Iâm sort of looking forward to tax time for the players, " Wait, what?! The IRS gets how much? " See how far that standard exemption gets you boysâŚ
4 Likes
Player (looking at taxes): âMom, Dad, can this be right???â
Mom and Dad chuckle
2 Likes
Iâm shocked there hasnât already been a massive failure to pay taxes scandal at a big time school. My money was on Auburn or Ole Miss.
4 Likes
Times were simpler when it was just stacks of cash in mcdonalds bags under park benches
3 Likes
Why is there this widespread belief that there will be such high rates of tax non-compliance among this cohort?
I started filing taxes when I had HS and summer jobs when I was 16 or so.
And I didnât even have an agent that I was paying a ridic commission who presumably would at least alert me to this stuff.
I mean, yeah, kids are dumb. I get it. Adults, too.
2 Likes
Yeah, Iâve never understood this. âOh, yeah, you wanna get paid for sportsball? Well, have you ever heard about TAXES?! Checkmate.â
2 Likes
As the sport has professionalized over the last 5 years, those clinging to amateurism have repeatedly harped on college kids being ill equipped to handle money as an excuse to deny the players their free market opportunities. Never mind that these players are all legal adults; the dinosaur segment of coaches and administrators (and media and fans) infantilize them and claim college students are incapable of making adult money decisions and therefore keeping them âamateurâ is thus in their best interests.
Which of course is an argument that stands up to absolutely zero scrutiny in our free and free market society. But Iâve heard actual D-1 coaches say it on the record, soâŚ
6 Likes
Point of clarification: Can international players receive revenue sharing payments? I know 3rd party NIL has been tricky with student visa rules. Is there any reason to think revenue sharing from the institution would be different?
2 Likes
This is an excellent question. Schools have had to be creative with how they set up international marketing opportunities for their overseas players, because yeah, individuals on student visas arenât allowed to earn income in the US. Jesse Edwards left Syracuse a few years ago because their Collective wasnât ready, able, or willing to jump through the additional hoops to get his revenue established through European channels.
But while many schools have now figured that (loophole / workaround) out, revenue sharing is a different beast altogether.
Ultimately, I think the NCAA is going to have to work with Congress (and maybe already are?) to migrate student athletes from student visas to ones similar to what Pro Athletes use:
Reading this, O-1 visas, which I understand most pro baseball/basketball/hockey players are on, would be the most appropriate (read: least restrictive). Though of course, itâs a potentially thorny political proposition. Ultimately some folks are going to see it as taking American $$ away from American kids.
3 Likes
I donât know how good this source is, but as a layperson, it helped: Show Me the Money: Navigating the House Settlement for International Students | Troutman Pepper Locke - JDSupra
However, schools have already been using certain workarounds to these F-1 visa restrictions for NIL compensation. For example, international student-athletes may earn money from NIL deals if the compensation is structured as passive income[3] (as opposed to active income[4]), like a group licensing agreement to sell apparel or other products.
Another example of a workaround to the F-1 visa restriction is for international student-athletes to perform all NIL services outside of the U.S. For example, an NIL deal could be structured so that the student-athlete perform the NIL deal in his/her home country (during holiday or summer break) or overseas while traveling with their athletic program (such as during a basketball tournament in The Bahamas).
I hadnât considered that USCIS could be the entity that would break the seal on the polite fiction around revenue sharing not being âemploymentâ
Because the House payments are being paid to student-athletes directly from the school, ostensibly for their performance in that sport, it is possible (if not likely) that USCIS will consider these student-athletes to be de facto employees who earn what amounts to a salary (i.e. , active income) by working for the school in the form of playing their respective sport.
Rest of the article notes a lot of uncertainties absent guidance from the govât. Sounds like one strategy is to frame this all as passive income that is allowed.
3 Likes
O-1 requires employment, I think: O-1 Extraordinary Ability Visa Process for Administrators | Harvard International Office
USCIS decides whether an individual qualifies for O-1 classification. The O-1 visa is employer specific, which means that a USCIS-approved petition that was submitted by the HIO only authorizes the scholar to work in the position specified in the petition filed by Harvard.
Correct, they would have to be redesignated as employees for any visa situation other that F-1. That or Congress codifies an exception for athletes revenue sharing (hah).
All thid legal talj and no one talking about how easy it is to launder money to non or visa holding people? And donât for a second believe itâs not happening.
1 Like
I mean, sure, we can just get back to good olâ bag-dropping, giving the money to a trusted friend or family member, whatever.
But that gets back to incurring risk both for the program and the player that many would prefer to avoid. And if EVERY international player on a P5 program entitled to their six-figure cut is driving a new BMW, and yet the rules are such that F-1 Visa holders arenât allowed revenue sharing, then yeah some media member is going to deep-dive how that money is flowing and itâll end up on the front page of USA Today. No one wants that.
Interesting comment from the Good Feet guy.
https://x.com/JonEasystep/status/1905334397408018815?t=zOeu3qCpy8M0biX47DxJow&s=19
6 Likes
Hereâs the thing with the 3x available or whatever was said. Available is the key word. Theyâve gotten more organized about itâŚwhich is fantastic. Itsâ what was needed. But saying it like that is deceiving. BeforeâŚthey had to go out and secure it as they made dealsâŚwe caught wind of it last year before guys visited, mentioned it to subscribers. Doesnât mean they had trouble getting moneyâŚbut it wasnât âavailableâ as in readily on hand.
7 Likes
This pretty much confirms my suspicions on why Tony left and left when he did.
Interesting comment from the Good Feet guy.
1 Like
4 Likes
This is interesting. Swimswam, of all sites, is doing a live update thread on the House hearing. Grant House having been a college swimmer and all.
4 Likes