Island Nucklehead wrote:It wouldn't surprise me if it goes deeper than that. Because NHL players are not paid by the game, but rather bi-weekly payments spread over the course of the season, they are technically paid by the day. So if a team spends 3 days in city X, they could be liable for 3 days of taxation at that city.
Again, I'm sure there are a lot of tax write-offs and loopholes to be used. Florida certainly has its appeal, Kessel lives there in the offseason and I'm sure some of that has to do with the tax benefits that can be associated with July 1st signing bonuses.
I'm a CMA, certainly not a tax expert by any stretch, but I do have a cursory understanding of the principals...
At a high level, world income is taxed in the jursidiction a person is resident for tax purposes for 183 days or more. That's why many Canucks have residences in Point Roberts - i.e. Messier / Mogilny were a couple of examples and there are likely more from the current roster.
Now, if you're a BC school teacher who spends summers in Point Roberts there would be no tax advantage - there is no world income - it's all Canadian based.
But if you're working (playing hockey) in various US states and Canada like an NHL Player, you would pay taxes in both Canada and the US but receive a credit for taxes paid in the country you are a non-resident. So you may be a resident for tax purposes in the US and would declare your whole income in the US, but would also pay taxes in Canada and would receive a credit against your US taxes owed for the taxes paid in Canada.
So, just because a signing bonus is paid on July 1st and you happen to be in Florida, doesn't shelter it from taxes in Canada and vice versa.
Being paid by the game, daily, weekly, etc would have no impact
But as mentioned by others earlier, it is not quite this straight forward and very complex
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/taxes/6 ... -1.1167892