Quote:Unless things are completely for an NFL player, that's incorrect. A person's tax status depends simply upon his state of residence along with the state of employment. If both are Florida, which they would be in this case, he isn't subject to any state taxes.

 

Plus, if they did that to football players, you can bet your bottom dollar that they're doing it to people on business trips and things of the sort. I know for a fact that they don't do that. Hell, could you imagine the nightmare that would make for filing taxes if you're an airline pilot?

 

 

I realize it sounds preposterous, but it is quite literally fact. NFL players can pay state, and local taxes in up to nine different states for the regular season. They are able to deduct those cost on both their own state tax filing (if applicable), as well as their federal tax filing. In most cases the tax rate for an NFL player playing a game in a state he does not reside in is adjusted to a non resident higher tax rate. Which means if Mack plays for the Jaguars, and list his main residence as being in Florida, he could, and most likely would have a higher state, and local tax rate than the players on the opposing home team.

 

I was not disputing that there are tax savings for an NFL player that plays for a team in a state with no state taxes, I was considering what that difference would be in Mack's case in particular between playing in Ohio, or playing in Florida. The posted 15% calculations seemed to negate the taxes from games played in states that do collect state, and local taxes from opposing NFL players. In addition, the overall difference in cumulative tax considerations that were posted didn't appear to take into account the deductible relief from federal, state, and local taxes, nor the elevated tax rate for being an out of state worker.

 

I understand this may not seem to make “common” sense, but it is absolutely pinky swear true.

---