Well, I finally joined Dinkytown Athletes - whose with me, and whose already here?

Donate To GopherHole
Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0 said:
Walk-ons can't be real happy about this.
Click to expand...
Hopefully they can get a ride with someone on the team. SLC is relatively a small city. I bet most these guys will be driving south to Vegas a lot. With the vehicles being managed by a fleet company in guessing they will also get a fuel card as well. Mileage reporting?
 


Mr. 131 said:
I agree it's insanity - but I think the part that is "insane" isn't that players are now getting paid.

The part that's insane is that schools make hundreds of millions of dollars off of athletes, and expected to continue to do so forever.

This isn't the 1940s - collegiate football has made billions of dollars off the backs of unpaid players.

This doesn't negate my frustrations with how much the NIL is going to perpetuation (and likely worsen) parity in college football.

I'm fine with paying players, but I do want regulation to help put some guardrails on parity.
Click to expand...
AGREE!
 




In-kind benefits worth over some dollar figure are indeed required to be reported on your taxes.

Will they actually do that? Have they been properly educated by the school about doing that?

Probably not. Better hope they don’t get audited.
 

Allshade said:
Will these leased vehicles create taxable income for the student?
Click to expand...
Yes.
MplsGopher said:
In-kind benefits worth over some dollar figure are indeed required to be reported on your taxes.

Will they actually do that? Have they been properly educated by the school about doing that?

Probably not. Better hope they don’t get audited.
Click to expand...
The University of Minnesota provides education to the student-athletes on their obligations if they elect to participate in NIL activities, including the need to consider tax implications of their actions. I presume that is commonplace among athletic departments. Whether the SAs actually take advantage of the information provided and whether they actually declare their income is an individual choice, just as it is for anyone else.

I continue to wait for the first game announcement indicating that "quarterback Sam Signalcaller is limited today with a high ankle sprain and starting tailback Johnny Footballer is out today due to an IRS audit."
 

I’m guessing audits would not occur during the season.
 




@2nd Degree Gopher apologies I missed replying to your earlier post.

Firstly, as I think was understood but to make crystal clear, I’m not using the word “legal” to talk about breaking laws. (Unless the discussion veered into areas of outright theft, fraud, etc. and I assume no such thing is going on at DA.)

I was using it in the sense of NCAA rules. There are none, now. That doesn’t mean what collectives are doing now won’t be ruled out later.


100% disagree that the Supreme Court ruling had anything to do with collectives and what they’re doing now to take advantage of the anarchy in the NCAA rules at his time.

Very much doubt they heard arguments about how such operations would spring up and how they’d do what they are doing now.


No. Their ruling was narrowly focused on the things I described: actual NIL rights. And I supported that ruling wholeheartedly. Student (athletes) should of course be able to engage in bona fide transactions with their NIL.

That’s not what collectives are doing.


All collectives are doing is taking the actions of SEC bagmen for decades and bringing them over the table, taking advantage of the lack of rules.

Again, I’m certain that DA is follow every letter of every rule and guideline available. I think and assume they’re doing it as cleanly as can be done.

I just am against the entire ideology of it. Schools should be paying players as employees and they (at least FBS or maybe at the conference level) should be unionized, maybe by sport. Or the Big Ten conference could pay them. Whatever is easier, they have the TV money.
 

MplsGopher said:
@2nd Degree Gopher apologies I missed replying to your earlier post.

Firstly, as I think was understood but to make crystal clear, I’m not using the word “legal” to talk about breaking laws. (Unless the discussion veered into areas of outright theft, fraud, etc. and I assume no such thing is going on at DA.)

I was using it in the sense of NCAA rules. There are none, now. That doesn’t mean what collectives are doing now won’t be ruled out later.


100% disagree that the Supreme Court ruling had anything to do with collectives and what they’re doing now to take advantage of the anarchy in the NCAA rules at his time.

Very much doubt they heard arguments about how such operations would spring up and how they’d do what they are doing now.


No. Their ruling was narrowly focused on the things I described: actual NIL rights. And I supported that ruling wholeheartedly. Student (athletes) should of course be able to engage in bona fide transactions with their NIL.

That’s not what collectives are doing.


All collectives are doing is taking the actions of SEC bagmen for decades and bringing them over the table, taking advantage of the lack of rules.

Again, I’m certain that DA is follow every letter of every rule and guideline available. I think and assume they’re doing it as cleanly as can be done.

I just am against the entire ideology of it. Schools should be paying players as employees and they (at least FBS or maybe at the conference level) should be unionized, maybe by sport. Or the Big Ten conference could pay them. Whatever is easier, they have the TV money.
Click to expand...
I recently read part of the Supreme Court ruling. What they concluded was limits imposed by the NCAA on "education-related expenses", such as paid internships, are unlawful. They did not address NIL at all. It was the NCAA that enacted NIL after the court ruling. Why they did that remains a question, because all they were compelled to do by the court was eliminate caps on "education-related expenses". As one poster mentioned, the NCAA probably instituted NIL because states were beginning to enact NIL laws, and they didn't want to fight it in the courts. What you all already know, is that collectives are probably "pay to play". What are the Utah kids required to do to earn their use of a $60,000.00 truck? And why was the presentation held on the school's football field? There is supposed to be a separation between the schools and the NIL deals. Instead, schools seem intimately involved in facilitating pay-to-play. They don't even attempt to disguise their language or provide a barrier between themselves and NIL. It seems like the schools, the kids and the funders are all in bed together.
 

MplsGopher said:
@2nd Degree Gopher apologies I missed replying to your earlier post.

Firstly, as I think was understood but to make crystal clear, I’m not using the word “legal” to talk about breaking laws. (Unless the discussion veered into areas of outright theft, fraud, etc. and I assume no such thing is going on at DA.)

I was using it in the sense of NCAA rules. There are none, now. That doesn’t mean what collectives are doing now won’t be ruled out later.


100% disagree that the Supreme Court ruling had anything to do with collectives and what they’re doing now to take advantage of the anarchy in the NCAA rules at his time.

Very much doubt they heard arguments about how such operations would spring up and how they’d do what they are doing now.


No. Their ruling was narrowly focused on the things I described: actual NIL rights. And I supported that ruling wholeheartedly. Student (athletes) should of course be able to engage in bona fide transactions with their NIL.

That’s not what collectives are doing.


All collectives are doing is taking the actions of SEC bagmen for decades and bringing them over the table, taking advantage of the lack of rules.

Again, I’m certain that DA is follow every letter of every rule and guideline available. I think and assume they’re doing it as cleanly as can be done.

I just am against the entire ideology of it. Schools should be paying players as employees and they (at least FBS or maybe at the conference level) should be unionized, maybe by sport.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with those who fear that this will "ruin" college football as we have known and loved it, but you described the collectives as "barely quasi-legal." (How can it be "barely legal" if you acknowledge that there are no rules to be broken?) If what you meant is "they aren't doing anything illegal, and they aren't doing anything in violation of NCAA rules, but I don't like it and I hope that someday they change the rules or the laws," it would have been clearer to just say that.

The original idea of the collectives was to find a way to allow well-heeled boosters to funnel NIL money to student-athletes in a manner way that would both take advantage of the new landscape allowing the SAs to profit from their name, image and likeness and do so in a way that was tax deductible as charitable contributions. Paying a SA for "real" NIL wouldn't do that because you would be paying individuals for goods and/or services. Those are taxable events. Somebody (Texas A&M, maybe?) came up with the idea of creating an organization (the "collective") to promote charitable activities. Donor makes a tax deductible contribution to the collective and then the collective pays individual SAs to do things like appear at charitable events, appear in PSAs, etc. The IRS pretty quickly made it clear that wouldn't pass muster. This is why many of the collectives registered as, but do not operate as, charitable organizations.

Certainly the Supreme Court didn't hear arguments on or rule on the legality of the collectives. What they did, I believe, is make very clear that they are willing to scrutinize closely the whole framework of collegiate sports and rules or policies that limit the freedom of SAs to capitalize on their labors in ways that courts have seldom done in the past. So it isn't that the NCAA is prohibited from creating new rules to limit SAs actions, it is that they fear the repercussions if they do so. The collectives, some more aggressively and successfully than others, have seized on this to provide funds to SAs. They recognize that the courts are unlikely to intercede to try to prevent willing donors and recipients from legally transferring assets in any way they find acceptable. (How do you propose to distinguish between "bona fide" NIL activities and illegitimate ones? If I say an Instagram birthday shout out for my Grandma from Jah Joyner or a lock of Quinn Ewers hair is worth $5,000 who are you, the NCAA or anyone else to say that's too much?)

The NCAA seems to be hoping that Congress will act. Failing that, the only options seems to be regularly getting paddled in court, letting the current chaos continue, or exploring some type of collectively bargained resolution with the SAs. None of those options seem very appealing to the NCAA.
 




@2nd Degree Gopher thank you for the well thought out post. Appreciate it. Lot of what you said I’m sure is right or close to right.

I just want someone (you, if you know) to explain this bit:

I “donate” $1000 to the nonprofit charity called Dinkytown Athletes. OK. Some time later, DA cuts a check to Gopher Player X for $20k. Let’s assume my $1000 went into that check, and that was indeed congruent to my wishes for the donation.

…… what tangible thing did X have to “do” for that check?


My guess/thinking is either nothing or they absolute minimum that they (lawyers) think they can get away with. And my other guess is that it has nothing or the absolute minimum to do with X’s NIL.


I’m not commenting on the “fairness” of that, because at the end of the day the main mission of DA is simply to be competitive with what the other schools are already doing. They’re not trying to do something that has never been done. I get that.
 

MplsGopher said:
@2nd Degree Gopher thank you for the well thought out post. Appreciate it. Lot of what you said I’m sure is right or close to right.

I just want someone (you, if you know) to explain this bit:

I “donate” $1000 to the nonprofit charity called Dinkytown Athletes. OK. Some time later, DA cuts a check to Gopher Player X for $20k. Let’s assume my $1000 went into that check, and that was indeed congruent to my wishes for the donation.

…… what tangible thing did X have to “do” for that check?


My guess/thinking is either nothing or they absolute minimum that they (lawyers) think they can get away with.

I’m not commenting on the “fairness” of that, because at the end of the day the main mission of DA is simply to be competitive with what the other schools are already doing. They’re not trying to do something that has never been done. I get that.
Click to expand...
While I would say your question is better directed to someone at Dinkytown Athletes, my understanding is that they are having the SAs engage with fans at various events, providing memorabilia, etc. I am sure that you could argue that in most cases the compensation doesn't match the labor involved, but it seems to be structured well within the current guidelines as they are understood.
 

MplsGopher said:
In-kind benefits worth over some dollar figure are indeed required to be reported on your taxes.

Will they actually do that? Have they been properly educated by the school about doing that?

Probably not. Better hope they don’t get audited.
Click to expand...

I would say that most schools probably do that. A component of athletes' scholarships - room and board - has been taxable income for a long time so it's not like schools haven't been informing athletes about these kinds of things in the past.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
While I would say your question is better directed to someone at Dinkytown Athletes, my understanding is that they are having the SAs engage with fans at various events, providing memorabilia, etc. I am sure that you could argue that in most cases the compensation doesn't match the labor involved, but it seems to be structured well within the current guidelines as they are understood.
Click to expand...

The bolded part is the key issue and it's certainly not impossible to establish some ranges of reasonableness. I did look around at Dinkytown's and another school's (either Creighton or Providence, can't remember which) listed prices for player services about a year ago and those seemed reasonable to me.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
I (How do you propose to distinguish between "bona fide" NIL activities and illegitimate ones? If I say an Instagram birthday shout out for my Grandma from Jah Joyner or a lock of Quinn Ewers hair is worth $5,000 who are you, the NCAA or anyone else to say that's too much?)
Click to expand...

The Treasury Department and the IRS determine those questions regularly because if a payment for something is "unreasonable" then the inference is that part of the payment is for something else. That's the primary issue here and it's not impossible to set standards for answering that question because it is done outside of athletics for multiple reasons.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
The bolded part is the key issue and it's certainly not impossible to establish some ranges of reasonableness. I did look around at Dinkytown's and another school's (either Creighton or Providence, can't remember which) listed prices for player services about a year ago and those seemed reasonable to me.
Click to expand...
TwistingMyMelon said:
The Treasury Department and the IRS determine those questions regularly because if a payment for something is "unreasonable" then the inference is that part of the payment is for something else. That's the primary issue here and it's not impossible to set standards for answering that question because it is done outside of athletics for multiple reasons.
Click to expand...
Oh sure, it's not impossible and I'm sure DA would be thrilled that you have approved of their pricing structure. But who would you propose to set the guidelines and provide the oversight? The NCAA? It takes them months to process transfer appeals, how would they monitor tens of thousands of transactions, not to mention the appeals and litigation that would flow from that oversight?

The Treasury Department and the IRS are, to my knowledge, generally involved in cases where things are undervalued to avoid tax obligations or where some fraud or illegality is alleged. How would NIL transactions implicate their authority or the authority of any governmental agency absent some new legislation? If I willingly pay SA $1,000 (or $10,000) to appear at my kid's birthday party and said SA willing agrees to appear and then declares the income and pays taxes on that income, why would or should the government care? We live in a world where some paintings are worthless and others sell for millions. One guy will install my new driveway for $4,000 and another wants $11,000. It's a (largely) free market, what's the justification for limiting that market?
 

Wow! I'm surprised by the lack of nastiness going on in this post. Just people that have different opinions weighing in. Where did all the crazies go? I mean besides the ones in Congress!:)

As I see it, there are two pretty clear sides to this argument:

1) Why contribute to a broken system with plenty of TV money already that just isn't giving it to the people that deserve it the most, the players?

2) It is the way it is. Yes, the system may be broken, but I can still help the players and my team right now by contributing to NIL and, if I don't, the Gopher product will certainly get worse competitively in the short term.

I am in camp #1, but really appreciate those of you in camp #2. You're improving the product on the field right now that I also get to enjoy. I hope by supporting NIL, you're not just helping major college football kick the problem down the road. They just keep figuring out new ways to soak people for more money for the same product! Welcome to capitalism I guess. On the other hand, I hope I'm not just being cheap!!!

I think many of you NIL supporters are likely our Gopher super fans. This team is really important to you and you put your money where your heart is. Makes sense to me and, as one of you said, it's still a bargain when compared to most alternative pro sports entertainment options. Damn the college football marketing folks that have figured this out! It makes me feel more like a casual fan. I watch a ton of college football on TV and attend Gopher tailgates and football games occasionally. I'm getting more into Gopher football mostly because I like the fun connection to my alma mater and the community which includes you all so thank you for that.

Hopefully, I didn't offend anyone/everyone with this post. I don't think there is a wrong or right here, it's just opinion and your unique set of values.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
Oh sure, it's not impossible and I'm sure DA would be thrilled that you have approved of their pricing structure. But who would you propose to set the guidelines and provide the oversight? The NCAA? It takes them months to process transfer appeals, how would they monitor tens of thousands of transactions, not to mention the appeals and litigation that would flow from that oversight?

The Treasury Department and the IRS are, to my knowledge, generally involved in cases where things are undervalued to avoid tax obligations or where some fraud or illegality is alleged. How would NIL transactions implicate their authority or the authority of any governmental agency absent some new legislation? If I willingly pay SA $1,000 (or $10,000) to appear at my kid's birthday party and said SA willing agrees to appear and then declares the income and pays taxes on that income, why would or should the government care? We live in a world where some paintings are worthless and others sell for millions. One guy will install my new driveway for $4,000 and another wants $11,000. It's a (largely) free market, what's the justification for limiting that market?
Click to expand...

I agree with you about the NCAA. They make general rules but are not particularly good about providing regulations/guidelines to interpret them, they too often don't enforce the rules they make, and they take very long to make decisions. My point is that such things "can be done" if the organization is willing to make the investments because they are done outside of athletics.

The justification for "limiting the market" is that if an amount isn't reasonable for the value of the services then part of that payment is for something else. Here are two examples of where this concept appears in tax law:

1) An owner/executive of a closely held company is paid compensation of $4,000,000 where similarly situated executives for a company of that type and size are paid $700,000-$2,000,000. If that compensation is determined to be unreasonable, then the authorities are saying that part of that compensation is for services and part is a dividend. The compensation is tax deductible by the company but a dividend is not. Businesses are not permitted to disguise non-deductible payments as deductible ones. Note, they are not saying how much an owner/CEO of a closely held company can be paid. They are only saying how it must be classified.

2) Another owner/executive pays his college student daughter $300,000 in compensation for working at the company during the summer. If this isn't reasonable, then only part of this amount is deductible compensation and the other part is a non-deductible gift, sort of like a nice allowance.

In the case of college athletes, the inference should be that amounts that are unreasonable for the value of services are pay-to-play which is not supposed to be allowed.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
I agree with you about the NCAA. They make general rules but are not particularly good about providing regulations/guidelines to interpret them, they too often don't enforce the rules they make, and they take very long to make decisions. My point is that such things "can be done" if the organization is willing to make the investments because they are done outside of athletics.

The justification for "limiting the market" is that if an amount isn't reasonable for the value of the services then part of that payment is for something else. Here are two examples of where this concept appears in tax law:

1) An owner/executive of a closely held company is paid compensation of $4,000,000 where similarly situated executives for a company of that type and size are paid $700,000-$2,000,000. If that compensation is determined to be unreasonable, then the authorities are saying that part of that compensation is for services and part is a dividend. The compensation is tax deductible by the company but a dividend is not. Businesses are not permitted to disguise non-deductible payments as deductible ones. Note, they are not saying how much an owner/CEO of a closely held company can be paid. They are only saying how it must be classified.

2) Another owner/executive pays his college student daughter $300,000 in compensation for working at the company during the summer. If this isn't reasonable, then only part of this amount is deductible compensation and the other part is a non-deductible gift, sort of like a nice allowance.

In the case of college athletes, the inference should be that amounts that are unreasonable for the value of services are pay-to-play which is not supposed to be allowed.
Click to expand...
OK, but like I said, the governmental interest arises where there is some effort to avoid taxes or there is some other violation of the law. We don't have that here. That means that the NCAA (or it's agent) is the entity that has to make the determinations and provide the oversight. So I ask again, who do you propose implements this system to enforce NCAA guidelines of dubious legality? How large of a bureaucracy will be needed to monitor these transactions and the appeals and lawsuits that will follow? Who sets the cap on what I can pay for an autographed football from Travis Hunter? What if instead of a football he signs a baseball or a t-shirt or the fender of a Ford F-150? Who gets to decide?

And once you answer that, tell me under what legal authority that person or entity is operating? Because looking at which way the wind is blowing, I think if you say that Travis Hunter has no problem if he sells me a signed football for $1,000 but he is ineligible if he sells it to me for $2,000 then Travis Hunter is going to beat your ass in court.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
OK, but like I said, the governmental interest arises where there is some effort to avoid taxes or there is some other violation of the law. We don't have that here. That means that the NCAA (or it's agent) is the entity that has to make the determinations and provide the oversight. So I ask again, who do you propose implements this system to enforce NCAA guidelines of dubious legality? How large of a bureaucracy will be needed to monitor these transactions and the appeals and lawsuits that will follow? Who sets the cap on what I can pay for an autographed football from Travis Hunter? What if instead of a football he signs a baseball or a t-shirt or the fender of a Ford F-150? Who gets to decide?

And once you answer that, tell me under what legal authority that person or entity is operating? Because looking at which way the wind is blowing, I think if you say that Travis Hunter has no problem if he sells me a signed football for $1,000 but he is ineligible if he sells it to me for $2,000 then Travis Hunter is going to beat your ass in court.
Click to expand...
Ok that's cool and all, but when are we getting EA NCAA Football back on Xbox?
 

Allshade said:
Will these leased vehicles create taxable income for the student?
Click to expand...
Yup.

NCAA has told the schools to make sure the school's inform students that their NIL income is taxable.

Students also are supposed to report all NIL activity to the schools, so it might be a bit hard to hide it from the tax man... we will see.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
And once you answer that, tell me under what legal authority that person or entity is operating? Because looking at which way the wind is blowing, I think if you say that Travis Hunter has no problem if he sells me a signed football for $1,000 but he is ineligible if he sells it to me for $2,000 then Travis Hunter is going to beat your ass in court.
Click to expand...

NCAA athletics are self-governing and the dominant philosophy has been to maintain the amateur status of players. If you are going to allow players to be paid for playing, then you're headed into an arms race that many schools (including possibly the U of M) won't be able to survive. You have to develop some sort of system for compliance. A starting point is to place the burden on players and schools to report NIL payments, why they were given, who gave them, and the basis for determining the fair value of the services.

$2,000 for signing a football may not be unreasonable depending upon the status of the player and I don't think a governing organization would be too concerned about sweating the difference between $1,000 and $2,000.
 


The U will for sure be left behind if even the most passionate gopher fans (AKA those in these threads) don’t step up and become members or drink a lot of Duck Duck Beer/ tell their friends and family about it!
 

Mr. 131 said:
I've been waffling for a while now - but despite the NW trainwreck that was, I have heeded Fleck's call to action and am now shelling out for the team.

Of course, like most of you, I am a season ticket holder, and I plan to buy Duck Duck beer as well (even though I think it tastes pretty bad).

That said, I am deeply frustrated that more corporate help hasn't shown up yet...but I was no longer feeling Ok moaning without voting with my dollar.

Do you contribute to Dinkytown Athletes yet?

If not, what is holding you back? I'm sure Dinkytown monitors these boards in some capacity, so it would be good for them to get a read on things.

Note - there is no sarcasm coming from me in any of this - I totally appreciate that times are hard and dollars are stretched. If you don't contribute, I have no beef with you.

Row, baby, row.
Click to expand...
Love this mindset.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
NCAA athletics are self-governing and the dominant philosophy has been to maintain the amateur status of players. If you are going to allow players to be paid for playing, then you're headed into an arms race that many schools (including possibly the U of M) won't be able to survive. You have to develop some sort of system for compliance. A starting point is to place the burden on players and schools to report NIL payments, why they were given, who gave them, and the basis for determining the fair value of the services.

$2,000 for signing a football may not be unreasonable depending upon the status of the player and I don't think a governing organization would be too concerned about sweating the difference between $1,000 and $2,000.
Click to expand...
I share your concern with where this is all headed, but I believe that Kavanaugh and a majority of the rest of the Supremes are ready and waiting for any argument that is based on the premise that the NCAA can justify preserving the "amateur status" of the student-athletes because it's always been that way or because that, if you don't, Local U might night be able to keep up. Those types of frameworks can survive when they are collectively bargained, not so much when they are imposed by one side on the other.

You still haven't answered the how? (And I don't really blame you because I don't think that there is a good answer.) You dodged my questions about value by dismissing the significance of the difference between $1,000 and $2,000. What if it was the difference between $1,000 and $5,000 (or whatever number makes you start to feel icky)? Or what if it wasn't one football, but 100 or 1,000? Finally, isn't the best determination for the fair market value of a non-fungible item like a signed football or a personal appearance the amount that a willing buyer and a willing seller agree upon?
 

JosephKaros33 said:
The U will for sure be left behind if even the most passionate gopher fans (AKA those in these threads) don’t step up and become members or drink a lot of Duck Duck Beer/ tell their friends and family about it!
Click to expand...
I can't get myself to contribute to NIL directly yet, but I will buy some Duck Duck Beer to try it out. I've got to give it to the NIL marketing folks. They are creative! It might be inevitable that they get me one way or another.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom