Jump to content
YoloinOhio

London Jaguars? Cheerio!

Recommended Posts

  I see Mexico City as problematic in terms of a NFL franchise.  A NFL team would be fertile ground for criminal activity with kidnapping/ ransoming clearly at the top of the list.  Any player regardless of background would not want to take his family there.  Yeah, his neighbors most likely will be fine but he can't control what is going on much outside the better parts of Mexico City.  One bad headline will create a lot of problems for the NFL.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

True. But I'm not sure if the same rules apply in the UK. But the larger point is this: people consistently overestimate foreign income tax rates vs. U.S. rates! This is probably a carryover from when there really was such a chasm - the Beatles' Taxman ("one for me, 19 for you") was true at the time when the UK had a top 95% marginal rate. But that was a long time ago. Now, for example:

- U.S. top tax bracket = 37% (AFTER the Trump tax bill). But then add state taxes, which could be as high as 13.3% (California) = 50.3%

UK top tax bracket = 45%, and there are no state/local income taxes.

 

 

Yup, difference is not as stark as people imagine (although I think the NHS tax is in addition to the 45% in the UK).  There was a list a couple years ago about total effective tax rates for NFL players.  Phillip Rivers topped the list at about 50%.

 

Too bad he's not paying his "fair share". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

With a trillion a year in gambling on the NfL, I don’t wanna think who cares the most about it...

 

 

The naive is that the game isn’t run by criminal elements

 

Are you Q?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Are you Q?

 

i don't even know what that means....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pop gun said:

Never happen, they wouldn't be able to attract UFAs to leave their families. Toronto is one thing London would be totally different as far as living in a different country.

 

If a UFA had, say 4 offers from Buffalo (snow/cold), London(rain/fog), Tampa(heat), and Dallas(heat). I'm thinking London is 4th on that list by a lot unless they offer twice the $$$ as the rest.

 

If you really believe rich athletes, with families, wouldn’t want to live in the UK for a bit you don’t have a clue.

 

Here’s a hint, many American’s live abroad, and prefer to do so, all the while seeing different parts of the world and keeping their status as a US citizen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Binghamton Beast said:

 

If you really believe rich athletes, with families, wouldn’t want to live in the UK for a bit you don’t have a clue.

 

Here’s a hint, many American’s live abroad, and prefer to do so, all the while seeing different parts of the world and keeping their status as a US citizen.

Yeah, because rich athletes would be so into paying much higher taxes than here in the USA. Hmmmm.... London or Tampa, where there is no state income tax. Who's clueless!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

What tension? They send us a million poor people each year and we say “sure, no problem...tell your friends!”

If the NFL expands, from my perspective it would make sense to expand to countries near you ie Mexico and Canada. Geographically it just makes too much sense, travelwise it would make more sense. People blast Mexico, but there are actually some really nice areas. Crystal blue waters, beaches, beautiful women, extremely cheap cost of living. Even a UDFA making 500k a year would live like a king there. I think it could work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pop gun said:

Yeah, because rich athletes would be so into paying much higher taxes than here in the USA. Hmmmm.... London or Tampa, where there is no state income tax. Who's clueless!

 

You.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want Fergy to file a lawsuit against them if they play all home games in England. Kick them out of the NFL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

i don't even know what that means....

 

 

Q is a spy gadget maker in Bond movies I believe 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NewDayBills said:

 People blast Mexico, but there are actually some really nice areas. Crystal blue waters, beaches, beautiful women, extremely cheap cost of living. Even a UDFA making 500k a year would live like a king there. I think it could work.

Sure...just don’t leave the resort strip...I’m pretty sure you’ll be fine! Cough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pop gun said:

Yeah, because rich athletes would be so into paying much higher taxes than here in the USA. Hmmmm.... London or Tampa, where there is no state income tax. Who's clueless!

 

Hmmm.....yet somehow tens of thousands of Americans choose to live in Europe and pay those taxes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

Hmmm.....yet somehow tens of thousands of Americans choose to live in Europe and pay those taxes.

 

 

The more money you make, the more you really hate to pay taxes.  NFL players will never be among those Americans you are referencing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all about money.  I suspect the product on the field will be compromised.  I think players will be more unsettled if they have two homes.  To put it another way, a team that has two home fields really has none.  I don't know that Kahn cares as long as his revenue goes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I HATE the whole london/Mexico thing. American football should always be American football. Fans all over the world watch the NFL regardless, I see absolutely no need to expand outside the United States 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

Yup, difference is not as stark as people imagine (although I think the NHS tax is in addition to the 45% in the UK).  There was a list a couple years ago about total effective tax rates for NFL players.  Phillip Rivers topped the list at about 50%.

 

Too bad he's not paying his "fair share". 

This is what I try to explain to people often. “the us tax rate isn’t that high”. While that may be true, it is still high. Then factor in social security FICA taxes and state taxes and we are actually taxed at a quite high rate. Then add in that we do not get universal healthcare for it like most other industrialized nations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the NFL will allow the London franchise to have a bump in the salary cap to entice them to go if the franchise initially has problems getting players to go to London. I though do think that many players would love the idea of going overseas to play for a similar salary after taxes especially considering the potential for endorsements if they get good. If the NFL does move the franchise it will be as important the Cowboys in that the NFL needs it work and become an icon brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny...I'm sure these owners love taxes when it comes to paying for their new stadiums, but boy does he want to avoid them when the money is coming out of HIS pocket -_-

 

And you better make damn sure your drafting is exceptional, otherwise don't expect to field a competitive team since no free agents will come there.

GO JETLAG JAGS!

8 hours ago, Bills2ref said:

This is what I try to explain to people often. “the us tax rate isn’t that high”. While that may be true, it is still high. Then factor in social security FICA taxes and state taxes and we are actually taxed at a quite high rate. Then add in that we do not get universal healthcare for it like most other industrialized nations. 

 

The funny thing is we pay just about the same amount of money per person through public money already as those same countries with universal healthcare, only because we've created such a huge multi-billion dollar industry with private healthcare, our money gets us far less, and per person we spend about 3 times more for the same procedures, meds, appointments, etc. than other industrialized nations.

Really sucks that we can't go back in time & fix it, because at this point it's probably too little too late...Oh well!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2018 at 12:22 PM, KD in CA said:

 

Yup, difference is not as stark as people imagine (although I think the NHS tax is in addition to the 45% in the UK).  There was a list a couple years ago about total effective tax rates for NFL players.  Phillip Rivers topped the list at about 50%.

 

Too bad he's not paying his "fair share". 

I just retired from a multi-national company and have worked with many in other countries and have done stints outside the US.

 

Two issues assuming your numbers are correct:

1.  All other comp is taxed so many of the benefits in US not taxed are taxed in Europe.

2.  The US will tax in addition to the European country.  The US is the only country in the world that does this and increases the ex-pat costs dramatically.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2018 at 12:22 PM, KD in CA said:

 

Yup, difference is not as stark as people imagine (although I think the NHS tax is in addition to the 45% in the UK).  There was a list a couple years ago about total effective tax rates for NFL players.  Phillip Rivers topped the list at about 50%.

 

Too bad he's not paying his "fair share". 

Rivers is a creep, fwiw.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------

 

 

Why the hell would any freedom loving American want to deal with the repression of the UK where they are banning pizza size.

Edited by Boyst62

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2018 at 2:36 PM, May Day 10 said:

No matter how badly the NFL probably would rather the Bills play in Toronto, there was no possible way to do so.

 

No because Ralph Wilson crafted a deal to keep them in Buffalo post sale.

Despite being called senile by posters on the wall he called the deal with NFLPA which almost broke it a bad deal and was smart enough to craft contract keeping Bills in Buffalo despite desires of some of the more powerful owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2018 at 10:29 AM, YoloinOhio said:

I think the Jags will have to provide tax-free player contracts/pay their taxes for them if they play 4 games/year there. Players on all teams get a one game tax bill when they play in London. 

How does this work with the salary cap? can the Bills pay taxes for their players because NY states suck worse than almost anywhere? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×