Nonresident income taxes require anyone who earns income in a state where they do not reside to file a return and, in many cases, pay tax on that income. Twenty‑two states impose a filing requirement even if a nonresident spends just a single day in the state; other states set thresholds based on days present or earnings amount.
How “jock taxes” work
Professional athletes and entertainers are subject to the same nonresident rules, but states apply a “duty‑day” allocation for them. An NFL player is assumed to have about 170 duty days in a season; each day spent in a nonresident state creates a proportional share of the player’s total compensation that is taxable there. For example, three days in a state would make roughly 1.8 % (3 ÷ 170) of the player’s income subject to that state’s tax.
Home‑state credit
A taxpayer’s home state taxes all worldwide income and generally provides a credit for taxes paid to other states, limited to the amount the home state would have owed on the same income. If the nonresident state’s effective tax rate is higher than the home state’s, the total tax bill rises; if it is lower, the overall liability is unchanged but the tax is split between states.
Effective‑rate vs. taxable‑income methods
States differ in how they calculate the nonresident liability:
| Method | Calculation |
|---|---|
| Effective‑rate | Compute the tax that would be due if all income were earned in the nonresident state, then multiply by the fraction of income earned there. |
| Taxable‑income | Apply the nonresident state’s tax brackets only to the income actually earned in that state. |
California illustrates the impact of the method. A taxpayer with $100,000 of taxable income who earns $10,000 (10 %) in California would pay only $100 under the taxable‑income method (1 % marginal rate on the first $11,079). Using California’s effective‑rate method, the tax is prorated from the liability on the full $100,000, resulting in about $574 of California tax.
Example: Dak Prescott
Using the Tax Foundation’s jock‑tax calculator, Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott—a Texas resident (Texas has no individual income tax)—is projected to owe roughly $15.1 million in total taxes for 2026, of which about $365,000 goes to state and local jurisdictions for away games. If he were a resident of California and played for the Los Angeles Rams, his state and local tax bill would jump to $5.3 million. Playing for division rivals would generate state/local liabilities ranging from $2.9 million (Philadelphia Eagles) to $4.4 million (New York Giants).
Why athletes consider state taxes
Because signing bonuses are generally taxed only in the player’s state of residence, many athletes—especially rookies—choose to establish domicile in a state without an income tax before signing contracts. The potential difference in state and local tax liability can be a material factor in contract negotiations.
Burden on ordinary taxpayers
For non‑athletes, the filing requirement can be disproportionate. A taxpayer with $100,000 of taxable income who works in Arizona for a single day would, under the letter of the law, need to file an Arizona return and remit roughly $10 in tax. Most ordinary taxpayers are unaware of this obligation, leading to low compliance rates.
Policy suggestion
States could reduce the administrative burden on ordinary workers by adopting reasonable filing thresholds and withholding requirements for nonresident income, similar to the streamlined approach used for athletes. Such changes would likely improve compliance at minimal cost to state revenues.
The jock‑tax calculator referenced above allows users to select any NFL player or team and view estimated federal, state, and local tax liabilities for the 2026 season, incorporating home‑state credits for taxes paid to other jurisdictions.
Source article: taxfoundation.org
