Speculation on Seahawks’ sale heats up following proposed WA ‘jock tax’
Whether or not the Seattle Seahawks are sold after Super Bowl LX remains to be seen, but the timing of such speculation comes shortly after the details of an income-based “jock tax” on professional athletes in Washington state went public.
A proposed 9.9% “millionaire’s income tax” being worked on by majority-party Democrats in Washington state, if enacted, would include a component that would force high-earning visiting athletes and performers to pay income tax on earnings generated during their time in the state.
“While the ‘jock tax’ is standard in states with income taxes, I doubt our Seahawks, Mariners and Kraken players will be thrilled about losing 10% of their salaries,” explained Ryan Frost, director of Budget and Tax Policy at the free-market Washington Policy Center think tank. “But the ‘jock tax’ is really just a symptom of the bigger problem. Olympia can’t stick to a budget even with record revenues, so they keep creating new tax mechanisms to extract more wealth from the private sector.”
As reported by The Center Square, state spending has increased dramatically over the last decade, with operating budgets far outpacing inflation and population growth.
The possible sale of the franchise was the talk of the sports world on Friday when ESPN, citing National Football League and ownership sources familiar with the situation, reported that the team will be put up for sale after the Feb. 8 championship game between the Seahawks and the New England Patriots at Levi Stadium in Santa Clara, Calif.
Shortly thereafter, The Seattle Times reported that the Paul G. Allen Estate put out a statement that refuted, at least to a degree, the notion that the team is currently for sale: “We don’t comment on rumors or speculation, and the team is not for sale. We’ve already said that will change at some point per Paul’s wishes, but there is no news to share. Our focus right now is winning the Super Bowl and completing the sale of the Portland Trail Blazers in the coming months.”
Jody Allen took ownership of the Seahawks following the death of her brother, Paul, in October 2018.
Under a Washington state income tax proposal under discussion, professional athletes could pay a 9.9% tax on income earned in the state, potentially costing them tens of thousands of dollars per game for top earners. The tax, targeting income above $1 million, would apply to both visiting and home-team athletes based on “duty days” spent in Washington starting Jan. 1, 2029.
“Duty days” are the total number of days a professional athlete performs services for their team – games, practices, meetings and travel – in a specific state, used to calculate income tax liability for nonresidents.
Supporters justify a state tax on high earners as a necessary step to fix what they say is Washington’s regressive tax system. Proponents argue the tax would raise more than $3 billion annually to fund education, enhance the Working Families Tax Credit, and eliminate sales taxes on necessities.
The Center Square reached out via email to the office of Gov. Bob Ferguson and to state Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, for comment on the “jock tax,” given the potential sale of the Seahawks, asking if the team’s possible sale makes it harder to persuade the public on the merits of a high-earners income tax. Neither responded to a request for comment.
Latest News Stories
$45M included in budget for previously unfunded property tax relief
Over one ton of cocaine seized at U.S.-Mexico tunnel bust
National security group urges Congress to investigate Airwallex ties to CCP
Open primary system debated as Californians go to polls
Illinois Quick Hits: Pritzker signs two bills
Elon Poll says 2 in 3 proud to be American and Signers would be disappointed
U.S. Supreme Court denies Florida request to sue over immigrant CDLs
Judge says federal rule blocks Illinois from banning ‘swipe fees’
Canadians, Brits stress U.S., Texas are key to shipbuilding
Tariff litigation expands as federal court weighs next move
Democrats dissatisfied by DOJ’s pause on ‘anti-weaponization fund’
Hegseth calls allied defense ‘bad deal for taxpayers’ in budget push