Well, here’s something… useful?
If that’s all that bill does, that’s good work. And I never thought I’d say that about anything Congress might do in the area of NIL regulation. After all, why should taxpayers subsidize booster payments to players?
- Bloviation for the Dawgnation
-
Quote Of The Day
-
“We remember the Sugar Bowl, I think it my junior year of high school, we let Alabama beat us twice,” Brinson said of a team that also lost to the Crimson Tide in the SEC Championship game. “We’re not letting Alabama beat us twice. In the Sugar Bowl in 2018, they… thought they should have been in the playoffs and lost to Texas.” -- AB-H, 12/27/23
Search
Categories
Archives
Blogroll (ND)
- 82 Sluggo Win
- And The Valley Shook
- Banner Society
- Black Heart Gold Pants
- Black Shoe Diaries
- Blatant Homerism
- Braves & Birds
- Brophy Football
- College Football Talk
- EDSBS
- Eleven Warriors
- Lost Angeles
- MGoBlog
- RazorBloggers Network
- Rock M Nation
- Rocky Top Talk
- Saturday Down South
- Saturday Tradition
- Shakin The Southland
- Smart Football
- Team Speed Kills
- The National Championship Issue
- The Wizard of Odds
- Tide Bits
Dawg Blogs
Dawg Links
Media Links
Stats/Info Links
- All-Time Division 1-A CFB Standings
- American College Football
- American College Football – Rankings
- cfbstats.com
- College Football at Sports-Reference.com
- College Football by the Numbers
- College Football Data Warehouse
- College Football Recruiting Map
- College Nicknames
- Football Outsiders – College
- Football Study Hall
- GBE College Football Ratings
- MapGameDay.com
- NCAA Division I Football Statistics
- SEC Statistics
- Statistically Speaking
- Strangestbrew's College Football Schedulizer
- The Helmet Project
- Varsity Numbers
Useful Links
Time, time…
GATA
Blog Stats
- 73,819,492 hits
Get The Picture · Bloviation for the Dawgnation
Get The Picture 
If my contribution for a student-athlete’s scholarship isn’t tax-deductible just because it’s related to obtaining ticket privileges, why should a contribution to an NIL collective be? This totally makes common sense.
LikeLiked by 8 people
I actually agree with this. If they can deduct it, it means we are all paying for it. Really do not like the thought of helping a Texas billionaire offset his/hers contributions to players playing against Georgia.
LikeLiked by 5 people
What about your local Georgia liquor baron who only has a net worth in the high 8 digits – brother, can’t you spare a dime???
LikeLiked by 5 people
Well the liquor barons provide a useful service by supplying us with the nectar of the Gods (bourbon). The Texas boosters only give us useless crap like oil, computer chips and Matthew McConaughey movies…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree in regards to payments to the collectives but direct payments to athletes who appear in ads for a business should be tax deductible. Businesses that pay actors or spokesmen to be in ads can write off the money paid to them, why should an athlete be considered any differently?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Totally agree with that.
LikeLike
Read the bill’s language. What you refer to wouldn’t be characterized as “charitable”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Deductible for business, sure. But not for individuals.
LikeLike
I assume this would only apply to individuals and not businesses? Raising Canes hiring Stetson to help sell chicken fingers isn’t any different than wheaties hiring Michael Jordan to be on the box, right?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Right, but if a business funneled a contribution to the local collective, it wouldn’t be deductible under this proposal.
I have no problem with Cane’s taking a deduction for a direct endorsement deal with SBIV.
LikeLike
This just deals with the payment being a “charitable”, legitimate advertising expenses are deductible business expenses.
LikeLike
And I imagine most of the contributions are being funneled through businesses already
LikeLike
This may slow some of the collectives, but there are ways to work around it. Just wait for when transactions are done in the Metaverse. The tax code is not the way to fix a problem created by the idiots in charge of college football.
LikeLike
So, these collectives organize as a non-profit and problem solved/made murkier?
Seems like a perpetual game of cat and mouse on the horizon with this one.
LikeLike
Not only booster payments, but also student loan write-offs.
No reason for taxpayers to subsidize at all
LikeLiked by 2 people
Let’s not go down that rabbit hole, okay?
LikeLike
Gotta keep the not-upper-class, educated citizenry in obligatory perma-debt so they can keep greasing the wheels of capitalism!
bUt mUh tAxPayeR dOllaRs!!!1!
I’m sure there’s a libertarian island out there looking for like-minded folk who enjoy the smell of their own rugged individualism.
LikeLike
I think this bill addresses a problem that isn’t really that big. I’m having a hard time envisioning the market for individuals paying athletes for their name, image, and likeness. I guess maybe signing appearances and photo ops are the biggest thing.
I perceive that the real money is in businesses using players in their advertising. They wouldn’t be claiming that as charitable anyway; it’s marketing and advertising expense, already deductible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I love college football but man, college football is so stupid and screwed up.
LikeLike
Looks more like a “double bite” at the apple by government. Athletes are already facing tax payments for receiving NIL benefits, now these clowns in Washington want to get further into the feeding frenzy. Taxpayers are not “subsidizing” individuals or companies making NIL payments using contribution rules in the tax code. The government is simply collecting less revenue to spend on ridiculous programs like the $200 million for the Presidio Trust which will benefit few taxpayers.
LikeLike
How does disallowing a tax write off result in less revenue?
LikeLike
No write off = Higher tax bill/payment = More government revenue/collection
Deduction = Lower/No tax bill = Government collects less revenue = Athlete benefits & taxpayer benefits
LikeLike
As a resident of Maryland, I’m proud of ol’ Ben Cardin for this one.
LikeLike
Congress doing something right? End times are upon us!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Have not read the bill but it seems that they are just going to make sure the Collectives do not get 501c(3) status. This means that the money donated to the Collective would not be a tax deduction to the donor. The Collective could claim to be a not for profit but that means they don’t have to pay tax on the money they get. My understanding is that the player will still be paid directly by the client if they do commercials etc. If the Collective is not given 501c(3) status or any of the other not for profit exemptions then the Collective would have to pay tax on the money collected but get a deduction for money paid out. I’ll try to find the bill and see exactly what they are trying to do.
LikeLike
ehhh, some jackass member of our garbage government will insert some ridiculous amendment and it won’t pass, then they’ll all point fingers at each other and accuse each other of being unAmerican, rinse, repeat
LikeLiked by 7 people
UPDATE: They are really after the 501(c)(3) Contribution deduction. However, as Morris Day has so eloquently pointed out, this will be unrecognizable when or if it sees the light of day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Athletes should be required to work for the advertiser like BB does on the radio or SBIV for the chicken place. If you are being paid millions (BY), then you ought to have to be on TV between 7 AM and 11 PM. Then the advertisers would have to buy TV time. just like the insurance companies and others.
LikeLike
👏👏👏
LikeLike