Does state income tax matter to NHL players? Response is emphatic yes — ‘Make more money’

Five million dollars is a lot of money.

But $5 million in New York or Toronto is not the same as $5 million in Fort Lauderdale or Nashville. State income taxes — and the higher federal and provincial taxes in Canada — appear to give some NHL teams a clear advantage in roster building solely due to where they’re located.

And while NHL commissioner Gary Bettman is correct when he says nobody was talking about the lack of state income taxes in Florida when the Tampa Bay Lightning and Florida Panthers were languishing at the bottom of the league, the fact is that those two teams have made the past six Stanley Cup Finals. And seeing the Panthers re-sign the likes of Brad Marchand, Sam Bennett and Aaron Ekblad at below market value this past offseason only added fuel to the fire.

Bettman called it “a ridiculous issue” during an interview on TNT in June, only allowing that it could be “a little bit of a factor if everything else were equal.”

Our survey of 120 NHL players says otherwise. Definitively. In a landslide, 86.3 percent of our respondents said state income taxes do matter.

Note: Some player quotes have been lightly edited for length and clarity. Not every player surveyed answered every question.

For the record, the following U.S. states have no state income tax: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wyoming. That gives the advantage to the Lightning, Panthers, Golden Knights, Predators, Stars and Kraken.

But understandably, all anyone wants to talk about is Florida. As if year-round beach weather weren’t enough.

“I think it’s a big thing, especially if you’re a free agent,” one player who responded yes to the question said. “The argument is it didn’t affect teams like Florida when they were bad 10 years ago. … But times have changed now. Everyone in Florida is taking a discount to play there. You can kind of make your own logic. Basic math.”

“I do think it helps,” another said. “I think that’s a thing. I feel like it’s hard not to see a theme with that, especially with how Florida was able to sign all their guys and they seem to take a bit more team-friendly. I do think it is a factor, but I don’t think it’s the biggest one.”

Others agreed:

“One hundred percent, and if someone says no, I’d like to hear why. I think if someone is signing an eight-year deal, that comes into play. Always!”

“Yes. Severely.”

“If somebody is going somewhere where you’re just going to make more money and get the exact same contract, it’s definitely beneficial. Especially if you’re going to a place like Florida and it’s nice all the time.”

“It’s definitely a factor, you see with Florida. I know Marchand mentioned it. If they were in New York, chances are they’re probably not all signed.”

“Yeah, I guess so, because that’s where all the players are going. Because they want to play on a good team for good money.”

“It’s not just the no income tax. It’s that wherever these states are, they’re places you want to play in. Florida, Tampa, Dallas.”

“It matters for sure. There’s ways around it for different citizens of Canada, but if you’re a U.S. citizen playing in the U.S., there’s definitely benefits to living in a no-tax state.”

Some players even wanted the NHL to change the rules to level the playing field.

“That’s something I would love the NHL to consider,” one said. “Let’s say in California, you have a higher state rate for our tax. You could have a higher cap, and those (no-state-tax) teams would have a lower cap, for example, so it would basically balance out. I think it would be fair for the whole league. But then again, the teams would complain that you have very nice weather in California so people would suddenly go there. It’s hard. There will always be advantages and disadvantages.”

One player predicted that every response would be yes, “except for the guys who are in those (no-state-tax) places.”

In reality, though, all but one of the players polled from teams in those states also answered yes.

“It depends on the guy,” that player said. “What matters for me is being on a winning team.”

To be fair, some of the “yes” votes were also moderate, somewhat in line with Bettman’s way of thinking.

“It does matter. It’s not the main factor, but it helps,” one player said. “I remember when I was in Tampa, no one really cared about Tampa and Florida when we weren’t doing well. No one was like, ‘I’ve got to sign there because there’s no state tax.’ Once we started doing well, that became part of the equation.”

“It definitely matters in free agency, for obvious reasons,” another said. “It’s not the biggest factor, but it is something that guys think of. It’s one of the many factors: How is the team run? Are they going to be a winning team? What’s my role going to be? What’s the state tax? And what’s the city like to live in? Those are all factors that guys look at.”

“It depends on what options you have and what the contract looks like,” added another. “I don’t think it’s the deal-breaker every time, but I definitely think it’s a big component. … Rightfully so. This is what you earn. You have this short window in your life where you can earn this kind of money, and that should be a consideration.”

Many pointed to it being a situational factor.

“There’s something to it for guys that are in those situations where they think about that stuff,” one said. “If you get a lot of money, you’re gonna be just fine, but it does matter, especially for guys on the brink.”

“For older guys, maybe at the end of your career, (it matters),” added a younger player. “For me, I don’t care. It’s more for the older guy that maybe is in his last contract.”

“Has anyone actually said no?” another wondered.

Among those who did, there was some self-awareness — an understanding that these are the first-world-iest of first-world problems.

“I think (it’s overblown),” one said. “Guys get paid a lot. How much different is it? You’re getting paid a lot to have fun every day.”

“If you have any chance to play in the NHL, it doesn’t make that big of a difference,” another said.

“There could be some benefits to it,” added another. “Obviously, if you’re a free agent and you’re offered this amount here versus this amount there. It could be more team-friendly for a team in a no-state-tax state if you’re being paid out more money. I still don’t think it makes a big enough difference to actually change something to make a league rule.”

As one astute player pointed out, it’s important to remember that players in Canadian cities get paid in American dollars.

“I live in Canada year-round, so with the exchange rate, I’m actually getting out ahead,” he said. “If you live in a no-tax state, you’re at 39 percent federal tax. Here, you’re at 51 percent, so you lose 12 percent tax. But I gain 40 percent on the exchange. Obviously, the prices are different, but everything I spend is in Canadian dollars and everything I make is in American dollars, so it is what it is.”

Then there are the fourth-liners and seventh defensemen and backup goalies. State taxes are a worry for the upper crust of the NHL.

“You asked the wrong guy about this one,” one of those players said. “I sign where I get offered contracts.”

“A lot of times, a guy in my position, you won’t have that many options,” another said. “It’s just kind of where are teams interested. So from that standpoint, if a guy’s a free agent and he’s gonna make a lot of money, I think it probably affects that big-time.”

We’ll leave the last word to our most thoughtful (and lengthiest) response:

“It’s a big decision for contract negotiations, for sure,” a player said. “At the end of the day, that’s a lot of money. For the guys signing the big contracts, obviously it’s going to be a lot more money to take home, so that matters to them. At the same time, the guys that might not make $9 million a year — making $1 million, it’s going to be a big difference getting that extra $110,000 or whatever it is, $200,000, out of that million in the long run.

“No matter what, it matters. And if not, it matters for the teams. Obviously, a team like Florida, if they were in L.A. or like Edmonton, they wouldn’t be able to sign all those players the way they’ve done, taking pay cuts. You’ve got (Gustav) Forsling making ($5.75 million per year). He’s probably a $9 million defenseman somewhere. (Sam Reinhart) signed a pretty team-friendly ticket last year after scoring all those goals. … Marchand. All those guys. Big-time, it helps.

“Teams are using it too. They won’t get the players as much, obviously. At the end of the day, they probably won’t make much more because I don’t think if you get $10 million in Edmonton, you’re probably not going to get offered $10 million (in a no-state-income-tax state). I know the GMs are using that as a bargaining chip. If you get $10 million in Edmonton and 50 percent tax, you get $5 million in your account. But in Florida, there’s a 33 percent tax or something. It’s (almost) 20 percent difference. Say out of that $10 million, you’ve got $7 million. … You’re still making more money than before. But in the long run, you’ll have a way better team obviously.

“I don’t know how to come up with a solution for it. But yeah, it’s a big difference.”