RUSH: Now, folks, this is the way it was meant to be. Now we're talking. You remember the famous middle linebacker for both the Denver Broncos and Oakland Raiders, Bill Romanowski? Well, Bill Romanowski, in talking about the Super Bowl, said (paraphrasing), "I think Seattle has to lay someone out if they're gonna win this game. They're gonna have to put somebody on a stretcher in order to win." Now, that's more like it, folks. That is more like it.
They hate Romanowski anyway. They think he took all kinds of PEDs and, you know, he spit on players. Did you know that? He actually spit on his opponents. He didn't just tell a reporterette what he thought about. He spit on 'em, on Monday Night Football. Oh, yeah. He was a football player. He took no prisoners. And he turned into a madman during game time. And he's out there, he said, "I think Seattle has to lay somebody out in this game. I think they need to bring that cart out or that stretcher. When those kind of bad things happen to your team and you’re wheeling a guy on a cart, there’s a certain energy that a team takes on and it hits you."
So what he's saying is, when a team puts somebody on a stretcher, that fires up the team, and the team seeing a teammate on the stretcher being carted off suffers a similar depression, particularly if it's a star player. So in the midst of all of this liberal touchy-feely attempt to take the violence and the masculinity out of the game, here comes old Bill Romanowski talking the way they still talk in the locker room today. Not in public. You will never hear a player, active player talk this way, and you would never hear an active player admit that this kind of conversation goes on in the locker room. But it does.
Oh, yeah. The only chance Seattle has is to put somebody on a stretcher, preferably Peyton Manning. He didn't say that, but, I mean, you take out the quarterback. Nothing's changed in the game. That's what you do. I'll catch heat now. I'm just adding a name here to what Romanowski -- he didn't name anybody and he probably didn't intend to name anybody, but you people that have played the game, you know exactly what I'm talking about. You try to take the quarterback out of the game. Not illegally. It's just always been part of the structure of the game.
Let's look at some of the headlines. I'm not sure this is right, by the way. Forbes has a story, and the Washington Post has a story. They both say that Peyton Manning will owe New Jersey $57,000 in taxes after the Super Bowl. Now, what did I do with the Forbes story? Well, here's the Washington Post version. "Seahawks, Broncos Will Pay New Jersey Taxes." And what this is, it's called the jock tax, and believe me, it's real. All visiting teams -- major League Baseball, NBA, football -- teams that are in town on the road playing, they pay the taxes of the state and perhaps even the city where they're playing.
So if the Dodgers are in New York for three games, they pay taxes to New York for those three days, and then they are exempted from those three days being taxed in California where they live. That's not really new. It's been standard operating tax procedure for a long time. Now, the way this works is the players will owe New Jersey part of their salaries because the game is being played in New Jersey and because they're here for a full week.
"New Jersey is one of a handful of states that levies a so-called 'jock tax' -- a tax on any out-of-state athlete who plays a game in the Garden State. The tax hits every member of a professional sports team's roster, regardless of whether they actually take the field, as well as the broadcasters who call the games." It affects the equipment managers; it affects everybody in the traveling party.
"Players will be taxed at a rate of 8.97% of the salaries they earn for each day in the state. Bonuses for winning championships are subject to taxes too." Now, what they've calculated here is that Peyton Manning and every other member of the Broncos... Well, let's stick with Manning because they calculated his income. "Peyton Manning, who stands to earn $15 million next year and will make either $92,000 or $46,000 whether the Broncos win or lose, will owe New Jersey somewhere around $57,000 next year."
Now, the only amount... I may be wrong about this, but the players' salaried paydays end with the end of the regular season, and the salaried paydays begin the first week of the regular season. These players, during the playoffs, are not making any salary. They've been paid. They are paid 16 times during the year -- well, 17 times. They're paid 17 times during the year, once per week of the regular season.
It's unknown whether a team is gonna make the playoffs so you can't calculate and prorate a salary for any longer than 17 weeks, so every team that makes the playoffs, the players are playing only for whatever they earn by qualifying for the playoffs. And the Super Bowl numbers by themselves -- this does not include any playoff games prior -- you get $46,000 if you lose the Super Bowl and $92,000 if you win the Super Bowl.
Now, what this article is saying is, you got Peyton Manning who stands to earn $15 million this year, calendar 2014, which is when he will earn either 92,000, 46,000 from New Jersey. They're calculating that Peyton, because of his salary, will owe New Jersey somewhere around $57,000. I'm not sure that that's right. He may only owe 8.97% of what he earns playing in the Super Bowl, and then if the Broncos return to play the Jets or Giants regular season schedule this year, this coming season.
Now, I'm not totally sure about this, but I don't know how New Jersey gets a cut of everything Peyton earns in 2014 simply because he was here for a week. What New Jersey will get is a week's worth of earnings that add up to $92,000 if they win. Regardless, it's still obscene. The point is, he doesn't even live here. These players don't even live here. They're going to be paying state taxes in New Jersey.
And if this story is right (and it could well be), he's gonna owe $57,000 even if he's on the losing team and earns $46,000, if the story is accurate. This is why I don't go to New York anymore. I'm subject to the jock tax. I'm not a jock, but anybody who is not a resident of New York but has lived there before, as I have, obviously has a record of living in New York, and New York tends to not believe you when you move, particularly when you move to a no-income tax state.
They follow you, and I get audited every year since 1997. Every year. You would not believe the process. It takes three years to prove a negative. I have to prove I haven't been there. I was not there, and I had to prove every day. It's ridiculous. It's harassment. But once you've lived there, they've got a record of you living there, and any time they claim you come back, even if you're just there to work a day, they find you and they audit you and they want your money for it.
So it's just how obscene and ridiculous this has gotten. I talk to people that leave New York. They're finally fed up and they're moving to Florida. "Yeah, yeah, all I gotta do is be in Florida for like 183 days and I don't have to pay New York taxes." That is not right. Whoever's telling you that, that you only have to be a Florida resident by living there a little over six months? Wrongo, pal. I explain the jock tax to 'em. Because if they find you, you're gonna pay tax on every day you're in New York if you're working.
If you go up on a Saturday and Sunday, you're still gonna have to prove to them you didn't do any work, even if all you did was go play golf. A lot of people don't understand how this works, but they're beginning to because they're beginning to be ensnared by it. So I think it's fascinating the story even ran. In the midst of the Super Bowl and maybe winning the highest championship in the world of professional football, the story is on how much they're gonna owe tax-wise.
Except, of course, class envy. Maybe there are people out there who think they deserve it and should pay more. Super Bowl ticket demand is down. It's way down. Did you hear about this? Yeah, what happens is the league gives tickets, sells tickets to certain partners -- the teams in the NFL and so forth -- and after that there develops the secondary and tertiary market. Those marketers generally end up selling tickets for sometimes up to three times face value.
They're having trouble maintaining face value, and they're certainly not getting anywhere near double face value. So the analysts are trying to figure out why, and they've got two conclusions. (interruption) Well, that's one of them. "It's gonna be cold." It's gonna be cold -- and it's not just cold. It's five hours of cold. You're outside five hours, and these people that are attending this game are not the kind of people that attend regular season games outside.
They're in suites.
These people are being forced to sit outside when they normally don't do that.
Five hours of cold, that's one of the factors.
The other thing being said is that the teams aren't sexy. The secondary market scalpers -- uh, ticket sellers -- say there's really not a whole lot of interest in Seattle and Denver. I mean, let's be honest about it. That's what they're saying. (interruption) Not only the Mannings, Richard Sherman. Richard Sherman had his latest column at MondayMorningQuarterback.com, and Richard Sherman says he's through attacking people.
Somebody sent him a tweet that said, "You never make yourself bigger by attacking them and making them smaller."
He said, that's right; he's through attacking people -- and now the media is through with him.
RUSH: I'm gonna tell you something, folks. I don't care how unsexy the Super Bowl teams are; I will make you the following bet: I will bet you that the Super Bowl ratings trounce the ratings for the State of the Coup speech tonight. Anybody have any doubt that that will happen? So they can sit out there and they can say, "Well, we can't maintain our ticket prices. The teams aren't sexy, and it's cold out there." Nevertheless, the State of the Coup ratings tonight will be buried by the Super Bowl ratings.
And what does that mean?
It means that people would rather watch war -- sanctioned brutality and maiming, injurious war -- than watch a man of peace and bipartisanship. Now, what must that say to the left about our country, that the people of this country would rather watch war and probably agree with Romanowski that the only way the Seahawks wins if somebody goes out on a stretcher? They would rather watch a man of peace and bipartisan speak on class warfare, inequality -- oh, and raising the minimum wage. It's like the fifth time in the State of the Union speeches since Bill Clinton, by the way.
RUSH: New Providence, New Jersey. Bob, hi. Great to have you on the EIB Network, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Very glad to talk with you. This is the socialist utopia of New Jersey, is another way to look at it. We're blessed with the highest taxes in every category: income, sales, real estate, debt, you name it, we pay it.
RUSH: Yeah, and it's not helping them with traffic jams, is it?
CALLER: (laughing) But anyway, the main thing is, I think when you're talking about the taxes you're leaving a couple things out with the football players, like Peyton Manning and so on and so on.
RUSH: Wait a minute, now. Be very careful telling me that I've left things out. What did I leave out?
CALLER: You left out the fact that whatever tax he pays in New Jersey, he gets a credit on his Colorado tax return, not for the full amount of the New Jersey tax, but a prorated share based on the rate in Colorado, which is 4.63 and New Jersey, which is 7.97. So in Colorado, he will get something like 52% of whatever he pays to New Jersey as a credit against his Colorado return.
RUSH: Well, now, I did --
CALLER: But let me finish. If you look at any Washington state player, there's no income tax in Washington state, so in Washington state, if they win, whatever they pay in New Jersey, they pay, period, they get no credit in the state of Colorado.
RUSH: Right. Exactly.
RUSH: But I did mention that the jock tax, the players, there is an accounting made in their home state for the state paid and the state they're working. I didn't get into the detail of the percentages that you did, but I did --
CALLER: Okay, I missed that.
RUSH: Yeah. I did mention it. But the rate I've got here -- you said 7.9 in New Jersey. The rate I've got is 8.9.
CALLER: I'm sorry. It's 8.97. I'm sorry, 8.97 in New Jersey.
RUSH: Okay, well, Bob, hang on just a second. I've gotta take a break here and a couple more things I want to ask you about. I don't think you're finished. I sense that.
RUSH: Back now to Bob in New Providence, New Jersey. Were you through making your point? We ran out of time there.
CALLER: Well, yeah, I more or less was, but I think I would just make a couple of other wrap-up points, and that is that, number one, I do have some sympathy for the players and the tax that they have to pay, but they use tax advisors. They use CPAs. They really have a lot of help in trying to at least maintain a logical level of taxes that they're paying. The bigger issue, really, is the residents in the state of New Jersey, where we're on our own. Now, we've had Governor Christie as governor for four years, he's into his fifth year, our taxes have gone up. Now, he says they haven't gone up but they've gone up. My property tax has gone up 13% since he's been governor. That's on a gross basis, but it really went up by about 25% when you take out that we're not getting property tax rebates anymore.
RUSH: Let me ask you a question about Peyton. Let's go back to Manning --
RUSH: -- because he's the example used in the story. If they win the Super Bowl, Manning will make 92 grand.
RUSH: Now, did you hear me say that their paydays end the last week of the regular season? Once the playoffs start they're not making any money.
CALLER: That's correct.
RUSH: They only earn whatever they win per playoff game and get by losing one. I think in the wild card round if you lose you get nothing.
RUSH: Anyway, the Super Bowl game by itself is 92 grand. I don't think that counts the previous rounds where they've won, so it's $92,000. Now, the way this has been calculated, for Peyton Manning to owe $57,000, obviously whoever calculated this is including earnings in New Jersey this year beyond the Super Bowl.
CALLER: Not necessarily. Now, again, the answer is it all depends. If he retires immediately after the Super Bowl game, then he only worked in New Jersey for 33 days, which would be the month of January and two days in February. And he made himself a whole lot of money --
RUSH: Wait, wait, wait, wait. He didn't get to New Jersey until Sunday night. He hasn't been --
CALLER: I think they're gonna count the entire month of January.
RUSH: No, they don't do that. No, no. In fact, I'll tell you, let me use me. It's a per diem. I have to tell the state of New York the number of days that I was working in the state earning income, and it's just those days that I am required to pay taxes on. Now, I haven't been to New York and work in four years and they audit me every year anyway. So he doesn't have to pay for January. That would be outrageous. My question to you was gonna be, do you think that these jock taxes are even legit? Peyton Manning doesn't live in New Jersey. Why should he have to pay anything to New Jersey? He had no choice, he has to go there.
CALLER: Is it legit? No, I don't believe it is. But at the same time there are 41 states that have an income tax on out of state residents and in-state residents. There are seven states with no income tax, Washington state being one of them, and there are two states that just tax interest and dividends. That would be New Hampshire and Tennessee.
CALLER: But the way the taxes are applied, it's not just as simple as saying only the days you worked in the state. The way New York and New Jersey do it and I believe most other states with an income tax do the same thing, they take the number of days that you worked in the state divided by the number of days you worked for the entire year anyplace, and the number of days for that denominator is gonna be 365 minus weekends off, holidays --
RUSH: It's 250 days, basically.
CALLER: -- and all that stuff.
RUSH: It's 250 days they calculate, yeah.
CALLER: You and I might work 250 days, but somebody who's a football player might only work 80 days, a hundred days a year when you take training camps, games, and so on. So his denominator is smaller, it makes the numerator have a more powerful impact in how that allocation is gonna be to a given state. I'm not gonna tell you that I know exactly how the jock tax works precisely, but I'm talking about the New York and New Jersey, it's very common for people to live in New Jersey, work in New York. And we go through this, it's a back and forth, back and forth --
RUSH: That's a whole different nut.
CALLER: -- keeping diaries and records and defending yourself.
RUSH: Yeah, yeah. That's a whole different thing. But that doesn't describe Peyton Manning. It doesn't describe any of the other jocks. In fact, I think he maintains his residence still in Indianapolis, to be honest with you. But I don't know that for sure.
CALLER: But if he does, then Indiana is going to be the base state, and whatever their max tax rate is, he will be taxed on --
RUSH: He's gonna be paying taxes in Colorado, he's gonna paying taxes in Indianapolis and now New Jersey, and every other state that he's gone to.
CALLER: Every other state. But every dollar of tax he pays in any state where he's not a resident, all those dollars --
RUSH: Right, he gets a credit, but you just explained, he gets shafted on the credit.
CALLER: He gets shafted on the credit 'cause New Jersey at 8.97 and Colorado, if he lived in Colorado which is 4.63, that means that every dollar -- if he pays $10,000 to New Jersey, he only gets a credit for $5,200 in his home state.
RUSH: Right. Well, here's the money quote from the Forbes piece that got all this started. "If Manning is able to play next season, his New Jersey income tax would be $46,989 on $92,000 for winning the Super Bowl, or 51.08%. If they lose and he is able to play in 2014, he will pay New Jersey $46,844 on his $46,000." If the Broncos lose, Peyton Manning will owe the state of New Jersey more money in tax than he will earn from the game, if Denver loses. That "amounts to a 101.83% tax on his actual Super Bowl earnings in the state -- and this does not even consider federal taxes!"
So the Forbes calculation was specifically based on Manning not retiring. Now, if you want to add even more to this, in the just-concluded season, which is the tax year 2013 for which everybody has to file by April 15th of this year, both the Seahawks and the Broncos played the Giants in New Jersey. So he's already been to New Jersey once last year and has already or will have to pay taxes in New Jersey for that trip. And that tax rate will be based on his $15 million annual salary.
Now, he was in New Jersey for two days. Actually, 36 hours. The visiting team will arrive at four o'clock in the afternoon on Saturday, they'll play the game on Sunday, then hightail it back home. So that's the length of time he's in the state. It's considered a full working day, I'm sure. So whatever prorated per game, New Jersey is gonna get their take of it for that day. Seahawks, same thing. But as you say, the Seattle players owe the state of Washington nothing because there's no state income tax there. Now, I've always thought this was weird when I was first exposed to it and first told what it was gonna cost me per day to go back to New York to work after I left.
I'll tell you, folks, since I learned what I know about income taxes, they really do influence the way I live. And I can't tell you how that frustrates friends of mine in California. I can't tell you. They tell me, "You know, you are tax phobic."
And I said, "I'm not tax phobic. I'm just tax smart."
"Well, why don't you get a place out here? I mean, you love coming out here and we love having you out here. Why don't you get a place out there for like five months or four months a year?"
"'Cause I don't want the state of California to find out I'm there, 'cause that's just gonna be another agency auditing me left and right, and I don't want to give them the money."
My lifestyle, where I determine that I will go, is indeed affected by taxes.
Now, I'm sure some of you people are saying (and I wouldn't blame you if you are), "Well, wait a minute. You can afford it." Not the point. To me, it's principle. I disagree with it, and if I don't have to pay it, I'm not going to sit here when I weigh the two things: How much enjoyment, fun, whatever do I get going to New York and working for a couple days, versus not going there and not having to pay taxes, given what that stupid previous governor has said.
Why would I want to spend any time in New York when the governor there has basically applauded my leaving, and the current governor has made it clear that he doesn't want any conservatives in his state? Why should I go make myself a target of these people? I already am one. So I am --I don't know -- probably more extreme about this than most other people. Most people probably don't care about it.
They just have the accountant figure it out, send the money, and the hell with it and they don't even think about it. But I do, because it's a matter of principle to me. So I pay attention to this kind of stuff, and it just irritates me that these football players are gonna owe the state of New Jersey money, whether they win or lose. I'm sure some of you disagree. "Well, Rush, they're in the state when they're earning it, and the state should get their take."
Yeah, but the state isn't paying them, and they have no choice in this case but to go there. It's a job requirement and this kind of thing. "But, Rush, they got a credit for it." Yeah, but as explained, sometimes the credit does not fully offset it. It ends up costing them money, based on all the different criteria. Then look at how much you gotta pay the accountants and lawyers to keep you legal on all this. After you do all that...
That's why I love home.