Reply With Quote
The league's Revenue Assistance Plan stipulates that $30 million will be distributed to "low-revenue teams."
Which teams are these?
Could the Spurs be one of them and getting more money?
Knicks top list of eight teams that must pay luxury tax
By Marc Stein
ESPN.com
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3480247
Eight NBA teams were officially notified of their luxury-tax obligations for the 2007-08 season via league memorandum in the early minutes of Wednesday morning, with the New York Knicks again topping the list of taxpayers.
Teams with a payroll above $67.865 million last season are required to pay one tax dollar for every dollar they sit over the threshold. That total, for the Knicks, is nearly $20 million -- $19,723,946 to be exact.
But the Dallas Mavericks, after their midseason acquisition of Jason Kidd, wound up only about $100,000 away from the Knicks in tax terms with a bill of $19,613,295.
The other six taxpayers from last season are the Cleveland Cavaliers ($14,008,561), Denver Nuggets ($13,572,079), Miami Heat ($8,318,879), Boston Celtics ($8,218,368), Los Angeles Lakers ($5,131,757) and Phoenix Suns ($3,867,313).
Each of the eight teams will receive formal invoices by Friday and must remit their tax payments in full to the league office by July 23.
The 22 teams that don't owe any tax, in accordance with the league's collective bargaining agreement, will each receive 1/30th of the $92,454,198 total tax pot. That computes to $3,081,807 per franchise.
The remaining $24.7 million of "undistributed tax funds" and an additional $5.3 million from "league en ies," according to an official NBA memo, will be used to fund assistance payments to teams for the 2008-09 season. The league's Revenue Assistance Plan stipulates that $30 million will be distributed to "low-revenue teams."
The good news for the Knicks is that their tax bill is less than half of what it was last summer, when they were forced to pay more than $45 million in luxury tax. They have missed the playoffs for four consecutive seasons and averaged 28 victories in that span, costing Isiah Thomas his dual roles of coach and team president.
The gap between the Knicks and the next closest tax team a year ago -- also Dallas -- was nearly $38 million.
Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here.
The league's Revenue Assistance Plan stipulates that $30 million will be distributed to "low-revenue teams."
Which teams are these?
Could the Spurs be one of them and getting more money?
I don't know if the Spurs are "low-revenue", but San Antonio is one of the smallest markets. Memphis, New Orleans, Charlotte, and San Antonio are, I think, the 4 smallest markets. Not really sure how the order goes though.
LMAO. That Kidd trade is the gift that just keeps giving.
???
I just read an hour ago on ESPN Spurs and company get 4.2 mil.
So... go add all that up, divide by 22 teams left = 4.2 mil before being taxed for it. If they are even getting taxed for it. I dunno.
Now it's 3m? Okay.
To figure out the amount, you divide the total by 30 (the amount of teams in the league). Then a share is given to each team that didn't pay the tax and the rest goes into a fund.
(That's at least how I understand it.)
The gift that keeps on giving...
???
I just read an hour ago on ESPN Spurs and company get 4.2 mil.
So... go add all that up, divide by 22 teams left = 4.2 mil before being taxed for it. If they are even getting taxed for it. I dunno.
Now it's 3m? Okay.
Just read the article above.
Why would they divide by 30 when 8 of the 30 is who is paying up. That doesn't make a lick of sense to me. There are 22 teams in the safe house, so you take what the total is and divide it by those teams? Why would it be done any other way?
And if you're dividing by 30, who gets the 1.2 mil that's on the table the 22 teams don't get? That's 26.4 mil, where does it go then? (Asking anyone btw)
Just read the article. Can you read?Brutalis Re: Spurs get $3,081,807 from taxpayers money
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
To figure out the amount, you divide the total by 30 (the amount of teams in the league). Then a share is given to each team that didn't pay the tax and the rest goes into a fund.
(That's at least how I understand it.)
Why would they divide by 30 when 8 of the 30 is who is paying up. That doesn't make a lick of sense to me. There are 22 teams in the safe house, so you take what the total is and divide it by those teams? Why would it be done any other way?
And if you're dividing by 30, who gets the 1.2 mil that's on the table the 22 teams don't get? That's 26.4 mil, where does it go then? (Asking anyone btw)
did you not read the op?
The remaining $24.7 million of "undistributed tax funds" and an additional $5.3 million from "league en ies," according to an official NBA memo, will be used to fund assistance payments to teams for the 2008-09 season. The league's Revenue Assistance Plan stipulates that $30 million will be distributed to "low-revenue teams."
...as if the Knicks really give a crap about how much taxes they pay on an annual basis.
Are you daft?
I'm asking where the ing money is going dude. Can you read? Where does the rest of the money go? Can you read? Huh can ya can ya?
sweet! Does it all just go into Holt's pocket? can it be added to the cap space or salaries?
Right.
But they are in parenthesis. Which means they don't ing know. I "could" sit here all "day" and do this with "people" but I "choose" not to. How does that make sense? All that makes sense is the small market teams . But it don't explain anything.
All 30 mil goes to those teams? I'm tired of having to assume with this league.
what? "undistributed tax funds" is simply the undistributed tax funds! the quotes ("...") are simply there because they are quoting the exact language from the nba memo. there arent any hidden messages in the article.
the only issue would be what makes a team qualify as a "low-revenue team", but im sure thats addressed somewhere in the cba, and isnt of too much issue, because we at least know where the cash is going, just not which specific teams will be receiving it.
MB trying to turn this into a S#$%a thread? unreal... whottt in 3,2,1....
The gift that keeps on giving...
I would say the le of the thread is misleading. I instantly thought of taxpayers as ordinary people. Not super-rich teams who spent too much money.
"The league's Revenue Assistance Plan stipulates that $30 million will be distributed to "low-revenue teams." (from the article above)
"Under the current plan, the NBA pays out $30 million to deserving teams, though the league does not disclose which teams received support. No team receives more than $5 million."
from: http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/58828
By JOHN LOMBARDO Staff writer Published April 28, 2008
In the same article:
"The debate was pushed along by a group of eight team owners: Michael Heisley (Memphis Grizzlies), Bob Johnson (Charlotte Bobcats), George Shinn (New Orleans Hornets), Paul Allen (Portland Trail Blazers), Herb Simon (Indiana Pacers), Glen Taylor (Minnesota Timberwolves), Larry Miller (Utah Jazz), and Herb Kohl (Milwaukee Bucks). In September 2006, they sent a letter to NBA Commissioner David Stern raising their concerns about how the league shares revenue."
San Antonio is not mentioned. CIA Pop?
Not like it helps us sign free agents or anything so meh..
I haven't looked it up but I'm guessing a good chunk goes to paying for veteran minimum contracts. The NBA reimburses teams who sign players to a minimum contract if they have more than two years of experience under their belt. The thinking is to reward veteran players who are hanging on while at the same time making it so teams don't have to spend more for a veteran minimum player.
Once you add up all those players around the league, the rebate checks the NBA issue probably adds up to a good amount of money.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
