FILE - People stand on the field in Acrisure Stadium before an NFL football game between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Seattle Seahawks in Pittsburgh, Sept. 14, 2025. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar, File)
Pittsburgh’s ‘jock tax’ on visiting athletes, performers at publicly funded stadiums shot down
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) 鈥 Pittsburgh鈥檚 so-called jock tax, which levies a 3% tax on income earned by visiting athletes and performers at publicly funded stadiums, discriminates against nonresidents, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
FILE - People stand on the field in Acrisure Stadium before an NFL football game between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Seattle Seahawks in Pittsburgh, Sept. 14, 2025. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar, File)
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) 鈥 Pittsburgh鈥檚 so-called jock tax, which levies a 3% tax on income earned by visiting athletes and performers at publicly funded stadiums, discriminates against nonresidents, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
City residents who play or perform at the stadiums pay a 1% tax on income, plus a 2% school district tax. The city argued that the net effect of the taxing scheme was therefore the same. However, the high court, like lower courts who first heard the case, disagreed, noting that nonresident workers are not subject to the school tax.
鈥淭he city does not provide concrete reasons that would justify taxing nonresident athletes and entertainers more than resident athletes and entertainers,鈥 Justice David N. Wecht wrote for the seven-member court. The decision was unanimous, although the judges were divided in their reasoning.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
The plaintiffs include former Pittsburgh Penguin Scott Wilson; Kyle Palmieri of the New York Islanders; former baseball player Jeff Francoeur; and the players鈥 associations of the National Hockey League, National Football League and Major League Baseball.
The judges noted that state lawmakers authorized the tax in the early 2000s not to offset the cost of stadium construction but to boost the city鈥檚 strained finances.
The ruling could cost the city millions in lost revenue. Phone and email messages left with the mayor’s office were not immediately returned Thursday.
