• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Jersey Taxes Could Eat Up All Of Peyton Manning's Super Bowl Earnings

Blue_State said:
Which part is untrue? He is getting paid for working in NJ either 46,000 or 96,000 depending on the result of the game. 1 day of work. This is the ONLY TIME he will work in NJ this year unless he plays for the Broncos next year. If he plays for the Broncos next year, he will make enough money that the state of NJ will tax him more than the money he made during his 1 day of work in NJ.

Which part of that is untrue?
Click to expand...

pretty much all of it. First off he is working in NJ more than just a day. Hes been there working over a week. This may come as a shock to a lot of people but NFL players do work more than just Sunday afternoons. Crazy I know but there is more to being an NFL player than just suiting up at game time. So while Manning could pay more in taxes for the year than he makes in bonuses off of this one game however his NFL salary pays him for the entire year. So part of that salary he makes he is earning in NJ. His salary is being taxed in addition to the bonuses. Furthermore he will pay more in taxes if he plays next season because he will play in NJ again next year. So that salary is a consideration. Manning will likely spend a few weeks there this year earning his salary with the Denver Broncos and prorated from the number of weeks he spends there and his annual salary plus bonus earnings he will make much more than his bonuses. So if you are going to take his total taxes paid to that state then you should be considering his full salary that he earns during those weeks and not just his bonus because despite the trickery and misleading bs in the article wages get taxed too, not just bonuses.
 
Kreton said:
pretty much all of it. First off he is working in NJ more than just a day. Hes been there working over a week. This may come as a shock to a lot of people but NFL players do work more than just Sunday afternoons. Crazy I know but there is more to being an NFL player than just suiting up at game time. So while Manning could pay more in taxes for the year than he makes in bonuses off of this one game however his NFL salary pays him for the entire year. So part of that salary he makes he is earning in NJ. His salary is being taxed in addition to the bonuses. Furthermore he will pay more in taxes if he plays next season because he will play in NJ again next year. So that salary is a consideration. Manning will likely spend a few weeks there this year earning his salary with the Denver Broncos and prorated from the number of weeks he spends there and his annual salary plus bonus earnings he will make much more than his bonuses. So if you are going to take his total taxes paid to that state then you should be considering his full salary that he earns during those weeks and not just his bonus because despite the trickery and misleading bs in the article wages get taxed too, not just bonuses.
Click to expand...

FALSE!

If he was in Denver this would he not get paid his salary? He would.

The payment is for the game in NJ. No other player but the players who are in the Super Bowl are getting that payment. The payment is for the work done this Sunday.

So if you are going to take his total taxes paid to that state then you should be considering his full salary that he earns during those weeks and not just his bonus because despite the trickery and misleading bs in the article wages get taxed too, not just bonuses.
Click to expand...

Why should he pay taxes to NJ? He doesn't live there, he doesn't work there full time. He earns his salary on the other side of the country.
 
maybe this will help most of you who are choosing to ignore facts.

Raiola, senior manager of the sports and entertainment group within the accounting firm of O’Connor Davies LLP in its Cranford office, said athletes across the country often file more than a dozen tax returns every year, paying taxes in every state in which they compete — and sometimes local taxes as well, if they play games in cities like Cleveland, Detroit and Philadelphia. So do many of the high-profile sportscasters who join them on the road.

The tax is essentially a super-sized commuter tax, based not just on the gameday itself, but how many days an athlete is in the state, imposed on a prorated portion of the player’s salary for the year.

And it’s not just for the Super Bowl. When the Redskins came to town to play the Giants in the last game of the season, everyone on the team incurred a tax liability — even those who did not play. If someone is on the roster, a portion of their income will be taxed in New Jersey.
Click to expand...

It is a common practice is most states for individuals to pay taxes to states for money they earn in that state. There is more being taxed than the bonus, however if you take the total taxes and divide them by only part of the income being taxed of course the numbers are going to look bad. Look at the complete picture. This is something all players pay as part of their accepting a salary in a league that earns money from coast to coast. This is nothing new. Not just for manning, not just for the superbowl. It is part of the NFL every week. EVERY WEEK. These numbers are twisted because they are leaving out the majority of the taxable income manning is earning, only accounting for a portion and taking the highest paid player and twisting the taxes on his salary to appear as if they are taxing his bonus for high amounts.
 
Blue_State said:
FALSE!

If he was in Denver this would he not get paid his salary? He would.

The payment is for the game in NJ. No other player but the players who are in the Super Bowl are getting that payment. The payment is for the work done this Sunday.



Why should he pay taxes to NJ? He doesn't live there, he doesn't work there full time. He earns his salary on the other side of the country.
Click to expand...

The bonuses are being paid for those who compete in the superbowl, however, mannings 15+ million dollar salary, which is what is being taxed. He earns his salary in multiple states across the country. Colorado cannot tax him for the same money NJ does. Or missouri. Or california. Every NFL player pays state taxes for a portion of their salary in almost every state they play in.
 
Kreton said:
The bonuses are being paid for those who compete in the superbowl, however, mannings 15+ million dollar salary, which is what is being taxed. He earns his salary in multiple states across the country. Colorado cannot tax him for the same money NJ does. Or missouri. Or california. Every NFL player pays state taxes for a portion of their salary in almost every state they play in.
Click to expand...

You are as thick as mud. You just answered it but you won't see it. He is going to earn 96,000 or 46,000 for his work on Sunday. There is potential, for over 100% for the money he made in NJ.
 
Those 10 days in New Jersey, divided by an estimated 235 total duty days, means that Manning’s accountant will have to allocate 4.26 percent of the quarterback’s salary to New Jersey — about $646,000 if he wins the Super Bowl, and $644,000 if he loses, according to Raiola. His New Jersey tax bill (with the top indiviidial tax rate here at 8.97 percent) will come to about $57,000 for his 10 days in the Garden State, whether he wins or loses.
Click to expand...

Look at the whole picture.
 
Blue_State said:
You are as thick as mud. You just answered it but you won't see it. He is going to earn 96,000 or 46,000 for his work on Sunday. There is potential, for over 100% for the money he made in NJ.
Click to expand...

No he is going to make about 650000 for this this game. That is what is being taxed.
 
Kreton said:
The bonuses are being paid for those who compete in the superbowl, however, mannings 15+ million dollar salary, which is what is being taxed. He earns his salary in multiple states across the country. Colorado cannot tax him for the same money NJ does. Or missouri. Or california. Every NFL player pays state taxes for a portion of their salary in almost every state they play in.
Click to expand...

I hope he pays his accountant well.

And doesn't try to do his own taxes!
 
Erod said:
New Jersey is paying him nothing. No one in New Jersey is paying him. The Denver Broncos pay him (and the NFL provides bonuses for playoffs).
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter who pays you. If you work for a company based in Chicago and work in Texas you pay taxes in Texas.

So a travelling salesperson should have to pay income taxes in every state they do business in? Of course they don't
Click to expand...
By law they should...but it's a headache and chasing down the income made by a travelling salesman isn't worth it. When it's a high profile person like say...Clinton giving a speech or an athlete it becomes more of an issue.

For the record, Texas has no state income taxes, so it doesn't cost an NFL player a dime to play in a Super Bowl in Houston or Dallas.
Click to expand...
Very true...but most states do have income tax.

This is nothing more than a money-grab from a perpetually debt-ridden state. Funny how the states with the highest taxes are in the worst financial state.
Click to expand...
Or it's just tax law because we tax either income or consumption. Consumption in the place you purchase the good (i.e. you buy something online from a state with higher/lower sales tax you pay the sales tax in the state you purchase it from) or where you earn the income.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I don't know either.

How anyone could owe all of what they've earned in a state they don't live in is a question. Why they have to pay taxes in a state they don't live in at all is another. It just seems to me to be a ripoff.


but, then, we do pay hotel/motel taxes to cities we don't live in. How is that justified?
Click to expand...

They are taxing him on the 7 work days out of his 200 work days spent in NJ. That works out to about $525,000 of his $15 million income, then they tax it at 8.97%, that's why the number is so big.

But I thought his pay is for the regular season, not the playoffs. So they should really just tax the winner or loser share, not the regular season pay. I'm sure their is some language in the law that lets them tax everything.

Teams should just pay the players the bulk of the pay for home games, and the minimum for road games, assuming they are not in a high tax state. The Giants and Jets don't need to consider this option.
 
upsideguy said:
Mislead by a misleading article, eh? In no case is he paying more than the 8.7% New Jersey tax. They are playing on your ignorance of taxes and your hatred for them. This is all about income allocation: how do you allocated your income for state tax purposes based upon where it was earned. Peyton Manning is NOT being taxed at 100% of earnings. He might have to allocate more of his earnings to NJ than he would like, but that is all that is at play here.
Click to expand...

If the Broncos lost to the Patriots and did not make it to the Super Bowl, Manning would still be paid his $15 million. So, if he loses the Super Bowl, he will actually make less money than not making it here at all. That's how the costing over 100% theory works.
 
Blue_State said:
Jock Tax
Click to expand...

I'm not yet seeing anything in there that proves that Manning will have to pay a 100+% tax on his Super Bowl earnings. Not saying that he necessarily won't, but the burden is on you guys to prove that he will.
 
iliveonramen said:
It doesn't matter who pays you. If you work for a company based in Chicago and work in Texas you pay taxes in Texas.
Click to expand...

But he doesn't live in New Jersey. A travelling salesperson doesn't pay taxes there. Why should he?

A Bears player who plays in New Jersey, therefore, gets taxed three times on the same dollar: once by the federal government, once by Illinois, and once by New Jersey. That's ridiculous. (And Obama wants to raise his taxes even further.)
 
notquiteright said:
More CON crap! The tax isn't on 100% of his income but on less than 9% of his annual salary. What the article you cited doesn't say is quite a few states use this tax, not just for the Super Bowl, and not an 'all of a sudden' tax.

That ring means FAR more to him than the tax, perhaps that is why he is so focused and successful a player.

But do whine on....
Click to expand...

Epic fail thread delivers the lulz.
 
Erod said:
A Bears player who plays in New Jersey, therefore, gets taxed three times on the same dollar: once by the federal government, once by Illinois, and once by New Jersey. That's ridiculous. (And Obama wants to raise his taxes even further.)
Click to expand...

How did Obama find his way into Manning paying taxes to New Jersey?
 
Manning will be the MVP of the game.
It is aligned in the stars of the NFL over New Jersey and the New York market.
The game is about money.
We may hear the commentators mention the State's Rights phenomenom over vtaxes .
Phys251 said:
I'm not yet seeing anything in there that proves that Manning will have to pay a 100+% tax on his Super Bowl earnings. Not saying that he necessarily won't, but the burden is on you guys to prove that he will.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
Manning will be the MVP of the game.
It is aligned in the stars of the NFL over New Jersey and the New York market.
The game is about money.
We may hear the commentators mention the State's Rights phenomenom over vtaxes .
Click to expand...

You are not listening to my specific concern.

Conservatives have been, and continue to be, so wrong about so many things, that it's almost gotten to the point where I assume they're lying until they can prove that they are telling me the truth. So I am deeply, deeply skeptical about the claim presented to me in the OP. And I will not accept it unless sure-fire evidence is presented to me.
 
Your Star said:
I'm sure he'll have major problems feeding his family because of these taxes.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously trying to make that point, or was that just trying to be funny? Maybe we should take everything you have except a loft of bread and stick of butter. You can feed yourself just fine, I'm mean.....you'll live.
 
Erod said:
Manning will make about $42K if he loses the Super Bowl this week. New Jersey will tax him more than that for THIS WEEK alone.
And he doesn't live in New Jersey. He lives in Denver right now.
Click to expand...
That's not what the article says:

"New Jersey, and every other state that imposes a jock tax, taxes players on their calendar-year income from each employer.
<snip>
But should Manning continue his career into the 2014 season, New Jersey will collect an additional $45,000 from him by taxing income he has not even earned yet."

Afaict, it says that they are taxing his annual income, not his week's income.
:shrug:
 
Phys251 said:
I'm not yet seeing anything in there that proves that Manning will have to pay a 100+% tax on his Super Bowl earnings. Not saying that he necessarily won't, but the burden is on you guys to prove that he will.
Click to expand...

I was responding to "what the hell is a jock tax and why should I believe it exists."
 
specklebang said:
I don't know. I was just trying to contribute my (very limited) knowledge regarding multi-state taxation based on my anecdotal experience. I don't follow sports so I'm a little out of my depth here. I assumed (and we all know how that goes:)) that Mr. Manning was playing a game in New Jersey which would effectively mean that he was working in New Jersey at the time he got paid this income. Maybe I'm completely off track here - did he "work/play" in New Jersey? If he did, then NJ has a claim on the revenue he earned in NJ. If not, no, they should have no claim at all. Please forgive my ignorance that lead me to incorrectly make my statement.
Click to expand...

AFAIK, your taxes are calculated in the state you live in. For example, as a Truck driver for a medium sized company, they are located with their HQ in Nashville TN, I live in SC, but drive through TN four times a week at least, that technically mean that I earn at least a part of my income from being in the states of SC, NC, TN, KY, OH, IN. That doesn't mean that I owe each one of the states tax money, that is insane.
 
Phys251 said:
You are not listening to my specific concern.

Conservatives have been, and continue to be, so wrong about so many things, that it's almost gotten to the point where I assume they're lying until they can prove that they are telling me the truth. So I am deeply, deeply skeptical about the claim presented to me in the OP. And I will not accept it unless sure-fire evidence is presented to me.
Click to expand...

Presented to you? If you're posting in this thread, you could look for the evidence yourself since you fear someone is lying to you. Or you could drop it if it isn't of sufficient interest to you to prompt a search for the truth. Just sitting back and taking this as an opportunity to smear all conservatives doesn't reflect any specific concern other than the aforementioned smear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom