost like they know deep down it was undeserved".
The jealousy pours from this post. Can you imagine being so delusional, that you talked yourself into believing that any Seattle fan thinks this championship wasn't deserved? Check on your Niners friends, they're not okay.