Former NFL quarterback and current WFAN host Boomer Esiason is calling on the NFL Players Association to take a hard stance against California hosting future Super Bowls, arguing the state’s controversial “jock tax” unfairly punishes players.
During a recent broadcast, Esiason pointed to the financial impact the tax had on Super Bowl-winning quarterback Sam Darnold, claiming the signal-caller actually lost money after winning the championship due to California’s tax structure.
California’s “jock tax” applies to non-resident athletes and entertainers based on the number of “duty days” they spend working in the state. While the impact during the regular season is typically limited, the Super Bowl presents a different scenario. Players spend nearly a full week in the host city for practices, media events, and league obligations — all of which count as taxable workdays.
Complicating matters further, the tax is calculated using a player’s total annual salary rather than the specific game bonus earned for the Super Bowl.
In Darnold’s case, he reportedly earned $178,000 for winning the game. However, because the state calculated taxes based on his overall salary and included the extended duty days, he was hit with roughly $249,000 in California taxes tied to that period. That left him down approximately $71,000 despite securing a championship ring.
Esiason argued that such outcomes should alarm the NFLPA. He also noted that players who face California teams like the San Francisco 49ers or Los Angeles Rams during the regular season accumulate even more taxable days in the state, compounding the financial burden.
According to Esiason, the players’ union should consider refusing to allow California to host future Super Bowls if the tax structure remains unchanged. He characterized the situation as unreasonable and suggested it sends the wrong message to athletes representing their teams on the sport’s biggest stage.
Despite the criticism, California remains firmly in the NFL’s rotation. Los Angeles is scheduled to host Super Bowl LXI next year, meaning players on both participating teams will once again be subject to the state’s tax rules.
Whether the NFLPA takes action remains to be seen, but the debate over California’s jock tax is unlikely to fade anytime soon.
