Questions on NIL and a POI [?] of ours

[sun]

Frankly, most of the rest of your arguments are irrelevant. For most players playing overseas, the teams pay their taxes. That includes Russia.

Can you cite any reference article as proof?
If not then how do you know or how did you learn about it?
You're saying that most every team pays up to 30% over the value of the contract to pay the player's foreign personal income taxes?
That would probably be a crime if the foreign taxes paid weren't reported as personal income to the US gov't. by each player.
That would effectively increase the player's US taxes.
Every US player must file the full amount of monies that they are paid for working overseas.
Either the player contracts are for up to 30% more to accommodate the taxes that they must personally pay, or the players need to claim 30% more income than their contract due to the their taxes that the teams pay on their behalf (if it's even true).

As Judge Judy would say, if it doesn't make sense then it's not true.
I'll believe it when I see a reference.

 

[JordyG]

Can you cite any reference article as proof?
If not then how do you know or how did you learn about it?
You're saying that most every team pays up to 30% over the value of the contract to pay the player's foreign personal income taxes?
That would probably be a crime if the foreign taxes paid weren't reported as personal income to the US gov't. by each player.
That would effectively increase the player's US taxes.
Every US player must file the full amount of monies that they are paid for working overseas.
Either the player contracts are for up to 30% more to accommodate the taxes that they must personally pay, or the players need to claim 30% more income than their contract due to the their taxes that the teams pay on their behalf (if it's even true).

As Judge Judy would say, if it doesn't make sense then it's not true.
I'll believe it when I see a reference.

Overseas Basketball Salaries - Earnings by Country

Overseas basketball salaries are on the mind of every aspiring player. This article will answer how much players are making overseas!

europrobasket.com

A simple Google and you'd have found out for yourself. This has been common practice for as long as I can remember.

Will there be anything else?

 

[Notyetready]

Nobody is going to play in Russia this year or in the foreseeable future. The Russian-Ukranian war will play havoc with Euro sports, especially in slavic nations, for years to come. Euro basketball will see some adjustments and the desireability of playing there will take a hit. Analysts are shocked by the global consequnces taking place in real time.

 

[awhom111]

Salaries in most other countries are described in net terms. Saying that the team pays the taxes is the functional equivalent of an American employer witholding from a paycheck. The tax rate in the other country determines whether American citizens would also owe the US government.

There is a lot that we do not know about WNBA prioritization in 2024 and beyond. Some leagues are likely to respond by trying to schedule their seasons in prioritization-compliant timeframes. Honestly, the worst known effect of prioritization is the attempt to prevent players from training with their national teams for the customary length of time. Players with little WNBA experience are not subject to the prioritization clause at all. Also, the vast majority of overseas contracts are for a season at a time.

I see no evidence that the financial situation for basketball outside of the United States is in positive shape. The pandemic has hurt both state funding and the local companies that provide sponsorship. On the women's side, soccer is a serious competitor now that it has gained greater acceptance in Europe. Very few teams generate any serious cash from fans (even the most well-attended teams in France, which is the league that is probably the closest to being a commercially-viable enterprise on the women's side charge less for first-row season tickets than the cheapest WNBA nosebleed season ticket).

I know that in the WNBA travel thread, there was a question about why overseas teams can allocate a larger portion of their budget to player salaries. It is not because of revenue, but instead has a lot to do with lower expenses elsewhere. Coaches cost way less because they are not competing with colleges and the head coach can usually also play the role of the GM. There are less other employees to hire because there are fewer fans and they expect very little, sometimes only needing to buy tickets at the door so the all of the business side that is a part of American sports teams is not needed. Expenses for travel and medical care are generally lower too.

 

[JordyG]

Salaries in most other countries are described in net terms. Saying that the team pays the taxes is the functional equivalent of an American employer witholding from a paycheck. The tax rate in the other country determines whether American citizens would also owe the US government.

There is a lot that we do not know about WNBA prioritization in 2024 and beyond. Some leagues are likely to respond by trying to schedule their seasons in prioritization-compliant timeframes. Honestly, the worst known effect of prioritization is the attempt to prevent players from training with their national teams for the customary length of time. Players with little WNBA experience are not subject to the prioritization clause at all. Also, the vast majority of overseas contracts are for a season at a time.

I see no evidence that the financial situation for basketball outside of the United States is in positive shape. The pandemic has hurt both state funding and the local companies that provide sponsorship. On the women's side, soccer is a serious competitor now that it has gained greater acceptance in Europe. Very few teams generate any serious cash from fans (even the most well-attended teams in France, which is the league that is probably the closest to being a commercially-viable enterprise on the women's side charge less for first-row season tickets than the cheapest WNBA nosebleed season ticket).

I know that in the WNBA travel thread, there was a question about why overseas teams can allocate a larger portion of their budget to player salaries. It is not because of revenue, but instead has a lot to do with lower expenses elsewhere. Coaches cost way less because they are not competing with colleges and the head coach can usually also play the role of the GM. There are less other employees to hire because there are fewer fans and they expect very little, sometimes only needing to buy tickets at the door so the all of the business side that is a part of American sports teams is not needed. Expenses for travel and medical care are generally lower too.

Thank you for bringing a more in depth and comprehensive view to this subject. Some of which I did not know or understand, and most of which is unassailable.

As I understand it, in many cases, expats working abroad do not owe taxes to the US. If you meet certain requirements, the IRS cuts you a break with the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, the Foreign Housing Exclusion and the Foreign Tax Credit. The US also has tax treaties with over 60 countries. Tax treaties vary from country to country. Treaties also generally provide U.S. athletes with special exemptions from the foreign treaty country's income tax, although you still must file.

I would comment on some things. You've said some leagues "are likely to respond by trying to schedule their seasons in prioritization-compliant time frames". I'm honestly curious, without any cynicism here, as to why you think so? How would it benefit a foreign club to do so; to alter their entire season, which would have an effect on their entire league, in order to comply with the WNBA's time frame? You've said the "worst known effect of prioritization is the attempt to prevent players from training with their national teams for the customary length of time". Yet as I've understood it, obligations to national teams will be given exceptions. Also, as I understand it, the league can suspended without pay for the entire season any player who does not report, which may really hurt those players not making Taurasi or Griner money.

Your said you see no evidence that the financial situation for basketball outside of the United States is in positive shape. You're perfectly correct, and I can't disagree with the evidence. Yet it's been my understanding that it was slightly better than the situation here in the US before the pandemic, and the rate of growth, although slow, had been slightly better than here in the US until last season. It's also my contention that the TV viewership increase in the playoffs seen by the WNBA last year, a whopping 63%, was directly due to the pandemic and TV broadcast availability, and that investors are banking on that increase to continue in a non pandemic world. Fan attendance creates little income neither for the Association or anywhere overseas. Indeed, I see no evidence that the financial situation for basketball anywhere is rosey for pro WBB. EuroSport 2 TV broadcasts only one game per week in Europe, so those numbers are hard to judge, and certainly cannot compare to what is broadcast here in the US.

 

[awhom111]

Thank you for bringing a more in depth and comprehensive view to this subject. Some of which I did not know or understand, and most of which is unassailable.

As I understand it, in many cases, expats working abroad do not owe taxes to the US. If you meet certain requirements, the IRS cuts you a break with the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, the Foreign Housing Exclusion and the Foreign Tax Credit. The US also has tax treaties with over 60 countries. Tax treaties vary from country to country. Treaties also generally provide U.S. athletes with special exemptions from the foreign treaty country's income tax, although you still must file.

I would comment on some things. You've said some leagues "are likely to respond by trying to schedule their seasons in prioritization-compliant time frames". I'm honestly curious, without any cynicism here, as to why you think so? How would it benefit a foreign club to do so; to alter their entire season, which would have an effect on their entire league, in order to comply with the WNBA's time frame? You've said the "worst known effect of prioritization is the attempt to prevent players from training with their national teams for the customary length of time". Yet as I've understood it, obligations to national teams will be given exceptions. Also, as I understand it, the league can suspended without pay for the entire season any player who does not report, which may really hurt those players not making Taurasi or Griner money.

Your said you see no evidence that the financial situation for basketball outside of the United States is in positive shape. You're perfectly correct, and I can't disagree with the evidence. Yet it's been my understanding that it was slightly better than the situation here in the US before the pandemic, and the rate of growth, although slow, had been slightly better than here in the US until last season. It's also my contention that the TV viewership increase in the playoffs seen by the WNBA last year, a whopping 63%, was directly due to the pandemic and TV broadcast availability, and that investors are banking on that increase to continue in a non pandemic world. Fan attendance creates little income neither for the Association or anywhere overseas. Indeed, I see no evidence that the financial situation for basketball anywhere is rosey for pro WBB. EuroSport 2 TV broadcasts only one game per week in Europe, so those numbers are hard to judge, and certainly cannot compare to what is broadcast here in the US.

Yes, foreign income will not be double-taxed, but some players play in countries that have much lower tax rates so they end up owing some to the United States too. As with everything tax-related, there is never one simple answer to cover all situations.

To be clear, I am not in support of prioritization and think that is silly and unlikely to provide anything meaningfully positive. Now that it is suddenly in the news, there are people out there saying things about it that are not entirely correct. Practically-speaking, any foreign league that finishes in time that allows players to get to the United States by the end of April will have an acceptable schedule. That is already a few of them and some others would really only need to move the end of their seasons up a few days. There are a couple leagues that will probably have to say goodbye to signing experienced WNBA players like France unless they make absolutely drastic changes, but there are still going to be good options for WNBA players subject to prioritization who still want to play overseas and players and agents will know which leagues are going to have scheduling conflicts. As you mention, the suspension date is the start of the regular season in 2023 and May 1 in 2024 and after.

Prioritization does allow for players to participate in national team play and gives some practice time, there are plenty of countries that usually practice for more than the two weeks before a tournament that is allowed. Before, the length of absence was between the team and player, but now the league is in control.

I am not sure what the best way is to assess basketball popularity and viability around the world, especially given how different the model is pretty much everywhere compared to professional sports in the United States. I just think that is important to debunk myths that some people have spread about it. Women's basketball is not more popular in pretty much any country than it is in the United States. It's not that WNBA teams have no fans while teams in Europe have tons of fans spending lots of money on their teams. Women's basketball is not on equal footing as men's basketball in pretty much every country. Even if salaries for women in certain leagues seem very high, the men playing in those countries are making even more.

 

[sun]

The 2018 article below states that 90 out of 144 WNBA players were playing overseas during the offseason.
If that's true, then why did they agree to the Prioritization Rule?
It's because the WNBA agreed to share 50% of the proceeds instead of only 25%.
And also because there must not be very much overlap between the seasons.
Some players also attribute their overseas success to being in the WNBA.
Time will tell if there needs to be any adjustment made to the rule or not.

'There's no break': Overseas double duty is an offer many WNBA stars can't refuse

Nearly two-thirds of players on WNBA opening day rosters are back from playing overseas in the offseason, where salaries can be far more lucrative

www.theguardian.com

 

[JordyG]

The 2018 article below states that 90 out of 144 WNBA players were playing overseas during the offseason.
If that's true, then why did they agree to the Prioritization Rule?
It's because the WNBA agreed to share 50% of the proceeds instead of only 25%.
And also because there must not be very much overlap between the seasons.
Some players also attribute their overseas success to being in the WNBA.
Time will tell if there needs to be any adjustment made to the rule or not.

'There's no break': Overseas double duty is an offer many WNBA stars can't refuse

Nearly two-thirds of players on WNBA opening day rosters are back from playing overseas in the offseason, where salaries can be far more lucrative

www.theguardian.com

For most of these players there is plenty of overlap, since they play 8 months of the year overseas. But they agreed to the CBA because so many other of the stipulations agreed to, as I've previously said, were very appealing and well thought out. Man, you really have the need to be right on at least one point, huh? All the other points I've made you have no argument, and now you're down to "so if it's so bad how come?". Players want to play man, and American players want to play at home. They realize that sometimes you gotta dig through some dirt to reach a vein.