IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Not so fast with that cash, Lefty.
According to a report by Forbes magazine, Phil Mickelson will sacrifice 61% of his earnings for winning both the 2013 Open Championship and the Scottish Open, all of which will go in taxes to the British and U.S. governments and to the State of California.
Great Britain still collects taxes in Scotland, where the Open Championship was held this year. (Scotland will start collecting its own taxes in 2016.)
The explanation for how Mickelsons tax rate can get to 61% is decently long and involved, including parts on escalating tax rates and also the fact that the UK is one of few countries that collects taxes on endorsement income for non-resident athletes that compete in Britain. Forty five percent of Mickelsons winnings will go to Great Britain, with 13% going to California and the remaining going to the United States government.
The long and short is that 61% will go to taxes, and thats before Mickelson pays his caddie, pays for his hotel and expenses, pays his agent, etc. All in, Mickelson will probably walk away with about 30% of the money he earned.
Doubling the pain? Mickelson also won the Scottish Open the week before the Open Championship, which will be taxed at the same rate. For winning both tournaments, Mickelson earned £1,445,000, or about $2,167,500. After taxes, hell take home $842,700, with a bit over $1.3 million going to taxes. We assume all of the money taxed by Britain will go directly to the Royal Babys Binkie Fund.
Now, its tough to feel any sort of sympathy at all for Mickelson, who just won the Open Championship, makes a boatload of money in endorsements and such (he was ranked as Forbes #7 highest-paid athlete), and all-in-all seems to have a pretty good life. This is also the guy who said he might move away from California because of the state taxes there. No tears shall be shed for him. But man. Sixty-one percent is a lot of percent.
According to a report by Forbes magazine, Phil Mickelson will sacrifice 61% of his earnings for winning both the 2013 Open Championship and the Scottish Open, all of which will go in taxes to the British and U.S. governments and to the State of California.
Great Britain still collects taxes in Scotland, where the Open Championship was held this year. (Scotland will start collecting its own taxes in 2016.)
The explanation for how Mickelsons tax rate can get to 61% is decently long and involved, including parts on escalating tax rates and also the fact that the UK is one of few countries that collects taxes on endorsement income for non-resident athletes that compete in Britain. Forty five percent of Mickelsons winnings will go to Great Britain, with 13% going to California and the remaining going to the United States government.
The long and short is that 61% will go to taxes, and thats before Mickelson pays his caddie, pays for his hotel and expenses, pays his agent, etc. All in, Mickelson will probably walk away with about 30% of the money he earned.
Doubling the pain? Mickelson also won the Scottish Open the week before the Open Championship, which will be taxed at the same rate. For winning both tournaments, Mickelson earned £1,445,000, or about $2,167,500. After taxes, hell take home $842,700, with a bit over $1.3 million going to taxes. We assume all of the money taxed by Britain will go directly to the Royal Babys Binkie Fund.
Now, its tough to feel any sort of sympathy at all for Mickelson, who just won the Open Championship, makes a boatload of money in endorsements and such (he was ranked as Forbes #7 highest-paid athlete), and all-in-all seems to have a pretty good life. This is also the guy who said he might move away from California because of the state taxes there. No tears shall be shed for him. But man. Sixty-one percent is a lot of percent.
Last edited by a moderator:
