“You might get paid less in a state like Florida or Nevada and, therefore, your salary cap will go a little higher,” he said.
“Now, I don’t think that’s the only thing. I mean, those places are also very sought-after places to play. It’s nice and warm, you can play in a little more darkness than in a place like Toronto or Montreal or some of the hot hockey markets.”
Weese suggests there could be a time when the league addresses the issue in an effort to level the playing field, saying it’s “not fair to other teams.”
“Maybe they could take into account the tax implications and that might balance it out a little bit,” Weese said. “So the cap could go up in some states that have a higher tax level because the competitive balance is so important. And in states that don’t have an income tax, maybe their salary cap would be a little bit lower.
“What I understand is that these players pay income taxes in the places where they play their road games. But there has to be a way to look at that, develop a formula and create the competitive balance that the salary cap was designed to promote.”
Besides the Tampa Bay Lightning, Vegas and Florida, the Dallas Stars and Nashville Predators also play in states without income taxes. The five teams have six Cup victories since the 1998-99 season, including three in Tampa Bay.
When asked questions before Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Final on Wednesday, Commissioner Gary Bettman referred the question to Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly, saying, “Why don’t you answer because you know I hate that question.”
While the NHL and NHLPA are in negotiations for a new collective agreement, Daly does not expect this issue to be addressed in a “proactive” manner.
“It’s certainly an issue that some of our franchises have raised as being concerning,” he said. “I guess what I would say is that at this point we don’t share the level of concern that they have. And what I would say further is that these imbalances have been there forever. There’s nothing new here.
“There are so many reasons why a player might choose to play in a particular place, for a particular team, for a particular coach, that have nothing to do with the tax situation of that market.”
David Silber, a partner at Crowe Soberman LLP, said players consider many factors, including their chances of winning the Stanley Cup, the best place to support their families and pay their taxes. However, Silber says players are increasingly paying attention to what their take-home pay will be.
“I think at the end of the day, players are like everyone else and they’re trying to figure out how I can make the most money for myself and my family and how to make sure I can take care of myself and my family financially, even in retirement,” he said.
“So I find that as the years go by and yes, the cap increases, which makes it worthwhile for teams to compete and try to sign these star players taking into consideration more and more the tax implications of playing for a particular state or province and what that means and what the take-home pay will ultimately be for them. I think that becomes a bigger issue for the players.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 5, 2025.
Abdulhamid Ibrahim, The Canadian Press
