Blog

Learning Center

We keep you up-to-date with all the latest tax news and changes in the industry.

Pennsylvania's Jock Tax Ruled Unconstitutional: Implications for Athletes and Cities

Pittsburgh's jock tax met its demise recently when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional. This decision has significant ramifications for athletes, cities, and tax policies going forward. According to the report published by the Associated Press, visiting athletes were subject to a 3% income tax under the Nonresident Sports Facility Usage Fee—an arrangement now struck down under the state’s Uniformity Clause.

Justice David N. Wecht stated in his majority opinion, "The city does not provide concrete reasons that would justify taxing nonresident athletes and entertainers more than resident..."

Image 3

Dissecting the "Jock Tax"

The "jock tax" is essentially an income tax imposed on nonresident performers and athletes. This tax is levied on earnings generated within jurisdictions they do not reside in. Pittsburgh, for instance, applied this to professional athletes competing in its publicly funded venues, highlighting the complex intersections of local taxation and professional sports.

Jock taxes began attracting attention following California’s taxation of Michael Jordan during the 1991 NBA Finals—a fiscal policy ripple effect that encouraged other states to implement similar tax structures.

The Legal Challenge

Pittsburgh's jock tax didn't withstand judicial scrutiny for several reasons:

  1. Violation of Uniformity Clause
    The tax structure was found discriminatory as it unjustly burdened nonresidents compared to city residents.
  2. Insufficient Justification
    The city couldn't provide rational justifications supporting the tax disparity.
  3. Misinterpretation of Burden Equality
    Arguments equating residents' school tax contributions with the nonresidents' 3% load were deemed legally insufficient.
  4. Judicial Precedent
    Lower courts had consistently ruled against similar tax structures.

Implications and Consequences

Financial Strain on Pittsburgh – Losing out on the estimated $6.1 million in jock tax revenue compels the city to seek alternative financial strategies.

Athletes and Performers – Professional athletes can now request refunds for taxes paid under this invalidated law. The legal firm Hemenway & Barnes is spearheading efforts for recoveries.

Policy Implications – Other jurisdictions might face increased challenges to their own jock tax laws. This ruling underscores the importance of aligning tax policies with constitutional standards, emphasizing fairness and uniform application.

Image 2

This landmark decision reflects a crucial moment in the relationship between taxation and professional sports, signaling the significant checks and balances within our legal framework.

Share this article...

Sign up for our newsletter.

Each month, we will send you a roundup of our latest blog content covering the tax and accounting tips & insights you need to know.

I confirm this is a service inquiry and not an advertising message or solicitation. By clicking “Submit”, I acknowledge and agree to the creation of an account and to the and .

We care about the protection of your data.

Butler Location

12714 W. Hampton Ave, Unit F
Butler, Wisconsin 53007
(414) 509-1626

Milwaukee Location

Remote
Milwaukee, WI 53217