Explore the complex world of state income taxes for professional athletes. Understand how various states levy income on non-residents.
legalclarity.org
Understanding the Jock Tax
The jock tax is not a distinct, separate tax but rather the application of existing state income tax laws to non-resident individuals who earn income within a state’s boundaries. While commonly associated with professional athletes due to their high public profiles and frequent travel, this principle extends to any non-resident earning income in a state, including entertainers, musicians, and even support staff traveling with teams. The underlying concept is “source-based taxation,” which asserts that the jurisdiction where income is generated has the right to tax that income. The modern application of this tax gained prominence after California taxed Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls following the 1991 NBA Finals, leading to retaliatory measures by Illinois and subsequent widespread adoption by other states.
States That Impose the Jock Tax
Many states with a general income tax impose what is colloquially known as the “jock tax” on non-resident professional athletes. States such as California, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts are examples of jurisdictions that levy income taxes on non-residents, thereby affecting visiting athletes. Conversely, states like Florida, Texas, Washington, and Nevada do not have a statewide income tax, and therefore do not impose a “jock tax” on income earned within their borders. The specific application and rates vary by state, but the principle remains consistent: income earned from services performed in the state is subject to its income tax.
How the Jock Tax is Applied
The calculation of the jock tax typically relies on the “duty days” method, which apportions an athlete’s income based on the number of days spent performing services in a particular state. This includes not only game days but also practice days, team meetings, and other official duties within that state. For instance, if an athlete earns a $10 million annual salary and has 200 total duty days in a year, but spends 10 duty days in a specific state, then 5% of their income ($500,000) would be allocated to that state for tax purposes. This allocated income is then subject to the state’s income tax rate.
www.dailymail.co.uk
