NCAA to soon pass name, image and likeness rules targeting boosters offering inducements to athletes (Dodd)

[AZHuskiePop]

I would like to know if they have to file income tax on NIL money. I am assuming that scholarships are not taxable.

Scholarships normally are not as they are considered gifts, The Unversities have exemptions from the laws governing gifts a person doesn’t have . You are taxed on any amount in excess of the exemption $15,000 the last I looked.
Frankly if someone sued the University because an oAthlete is receiving benefits in excess of tuition room & Board that would test that special privilege.

 

[uconndogs]

Scholarships normally are not as they are considered gifts, The Unversities have exemptions from the laws governing gifts
Frankly if someone sued the University because an oAthlete is receiving benefits in excess of tuition room & Board that would test that special privilege.

NIL isn't through the universities (presumably) so I would have to believe that compensation is taxable.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

NIL isn't through the universities (presumably) so I would have to believe that compensation is taxable.

True but the IRS can take a different stance if they believe they can attribute the earnings to the scholarship.

I've dealt with the IRS on a few matters where what common sense would dictate that things are (or are not) intrinsically related but the IRS took a different stance.

 

[auror]

That’s why the sanction would need to continue to be, as it always has been, player eligibility. You don’t sanction the party that’s outside of your system, you sanction the party that’s inside your system.

But again, how do you enforce it? How do you even gather evidence? Previously, booster activity was caught by the schools themselves essentially self-policing (or the occasional random FBI sting). The schools for a long time felt a compulsion to voluntarily cooperate, because they themselves ARE the system (the NCAA is just the collection of schools). This started flipping as some schools decided winning was more important than the NCAA itself, which had lost all of its credibility and public goodwill had shifted towards athlete rights and in a twisted sense the dirty schools had the moral high ground on that issue.

But because amateurism was too important, they "designed" (aka hastily scrapped the previous guidelines they had written and just said basically do whatever you want) this NIL system so that the schools are outside of the deals and even more importantly the contact entirely. Boosters are working "with" the schools, but the schools are expressly not allowed to get into contact or negotiations. How are you going to catch anyone when your only entry into enforcement is prohibited from accessing the conversation?

 

[McLovin]

Yes. They can and should solve this. The idea was to allow kids to profit off their NIL. So they can make money on Instagram, YouTube, TikTok or by doing commercials or anything else. That remains. What you can do is say that booster cannot promise NIL to any recruit, and any recruit who accepts any deal for NIL $ before committing to a school is ineligible. It's the explicit inducement that has to go away. The implicit inducement "if you go to Alabama you will have a good chance to make NIL $" is fine. That's still there. Paying kids to attend a specific school is not.

I don’t see the difference there.

And if you do stop schools from offering NIL deals before the students sign, what will happen is the kids and their agents will start giving schools their demands to pick their place. Basically become a player driven free agency for top prospects and transfers.

“Hey coach, I really want to play QB for Bama, but if I do I’ll want a Porsche, beach house for my mom and $500K in NIL, or else I’ll transfer after my first year. Just wanted to let you know, in case you want to pull my offer and offer another QB.” 24 hours later, Bama hasn’t pulled the offer so the kid signs with Bama and magically he gets his NIL wish list demands.

Either way, you can’t stop the NIL money talks from happening before or after. The information is out there and pretty easy for players / programs to figure out the players NIL “worth” / ability to pay up…

 

[HuskyHawk]

I don’t see the difference there.

And if you do stop schools from offering NIL deals before the students sign, what will happen is the kids and their agents will start giving schools their demands to pick their place. Basically become a player driven free agency for top prospects and transfers.

“Hey coach, I really want to play QB for Bama, but if I do I’ll want a Porsche, beach house for my mom and $500K in NIL, or else I’ll transfer after my first year. Just wanted to let you know, in case you want to pull my offer and offer another QB.” 24 hours later, Bama hasn’t pulled the offer so the kid signs with Bama and magically he gets his NIL wish list demands.

Either way, you can’t stop the NIL money talks from happening before or after. The information is out there and pretty easy for players / programs to figure out the players NIL “worth” / ability to pay up…

Schools can't offer NIL deals at all. They aren't allowed to do that. Before or after.

All that can happen with NIL is that a player who was previously prohibited from taking a job or earning money that is based in part on his or her status as a player, is no longer prohibited from that. So Andre can do advertisements for Huskies now, if both parties are so inclined. Paige can pitch Gatorade. Boosters? The rules for booster haven't changed, they can't recruit players. And they certainly can't pool $ to entice kids to go to their school for a side job with NIL money like what happened in Miami. NCAA can regulate this, but yes, it will be hard.

 

[BuffaloHusky]

Beyond the collectives... I just don't understand how the NCAA and the university athletic departments can claim tax- free status any longer unless they create boundaries within existing tax law. Even the SEC needs the NCAA because they at least give their universities cover for running non-profit organizations. Take the NCAA away and suddenly all that tax free money being spread around to build stadium clubs and hire 10 million $ coaches will likely come under significantly more scrutiny.

 

[mussels]

Not so much. I think you were thinking of the Alston case which said that schools couldn’t limit the amount of benefits paid to athletes. Justice Kavanaugh‘s concurring opinion, which was not the opinion of the court, went further, but again it’s not the law of the land.

Just read a little about the Alston case and apparently it was narrowly crafted to just address limits on academic related benefits that schools could give to athletes. The NCAA lost on anti trust grounds.

Are you saying that somehow they wouldn't lose a similar case regarding NIL income base on your "NCAA is a voluntary organization" rational ?

 

[CL82]

But again, how do you enforce it? How do you even gather evidence? Previously, booster activity was caught by the schools themselves essentially self-policing (or the occasional random FBI sting). The schools for a long time felt a compulsion to voluntarily cooperate, because they themselves ARE the system (the NCAA is just the collection of schools). This started flipping as some schools decided winning was more important than the NCAA itself, which had lost all of its credibility and public goodwill had shifted towards athlete rights and in a twisted sense the dirty schools had the moral high ground on that issue.

But because amateurism was too important, they "designed" (aka hastily scrapped the previous guidelines they had written and just said basically do whatever you want) this NIL system so that the schools are outside of the deals and even more importantly the contact entirely. Boosters are working "with" the schools, but the schools are expressly not allowed to get into contact or negotiations. How are you going to catch anyone when your only entry into enforcement is prohibited from accessing the conversation?

The same way you catch violators now. Follow the breadcrumbs. Social media is a particularly useful tool. Never ceases to amaze me how people were willingly volunteer information about themselves. Don’t underestimate the value of peer institutions dropping a dime. It happens all the time.

The point remains no system or code of conduct has to be hermetically sealed to be an effective deterrent.

 

[CL82]

Just read a little about the Alston case and apparently it was narrowly crafted to just address limits on academic related benefits that schools could give to athletes. The NCAA lost on anti trust grounds.

Are you saying that somehow they wouldn't lose a similar case regarding NIL income base on your "NCAA is a voluntary organization" rational ?

No, what I am saying is that the notion that the Supreme Court has ruled on NIL and it is somehow constitutionally protected is a fallacy.

FWIW, I don’t think that a voluntary (in that membership in the NCAA is voluntary) cap on third-party compensation allowable for kids to participate as an NCAA athlete would be an antitrust violation.

 

[CL82]

Beyond the collectives... I just don't understand how the NCAA and the university athletic departments can claim tax- free status any longer unless they create boundaries within existing tax law. Even the SEC needs the NCAA because they at least give their universities cover for running non-profit organizations. Take the NCAA away and suddenly all that tax free money being spread around to build stadium clubs and hire 10 million $ coaches will likely come under significantly more scrutiny.

If athletic departments become taxable entities does that mean the University of Connecticut gets to deduct 47 million loss a year?

 

[auror]

The same way you catch violators now. Follow the breadcrumbs. Social media is a particularly useful tool. Never ceases to amaze me how people were willingly volunteer information about themselves. Don’t underestimate the value of peer institutions dropping a dime. It happens all the time.

The point remains no system or code of conduct has to be hermetically sealed to be an effective deterrent.

Okay say a peer institution drops a dime. "I heard my guy got poached by Kentucky. Inducement by NIL booster car wash" NCAA investigates. They see that Ja Morant Jr. followed Shammy's Auto Wash in March before he entered the transfer portal in April.

Then what? You ask Ja. "No, sir. I didn't engage with them in conversation until after I committed to Kentucky." NCAA demands to see the DMs. "Okay, here are all my messages ". Oops, he left out the incriminating evidence and the NCAA is not the federal government so there's no repercussions and no way to subpoena anyone to get the real records. You can't get the other side of the conversations because they're a private business and they tell you to screw. You going to declare him ineligible over a follow?

I know enforcement doesn't have to be airtight to be a deterrent in general. But enforcement wasn't a deterrent before (we know everybody was dealing under the table), they made payments to athletes more legitimate while reducing their ability to oversee, and you think they'll somehow now be able to have an effective deterrent?

I guess some deterrent is better than none, but it's pissing in the wind.

 

[CL82]

Okay say a peer institution drops a dime. "I heard my guy got poached by Kentucky. Inducement by NIL booster car wash" NCAA investigates. They see that Ja Morant Jr. followed Shammy's Auto Wash in March before he entered the transfer portal in April.

Then what? You ask Ja. "No, sir. I didn't engage with them in conversation until after I committed to Kentucky." NCAA demands to see the DMs. "Okay, here are all my messages ". Oops, he left out the incriminating evidence and the NCAA is not the federal government so there's no repercussions and no way to subpoena anyone to get the real records. You can't get the other side of the conversations because they're a private business and they tell you to screw. You going to declare him ineligible over a follow?

I know enforcement doesn't have to be airtight to be a deterrent in general. But enforcement wasn't a deterrent before (we know everybody was dealing under the table), they made payments to athletes more legitimate while reducing their ability to oversee, and you think they'll somehow now be able to have an effective deterrent?

I guess some deterrent is better than none, but it's pissing in the wind.

No I’m not going to declare him ineligible over a follow. That’s kind of a silly strawman isn’t it?

But let’s see the kid goes on his Instagram account and post I just got a half $1 million in cash from NIL booster car wash and rival state you sees it and reports it to the NCAA. Is that something that is worth following up on?

Let’s say an assistant coach he’s fired and he goes to the NCAA and says yeah that car wash guy has been giving millions to our kids. Perhaps that might be worth a look?

Let’s say popular recruit who has been a big state U target for three years texts them rival state U he’s offering me $750,000 in booster money can you match it? Do you think that text might make its way to the NCAA?

It’s easy to come up with 1 million things that would be hard to track, but there are 1 million more that would be easy.

Again, your argument is don’t regulate things that people could hide. by that logic, we really shouldn’t have any anti-drug laws because a whole lot of that happens under the radar and we certainly shouldn’t have an income tax because the black economy is huge. Still, we do have laws, and there actually are prosecutions under them.

 

[auror]

No I’m not going to declare him ineligible over a follow. That’s kind of a silly strawman isn’t it?

But let’s see the kid goes on his Instagram account and post I just got a half $1 million in cash from NIL booster car wash and rival state you sees it and reports it to the NCAA. Is that something that is worth following up on?

Let’s say an assistant coach he’s fired and he goes to the NCAA and says yeah that car wash guy has been giving millions to our kids. Perhaps that might be worth a look?

Let’s say popular recruit who has been a big state U target for three years texts them rival state U he’s offering me $750,000 in booster money can you match it? Do you think that text might make its way to the NCAA?

It’s easy to come up with 1 million things that would be hard to track, but there are 1 million more that would be easy.

Again, your argument is don’t regulate things that people could hide. by that logic, we really shouldn’t have any anti-drug laws because a whole lot of that happens under the radar and we certainly shouldn’t have an income tax because the black economy is huge. Still, we do have laws, and there actually are prosecutions under them.

You're forgetting that NIL is legal and okay. It's not just the fact that he got paid. It's that he got paid EARLY that is the problem. If the NCAA actually tries to enforce this, nobody is advertising their NIL deal on social media before committing. They'll do it 3 days later or whatever.

That text is not to the assistant coach. It's to the head of the collective from the player's NIL agent. It's maybe the player's agent asking an assistant coach what collectives or prominent boosters exist at the school. Asking the question about future NIL $ isn't against the rules and won't be. It's like asking about the locker room quality. There are no smoking guns. The school isn't involved in the actual dealing at all, and this is why making the schools not able to participate in the NIL deals makes it an enforcement nightmare.

The way I see it, there are two possibilities moving forward without an overhaul of the entire system:

1) The NCAA doesn't try to crack down on anything and all the things happen as you outline and as currently are happening.
2) The NCAA tries to cracks down once and all the dumb people doing obvious violations gets obfuscated behind agents, middlemen, and collectives (if it wasn't already), but everything still happens.

There is no 3) Inducements no longer happen.

It's all optics. You could probably reduce my argument that attempts to enforce regulations that are unenforceable are bad regulations, and you either need to change the system or get rid of the regulations.

Drug laws are ineffective as a deterrent, but very enforceable. We see tons and tons of enforcement. That's not what this is. This is like if USA passed laws about Americans doing drugs while visiting Amsterdam. In your world, the cops can just check out the tourists social media pictures to see if anyone posted about doing drugs. There's no jurisdiction and no enforcement possible because it all happens outside the USA/NCAA legal system.

 

[huskymedic]

NCAA approves NIL guidelines, threatens booster funding - Sports Illustrated

The growing collectives at big-time programs are under threat, but does the NCAA have the resources to enforce it?

www.si.com

 

[auror]

But again, how do you enforce it? How do you even gather evidence? Previously, booster activity was caught by the schools themselves essentially self-policing (or the occasional random FBI sting). The schools for a long time felt a compulsion to voluntarily cooperate, because they themselves ARE the system (the NCAA is just the collection of schools). This started flipping as some schools decided winning was more important than the NCAA itself, which had lost all of its credibility and public goodwill had shifted towards athlete rights and in a twisted sense the dirty schools had the moral high ground on that issue.

But because amateurism was too important, they "designed" (aka hastily scrapped the previous guidelines they had written and just said basically do whatever you want) this NIL system so that the schools are outside of the deals and even more importantly the contact entirely. Boosters are working "with" the schools, but the schools are expressly not allowed to get into contact or negotiations. How are you going to catch anyone when your only entry into enforcement is prohibited from accessing the conversation?

“Hopefully this passes Monday and will give more clarity and guidelines. But then, [NCAA] enforcement has to enforce. The schools need to enforce as well. That’s the other part. At the end of the day, you have an institutional responsibility to enforce.”

NCAA sanctions are not expected to be directed at player eligibility but will instead sanction schools in other ways for not controlling their boosters, working group members said.

Lol.

So they want the schools to tell on themselves, and the punishments will only affect the institutions themselves, because anything else would be challenged heavily in the courts. And the NCAA has recently been setting precedent that self-enforcing only makes it worse for you. This will all go great.

Meanwhile the alternative is not enforcing an impossible to enforce regulation, succeeding in competition, and seeing kids get paid for their hard work successfully to their full market value. I wonder what will happen.

 

[auror]

This seems to me the only actionable and enforceable thing in this. If it's very obvious your booster has paid the whole team, that could be acted upon.

 

[CL82]

You're forgetting that NIL is legal and okay. It

No, I’m not. We’re talking about whether it’s possible to put together a system to constrain what’s going on currently. I believe it is, and you apparently believe that’s an impossibility. We may have to agree to disagree on that.

1) The NCAA doesn't try to crack down on anything and all the things happen as you outline and as currently are happening.
2) The NCAA tries to cracks down once and all the dumb people doing obvious violations gets obfuscated behind agents, middlemen, and collectives (if it wasn't already), but everything still happens.

There is no 3) Inducements no longer happen

Or, 4) NCAA comes up with rules and regulations which prohibit the most extreme examples of NIL abuse that we are seeing currently.

It's all optics. You could probably reduce my argument that attempts to enforce regulations that are unenforceable are bad regulations, and you either need to change the system or get rid of the regulations.

Well I mean if I’m the one who’s reducing your argument, I would reduce it to “Nothing can ever be enforced perfectly, therefore nothing must ever be enforced at all.” As you probably can guess I disagree with that premise.

Drug enforcement is a perfect example of our disagreement. It will never be enforced perfectly, yet I think there is value in having anti-drug laws. Likewise, the prohibition against drunk driving will never be enforced perfectly, but the enhanced enforcement that we’ve seen have changed the culture whereby designated drivers and Ubering home from the bar has now become the norm.

Perfection or nothing isn’t really an exclusive choice.

 

[auror]

Or, 4) NCAA comes up with rules and regulations which prohibit the most extreme examples of NIL abuse that we are seeing currently.

4) is just 2). There will be no actual change in inducement activity.

Well I mean if I’m the one who’s reducing your argument, I would reduce it to “Nothing can ever be enforced perfectly, therefore nothing must ever be enforced at all.” As you probably can guess I disagree with that premise.

Drug enforcement is a perfect example of our disagreement. It will never be enforced perfectly, yet I think there is value in having anti-drug laws. Likewise, the prohibition against drunk driving will never be enforced perfectly, but the enhanced enforcement that we’ve seen have changed the culture whereby designated drivers and Ubering home from the bar has now become the norm.

Perfection or nothing isn’t really an exclusive choice.

Then you are not understanding my argument. I've said the opposite. Enforceable systems and laws are good. My issue is when the laws or regulations are grossly unenforceable. Key word grossly. As I've said, drug laws that literally cripple communities and lead to overflowing prisons are not an example of unenforceable laws, just ineffective ones.

You could give the NCAA a giant enforcement team and they'd prosecute nobody, because nobody in the NCAA system is involved and nobody has to tell them the truth. It's literally only Isaiah Wong that would be caught, because his agent either didn't care or didn't understand the guidelines. That won't happen now that the guidelines are clarified and the collectives are more established. But the inducements will continue unabated.

 

[notthestuff]

This seems to me the only actionable and enforceable thing in this. If it's very obvious your booster has paid the whole team, that could be acted upon.

One thing I’m curious about based on these guidelines is say hypothetically a media company wanted to make a documentary or some type of show or video game, could that company pay all the members of the team for their participation? That last line seems to indicate the NCAA would say no. An opportunity like that seems like the exact reason for NIL in that kids should be compensated for their participation in something like that if it’s legitimate. There’s just so much gray with this whole thing that it really doesn’t seem like there’s any way to prevent the system being manipulated in spite of the NCAA trying to create the illusion of control. This will just lead to typical uneven enforcement and penalization which seems to be par for the course for the NCAA.

 

[CL82]

4) is just 2). There will be no actual change in inducement activity.

Disagree. The reason why you don’t see them as distinct things is because you are locked onto this notion that it’s impossible. That’s the kind of inherently self-defeating viewpoints that stop people from making progress. It’s impossible let’s not try.

Then you are not understanding my argument. I've said the opposite. Enforceable systems and laws are good. My issue is when the laws or regulations are grossly unenforceable. Key word grossly. As I've said, drug laws that literally cripple communities and lead to overflowing prisons are not an example of unenforceable laws, just ineffective ones.

I disagreed that it would be grossly enforceable. Grossly in enforceable and not perfectly enforceable are two distinct things. I think because you’re locked on to “you can’t be done“ you’re not seeing the difference.

You could give the NCAA a giant enforcement team and they'd prosecute nobody, because nobody in the NCAA system is involved and nobody has to tell them the truth. It's literally only Isaiah Wong that would be caught, because his agent either didn't care or didn't understand the guidelines. That won't happen now that the guidelines are clarified and the collectives are more established. But the inducements will continue unabated.

Disagree that everyone in the world except for Isaiah Wong is a master criminal who can’t be caught.

I think we are wheel spinning here. I understand your position, and you either understand mine or not. I don’t see much movement either way going forward. But it was an interesting conversation.

 

[huskymedic]

This about sums it up…

 

[UconnU]

If athletic departments become taxable entities does that mean the University of Connecticut gets to deduct 47 million loss a year?

 

[McLovin]

Schools can't offer NIL deals at all. They aren't allowed to do that. Before or after.

All that can happen with NIL is that a player who was previously prohibited from taking a job or earning money that is based in part on his or her status as a player, is no longer prohibited from that. So Andre can do advertisements for Huskies now, if both parties are so inclined. Paige can pitch Gatorade. Boosters? The rules for booster haven't changed, they can't recruit players. And they certainly can't pool $ to entice kids to go to their school for a side job with NIL money like what happened in Miami. NCAA can regulate this, but yes, it will be hard.

Right. But how?

If politicians can use dark money to fund campaigns or the mob / cartels can set-up businesses to launder money, how is the NCAA going to stop it from influencing athletes?

There is going to be an algorithm that will determine what a player could get paid, based on skills / ranking, school and/or conference. If this doesn't already exist, it will within 24 months.

Kids will know what their NIL should be. Then they will just see what schools have been able to fulfill those in the past. And pick those.

Whether the money is coming from the car dealership down the road who is "just a huge fan of the staring PG" or an open booster collective, the money is coming from the same source. I guess I think it's better to be open about the new reality than pretend to regulate it (which they have never done before for top programs anyways)...

 

[UconnU]

If a kid wants to sign a contract with a booster there’s no legal way the ncaa can stop him.