Owners proposing 4 luxury tax levels

Besides the dollar-for-dollar tax teams now pay for going over the cap, the owners are proposing a 4-to-1 tax for teams that go over $10-15 million threshold as well as a 2-to-1 tax and 3-to-1 tax for teams over certain other levels over the cap. .... I like this proposal

8 months ago AyyJude 8 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I am for anything that gets them on the court

hopefully this will help

As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.

by ElRonToro on Sep 28, 2011 10:51 AM PDT reply actions

"Big named" Players(Durant, Lebron and a few others) and 15 owners have agreed to meet Friday

They have also agreed to leave the weekend open for possible negotiations.

Always a good sign

by HeuristicLineup on Sep 28, 2011 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions

I guess a hard cap might be in another 10 years.

Who here still thinks the Lakers will gladly pay 4-1 for a Championship team?

"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!

by caseycheesecake on Sep 28, 2011 9:50 PM PDT reply actions

A hard cap without revenue sharing spells death for small market teams.

The small market teams count on the big market teams paying more than their share of the agreed upon percentage of revenues guaranteed to the players.

by Kfan in Korea on Sep 29, 2011 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions

The small market teams don't get as much of the Luxury Tax as one might think.

If I’m not mistaken, no matter how many teams pay or receive, each team gets only 1/30th of the Luxury Tax paid. So, if 20 teams pay $300M in Luxury tax, and 10 teams receive payment, each team only gets 1/30th of $300M or $10M. The extra $200M goes to the league.

I know a couple of years back the Kings got $6M from the Luxury Tax payout. But, your title line is indeed accurate. If there were a hard cap and no Luxury Tax or Revenue sharing, the league would end up with 16 teams in a very short time.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
The greatest impact player in NBA History - Tim Donaghy

by HighTops on Sep 29, 2011 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions

It's not just the luxury tax, it's not having to spend 1/30th of the total amount due the players

The NBA guarantees the players a certain percentage of the revenue. If a few teams are paying huge chunks of salary the smaller market teams can pay less in salary. If there is a hard cap the small market teams have to pay an equal share.

This last season the Kings made money by having a salary near the league minimum. And I think the NBA actually had to pay the players a bit extra because the total salaries didn’t add up the the 57%(?) of the NBA revenue, which is guaranteed.

Last season, if there had been a hard cap at say 60 million, and all the teams over that cap last season, weren’t actually over that cap. Where do you make up that salary deficit? You raise the minimum salary.

Even with the players taking a smaller percentage of the pie under the new CBA, a hard cap would likely spell a higher minimum salary than the current level.

For the health of the league, the rich teams need to pay more. Either through extra salary (as it is now), or preferably through some sort of revenue sharing to even the playing field.

by Kfan in Korea on Sep 30, 2011 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I imagine if the league made too much money

They would have some avenue in place where the money would be funnelled from the league back to the players and not just from individual teams. It would seem counter productive to punish a team for making good business decisions. But you could be right.

The revenue for last year was up 4%. But, the salary total for the league was 10% above the salary cap which is based on the 57%. So no the league didn’t have to pay above the contracted salaries. But, the league did have to return the escrow account money to the players.

Revenue sharing will make the league and it’s small market teams more profitable. But even if the Busses and Cuban’s add every dollar that the team makes to revenue sharing it won’t level the playing field. As long as there are owners like the Maloofs going against Billionaires who treat their teams as hobbies and are willing to use their non-basketball revenue to buy a championship.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
The greatest impact player in NBA History - Tim Donaghy

by HighTops on Oct 2, 2011 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions

They should change it to where all luxury tax money ONLY goes to teams that do not pay the luxury tax.

That will be a major deterrent to keep teams under that threshold. Teams like the Lakers/Knicks/Mavs will not want to hand checks directly to their competition.

Or you could easily just set up an inverse proportion system so the Kings would get the most out of the pot, and the Lakers would get the least.

by Wonderchild on Sep 29, 2011 1:31 PM PDT reply actions