While mia may complain a lot about taxes...

[Futbol Phan]

... let's be thankful he's not Andrew McCutcheon of the Pirates, whose pay stub was discarded in the Wrigley locker room and found by a dude who (of course) posted it for all to see:

http://imgur.com/TyrGObW

Take a look at how these big salary athletes get nicked for taxes in most every city/state they play in. And imagine what a nightmare filing taxes in 15 states must be.

[michael anderson]

well they only get nicked for taxes for the portion of the season that game represents, for example. It is better to have a long and complicated tax stub where you may pay 12 different people .05x than it is to pay one entity x. (of course it doesnt always work out this way...depends on where the home base would be)

If a baseball players team only plays two games in atlanta, for example, he only pays the tax for that fraction of his salary. It sounds bad because you see a ton of different taxes listed, but they are just fractional.

what this does is minimize the advantage of texas/tennessee/florida. You see the news media report that a player can "save x million in state taxes by signing with the rangers/rockets/mavs/magic/etc". In reality its about half that, because they do have to pay on the road games in other states.

[jim brown]

It looks like he earns $820K and takes home $427K. That's a big nick. I thought the rich in this country didn't pay any taxes.

[michael anderson]

his base salary for 2015 is 10 million, so on a per month basis that sounds about right....but a guy like that is probably making another few million or more with endorsements.

depending on what state/city they live in, it's easy to do the tax numbers for people like this. Over 90% of their income is going to be at the 35 or 37% marginal rate, so we'll put down 35% there. Average state tax is probably 6%. So you are already at 43%. Before city stuff is even considered. FICA isnt a big deal for the super rich on salary as such a small percentage of their salary is taxed.

We are taxed too damn much.

[xyzzy]

That was an interesting picture.

Small adjustment but his after-tax take home is $440K since $13K of those deductions are not taxes (MLB fee, 401K, etc).

But everyone knows (or should know) that his withholding is not his taxes, unless you've never gotten a refund (or had to pay). We also don't know how his non-salary income is structured and taxed, or what other investments or shelters he has that might be generating tax losses that can offset some of this. Salary income is probably the least loophole-prone since it's reported and withheld.

[xyzzy]

On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 2:00:31 AM UTC-4, michael anderson wrote:
> On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 1:54:25 AM UTC-4, jim brown wrote:
> > On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 12:30:41 AM UTC-5, michael anderson wrote:
> > > On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 12:30:50 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
> > > > ... let's be thankful he's not Andrew McCutcheon of the Pirates, whose pay stub was discarded in the Wrigley locker room and found by a dude who (of course) posted it for all to see:
> > > >
> > > > http://imgur.com/TyrGObW
> > > >
> > > > Take a look at how these big salary athletes get nicked for taxes in most every city/state they play in. And imagine what a nightmare filing taxes in 15 states must be.
> > >
> > > well they only get nicked for taxes for the portion of the season that game represents, for example. It is better to have a long and complicated tax stub where you may pay 12 different people .05x than it is to pay one entity x. (of course it doesnt always work out this way...depends on where the home base would be)
> > >
> > > If a baseball players team only plays two games in atlanta, for example, he only pays the tax for that fraction of his salary. It sounds bad because you see a ton of different taxes listed, but they are just fractional.
> > >
> > > what this does is minimize the advantage of texas/tennessee/florida. You see the news media report that a player can "save x million in state taxes by signing with the rangers/rockets/mavs/magic/etc". In reality its about half that, because they do have to pay on the road games in other states.
> >
> >
> >
> > It looks like he earns $820K and takes home $427K. That's a big nick. I thought the rich in this country didn't pay any taxes.
>
> his base salary for 2015 is 10 million, so on a per month basis that sounds about right...

That's a semi-monthly paycheck (pay period is May 1-15) so on an annual basis that pencils out to $20 million. Of course we don't know how MLB pay is structured, does he get paid only during the season or all year?

>.but a guy like that is probably making another few million or more with endorsements.

Plus he's probably got other investments, many of which could be generating tax losses for him. You really can't tell from this what his true tax burden is.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

We also don't know how much he's paying his agent - and other professional staff - particularly accountant

[xyzzy]

I had assumed his agent was paid in the "Pittsburgh Professional Athlete Fee". But I googled on it and found that it's actually a tax, even though it's not listed as one on the paystub. So an adjustment to my reply to jim brown is in order.

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/businessnews/2013/04/14/A-slew-of-taxes-just-part-of-the-ballgame-for-pro-athletes/stories/201304140277

"In Pittsburgh, where a Non-Resident Sports Facility Usage Fee was imposed in 2005, athletes and entertainers pour in an average of $3.7 million annually with a 3 percent fee on all income earned while performing in any venue built or maintained with public money. The teams pay the city directly and withhold the fee from their employees' paychecks."

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

dude pays a lot of taxes - you can be damn sure that's mimicked elsewhere - prolly with kicker surcharges on top of pro rata income tax

[Futbol Phan]

On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 12:30:41 AM UTC-5, michael anderson wrote:

> On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 12:30:50 AM UTC-4, Futbol Phan wrote:
> > ... let's be thankful he's not Andrew McCutcheon of the Pirates, whose pay stub was discarded in the Wrigley locker room and found by a dude who (of course) posted it for all to see:
> >
> > http://imgur.com/TyrGObW
> >
> > Take a look at how these big salary athletes get nicked for taxes in most every city/state they play in. And imagine what a nightmare filing taxes in 15 states must be.
>
> well they only get nicked for taxes for the portion of the season that game represents, for example. It is better to have a long and complicated tax stub where you may pay 12 different people .05x than it is to pay one entity x. (of course it doesnt always work out this way...depends on where the home base would be)
>
> If a baseball players team only plays two games in atlanta, for example, he only pays the tax for that fraction of his salary. It sounds bad because you see a ton of different taxes listed, but they are just fractional.

This is being challenged, BTW, by an NFLer (can't remember who) that argued that paying taxes on 1/16 of his season salary to SF and CA, for example, because of a road game at the 49ers, is unfair because he is getting paid for far more than 16 days of work. Once you consider practices, game day translates into more like 1/150th of a season. NFLers certainly are impacted by this more than other sports because of the small number of games they play.

Athletes are impacted hugely by this, and most places that do this are doing it because of big-salary entertainers. But others get hit too. I gave three seminars in CA over a three day period in 2013, and got hit with a $164 tax bill for my efforts.

[jim brown]

And maybe some fucking AMT somewhere along the way....the idea that the rich don't pay their fair share of taxes is ludicrous.

[jim brown]

Does that go for everyone? I know someone who travels around the US and judges livestock shows...usually for expenses plus ~$1000 stipend....should he be paying this to each state as well?

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

Hey, their money is other people's money, and they have a lot of it,
so it's fair game!

The thing is, rich people are very mobile. When Keith Richards did
his autobiography, he stated that the 83% tax rate of the UK was a
simple statement to the Rolling Stones, "We don't want you to live
here." So they moved to the south of France.

Problem is, poor people aren't so mobile. So the chauffeurs, artisans,
grocers, and other people who served the members of the Stones had to
do with the lower income when Richards et al moved away.

--
The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on my
life. ... I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90%
how I react to it. And so it is for you... we are in charge of our
attitudes. -- Charles Swindoll

[xyzzy]

I know this doesn't apply every situation but whenever I read one of these jock tax discussions I wonder..

Assuming:

1. A league with the salary cap so that all of the total payrolls are roughly the same.
2. People who work out of their home state and pay taxes to the state they don't live in don't pay the same taxes to their home state (in other words you get a credit for the taxes you paid to other states which I know is the case in North Carolina)

Wouldn't every state get the same total income tax revenue they get by doing this, with less hassle and overhead, if they all agreed to collect the full year income taxes for the home team and leave visitors alone?

I know this wouldn't work with rock concerts, etc, but in sports....

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

There would still be an incentive for teams policies to favor locating
in low-tax states. And plenty of incentive to game the system, ala NJ
attracting the Giants and Jets.

--
The problem with Internet quotations is that many of them
are not genuine. -- Abraham Lincoln

[Futbol Phan]

First, not every state does this. And those who do set different thresholds for the amount that triggers the tax. They aren't really looking to nick a livestock judger; the $$$ is in going after the athletes, actors, etc. I got nailed because my three days in Cali earned me enough to exceed their threshold (which I believe was $2000).

[Wolfie]

"xyzzy" wrote

> Wouldn't every state get the same total income tax
> revenue they get by doing this, with less hassle and
> overhead, if they all agreed to collect the full year
> income taxes for the home team and leave visitors alone?

You can't tax people differently like that, equal
protection and all that.

[Wolfie]

"jim brown" wrote

> I know someone who travels around the US and judges
> livestock shows...usually for expenses plus ~$1000
> stipend....should he be paying this to each state as well?

He should be filing taxes everywhere he makes income,
yes. Depending on how often he hits a particular state
or city, he may be under the tax minimum. And he should
be including it on his residential state tax as well, in most
cases.

State taxes were under consideration at the SCOTUS this
session, interestingly enough. The home state is required
to provide a credit for taxes paid to other states on income
earned in those states, if they tax on total income (as most
do). (Ruling was a few days ago.)

[michael anderson]

Between state, federal, and FICA......I pay over 100k in taxes every year, and that's after deductions(as aggressive as I can do). And I'm obviously not anything close to rich. If some dude like me is paying 6 figures in taxes, we are taxed TOO DAMN MUCH.

[Some dued]

Assuming this is true, you are one of the richest people on the planet, but all you can do is feel sorry for yourself. Pretty damn pathetic in my opinion.

[michael anderson]

No, I'm not anything close to 'one of the richest people on the planet'.....there are over a million people in this country alone who make more money than me(some significantly).....and yet the govt, at all levels, insists on taking more more more.

In my state just this week they were considering INCREASING state income taxes. Huh? I'm already seriously considering bailing from this state due to the prohibitive state income tax as two neighboring states don't have any state income tax(and thus would save me over 1k per month), and yet these tax and spenders are saying they may need even more? No thanks....I'll pass.

We need lower taxes....especially in terms of income tax.

[RoddyMcCorley]

On 5/23/2015 1:27 PM, michael anderson wrote:
>
> Between state, federal, and FICA......I pay over 100k in taxes every year, and that's after deductions(as aggressive as I can do). And I'm obviously not anything close to rich. If some dude like me is paying 6 figures in taxes, we are taxed TOO DAMN MUCH.
>

Simple: Make less money.

--
False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul
with evil.

Pennsylvania - Tá sé difriúil anseo.

[Some dued]

Assuming you pay 50%, you are at least in the top .1 percent according to sites such as givingwhatwecan.org, though I have no idea how accurate it is.
The truth is people complain, whether they have everything or nothing, but it sounds like money is not a problem for you.

[RoddyMcCorley]

On 5/24/2015 6:23 PM, Some dued wrote:
> Assuming you pay 50%, you are at least in the top .1 percent according to sites such as givingwhatwecan.org, though I have no idea how accurate it is.
> The truth is people complain, whether they have everything or nothing, but it sounds like money is not a problem for you.
>

It is a problem for him. He's consumed by it and its loss to taxes. I
don't think he is smart enough to realize that what he is paying is the
price of success.

I don't like paying taxes, but I realized about 30 years ago I should be
thankful to have the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of my labors.

[jim brown]

On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 10:19:58 PM UTC-5, RoddyMcCorley wrote:
> On 5/24/2015 6:23 PM, Some dued wrote:
> > Assuming you pay 50%, you are at least in the top .1 percent according to sites such as givingwhatwecan.org, though I have no idea how accurate it is.
> > The truth is people complain, whether they have everything or nothing, but it sounds like money is not a problem for you.
> >
> It is a problem for him. He's consumed by it and its loss to taxes. I
> don't think he is smart enough to realize that what he is paying is the
> price of success.

No....he is paying for the price of politics...every politician, D or R is out there buying votes with our tax dollars...why is he deemed unappreciative to the fact that he is forced to pay six figures in taxes...that's six figures on a few hundred thousand in earnings, not a million.

>
> I don't like paying taxes, but I realized about 30 years ago I should be
> thankful to have the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of my labors.
>

Once again..."we should be thankful that our pols waste our money with no regard for the source" ...BULLSHIT! To what end will you gladly pay your taxes? Hell, do you even pay any? Half of all Americans pay zero Fed tax...that makes quite a burden on the rest of us.

[michael anderson]

On Monday, May 25, 2015 at 5:01:10 AM UTC-5, jim brown wrote:
> On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 10:19:58 PM UTC-5, RoddyMcCorley wrote:
> > On 5/24/2015 6:23 PM, Some dued wrote:
> > > Assuming you pay 50%, you are at least in the top .1 percent according to sites such as givingwhatwecan.org, though I have no idea how accurate it is.
> > > The truth is people complain, whether they have everything or nothing, but it sounds like money is not a problem for you.
> > >
> > It is a problem for him. He's consumed by it and its loss to taxes. I
> > don't think he is smart enough to realize that what he is paying is the
> > price of success.
>
> No....he is paying for the price of politics...every politician, D or R is out there buying votes with our tax dollars...why is he deemed unappreciative to the fact that he is forced to pay six figures in taxes...that's six figures on a few hundred thousand in earnings, not a million.
>

It's not just the amount I pay. but it's the fact that people who make the exact same as me(in some cases a little more) pay less. Because they bought a house, or because they figured out how to claim some of their house as an office, or because they lease a car a certain way. Or have lots of kids. Or put their kids in daycare(and yes I know for some of these they phase out after a certain amount). Or buy some sort of green car.

Regardless of whether I pay what I do or if I paid 50% less, I'd still feel our tax system is grossly unfair. I don't want to buy a green car. I shouldn't be forced to make lifestyle changes just to pay a more reasonable amount on taxes. Taxes shouldn't be a game.

[Ken Olson]

That's the way the social engineers get people to change their behavior,
along with supporting selected activity. It is what it is and I doubt
it will change much in our lifetimes, although I will always have hope!