Phil Mickelson's "Drastic Changes"

[Matt Saternus]

NOTE: It is a testament to my immense faith in the MGS community that I'm posting this topic. There are a small handful of things that I hate more than golf turning political (see as evidence: the purge of my Twitter feed during election season), but I believe that we can discuss this without it going in that direction. And I figure someone else would have started this topic anyway.

 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/golf/2013/01/20/humana-challenge-phil-mickelson-taxes/1850265/

 

You may have seen this already, but Phil Mickelson is talking about "drastic changes" due to his tax bill. I'll copy the actual quotes, you can read the link for the rest:

 

Mickelson's quotes from the press conference:

 

Q. When you're asked about Stricker's semi retirement, with the political situation the last couple months, blah, blah, blah, what did you mean by that? Do you find it an unsettling time in a way?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: Well, it's been an interesting offseason. And I'm going to have to make some drastic changes. I'm not going to jump the gun and do it right away, but I will be making some drastic changes.

 

Q. Meaning leaving from California?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: I'm not sure.

 

Q. Moving to Canada?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: I'm not sure what exactly, you know, I'm going to do yet. I'll probably talk about it more in depth next week. I'm not going to jump the gun, but there are going to be some. There are going to be some drastic changes for me because I happen to be in that zone that has been targeted both federally and by the state and, you know, it doesn't work for me right now. So I'm going to have to make some changes.

 

Q. Is that a correlation between that and what happened to the Padres?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: Yeah.

 

Q. With you?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: Absolutely.

 

Q. So why do you say next week? What is going to happen so drastic next week?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: No, but I'll probably be in the media center and I'll probably be a little more open to it because San Diego is where a lot more things, it's where I live, it's where the Padre thing was a possibility, and it's where my family is. And it just seems like a better fit than right here off of 18 on Palm Springs.

 

Q. Is it a stance that you are taking because on the one hand, you've made a lot of money, and no matter how much they take out, you are left with a lot of money?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: Yeah. I'll probably go into it more next year or next week. But if you add up, if you add up all the federal and you look at the disability and the unemployment and the Social Security and the state, my tax rate's 62, 63 percent. So I've got to make some decisions on what I'm going to do.

 

Q. How do you balance that against the TOUR's retirement plan which by all standards is the best retirement plan in sports?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: I don't understand. What do you mean?

 

Q. Well, I mean I understand the 60 percent part of the equation, but in the TOUR's plan, you guys put about as much money aside as you want. It's treated differently under tax laws than most anybody else's tax plans. Where most people can only put away $45,000 or $50,000, you guys can put as much away as you want. And so at the end you guys end up with a much larger pot of gold than most people can.

 

PHIL MICKELSON: But when it comes out, it's still taxed at the same 62 percent rate.

 

Q. Well, you're still making that kind of money. That's if you're still in that bracket.

 

PHIL MICKELSON: (No response.)

 

 

 

Again, I do NOT want this to be a discussion about politics or taxes or anything else. Here's what I am curious about:

 

1) Does this change how you feel about Phil? If so, how? You were a fan and now think he's a douche? Vice versa?

 

2) Does anyone have any idea why he's bringing this up? To me, it seems like a big PR nightmare of his own creation, but I might just be missing something.

[MmmmmmBuddy]

2 Quick takes...

1. Phil has always come across as a bit smarmy imo, and this does nothing to help that.

2. could he possibly be positioning himself for a political campaign??

[ms1195]

Phil was always a douche in my opinion, and this falls right in line. It is definitely fun to watch him hit some amazing shots but I find the constant smile'n'nod after his shots very annoying and fake.

 

In terms of him bringing it up now, I suppose with the beginning of the season he is kind of back in the spotlight and wants to make a political statement that has been on his mind since late November.

 

Obviously I'm not in the same tax bracket as him so I can't say what I would do in his situation, but from where I'm sitting he's talking about making a b*tch move (hope that wasn't too political ).

[revkev]

Okay I'll bite but it's hard to not sound political.

 

1. I'm not a huge Phil fan or detractor which means that I'm favorably dispossed towards him as I am towards just about everyone on tour.

 

Everyone needs to pay taxes or the country/state can't run. I would hope it's not considered political to say that and I'm reasonably sure that Phil is not thinking he shouldn't pay any taxes. But, there comes a point when it gets to be ridiculous. Of course he gets to put more away than most people, he makes more, he's earned the right to put more away, isn't that how an economy works? I thought it was a ridiculous question to ask and yet I know there are lots in our country who think this way.

 

2. I don't think this will be an issue for most people who watch and sponsor golf. Yes its controversial for the general public but overall for the mainstream golf fan there is an understanding that there are places where business are taxed into moving. I don't believe this will hurt the Phil Mickleson brand. It may make him a hero and earn him more money.

 

Interestingly the NY Times take on this interview was that it means that Phil is going to be playing less. I didn't take it that way at all. I believe he's pondering a move to AZ - who could blame him really? Lots of people have left California for Arizona because of the taxes. He'd be just another in a long, long line.

[Matt Saternus]

Someone tweeted the other day that most professional golfers already live in Florida, Texas, and Arizona, three states which don't have state income tax (I could be wrong about AZ, fairly certain about the other two).

 

RK: I also heard the comment about him playing less, heard that first, actually. Then I heard about him moving.

 

Late addition: If I were him, I'd probably move, too. I'm just confused about why he feels the need to make news about it. Pack your s*** and move like everybody else. You hit golf shots. No one (or at least not this guy) gives a poop about your political opinions.

[GolfSpy WD]

1) Does this change how you feel about Phil? If so, how? You were a fan and now think he's a douche? Vice versa?

 

Absolutely not. People have to do what's best for their family. This is one of the problems France is facing right now where the tax rate on the rich is so drastically high, that many of them are moving out.

 

/2) Does anyone have any idea why he's bringing this up? To me, it seems like a big PR nightmare of his own creation, but I might just be missing something.

 

He's probably pissed off because he doesn't want to move, but in the end it's his choice of remaining in his circle of comfort vs saving a lot of cash and moving out. Point is, if a huge chunk of wealthy citizens follow suit, California is going to be in trouble (not that they're not in trouble either way).

[Tony Covey MGS]

Quick...somebody call Phil a wambulance. Seriously...and while we're waiting for it to get here, let's offer him a steaming cup of STFU.

 

Yeah Phil...your taxes are too high, and they might get higher. It's not fair that that guys who make insane amounts of money (more than most could reasonably spend in a lifetime) have to pay a higher rate than the woman who greets me at Wal-Mart.

 

It's also grossly unfair that society has been placed a financial premium on being able to hit (or throw, or catch) a ball, and guys who do real work get paid pennies in comparison.

 

The biggest issue I have any time this sort of nonsense comes up is that more often than not the guy spewing it is under some sort of false notion that just because he gets paid more than somebody else, he must work harder too. There is zero correlation. At the end of the day, Phil gets paid to play with a little ball...something my 2 year old does for nothing.

 

Let's put this in some real perspective. By his standards, Phil had a down week at the Humana Challenge. For the 20 hours or so he spent on the course, he earned $22,400. We're already creeping into territory that exceeds what some very hard working people are able to make in a year. Brian Gay, for his 20 hours or so earned 1.08 MILLION. That far exceeds what 99% of the population earns in a year...and for many, it well exceeds what they'll make in a lifetime...and that's for 20 HOURS WORK.

 

Now I know what the argument is...these guys had to work hard damn hard to be where they are, and you can't discount that time and effort when you consider the financial rewards. It's true. They worked hard to get where they are. It's also true that once upon a time (in my former corporate life - which paid an annual salary somewhere in-between what Gay and Mickelson were paid this week), I worked very hard to get where I was. I was exceptionally good at what I did...

 

Like anyone who has gotten anywhere in this world, my efforts weren't limited to a 20 hour (or 40) work week. I did the equivalent of practice (worked long hours, worked from home, learned from home, etc.), but at the end of the day, as hard as I worked...as hard as many of you work - we're not going to earn 1.08 million...not for spending 20 hours on the golf course.

 

Almost ANYBODY who managed to get very good at ANYTHING had to work very hard to do it. It's not the efforts, it's the rewards that are disproportional.

 

Poor Phil...he netted about 60 million last year. At an 80% tax rate, he still would have made 12 million. You can live on that...most people could live forever on that.

 

I don't know how much this little rant is going to cost Phil. Golf tends to slant a certain way, and politically speaking, most are probably aligned will Phil's way of thinking. What is interesting is that his equipment sponsor (Callaway) is in the midst of trying to basically reinvent the brand. At the risk of simplifying the new strategy; they're trying to become one with the people (all the people, not just corporate sponsors). It doesn't look good for Callaway when their #1 guy is spouting off about things that are very much not relateable to the average Joe. (Poor Phil...the government expects him to squeek by on 25 million this year). That's the problem with percentages...they can obfuscate the fact that when all is said and done, these guys are still left with STUPID money.

 

How about we call it tax on the privilege of playing a game for a living?

 

If athletes like Phil are so concerned about their tax brackets, I would humbly suggest they do what they can to make less money. Talk to his fellow tour players, talk to sponsors...reach an agreement that, you know what, we make way too much money for what we do. How about instead of padding our bank accounts to levels that exceed the GNP of most countries, why not use that money for the betterment of society.

 

How about kicking some in to a fund that raises salaries for teachers...or allows districts to hire new teachers, stop laying off good ones, and keep class sizes small and manageable. Of course, these aren't issues when your salary allows you to circumvent what some would argue is a failing education system.

 

Let's not do that though...not if it means poor Phil will have to wait 3 months to resurface one of the putting greens in his backyard.

 

Given the choice, I suspect he'd actually prefer the high tax bracket.

[Tyk]

While I tend to agree with alot of what T said, I also think Phil has the right to decide what is important to him and act accordingly. If it is important enough to him to relocate to save some money, then he should. It would not effect my opinion of him much, unless he did move to another country to avoid paying U.S. taxes, I'd have a problem with that.

 

However, moving will only solve some of Phil's tax problems (as perceived by him). Professional athletes have to pay state income taxes in the states where the income is earned. Now, for the top guys in sports, team contracts and tournament winning income pales in comparison to endorsement contracts.

 

I think this is a bit of a whine, but when you are talking about differences of millions in taxes based on where one chooses to live I have to say I do understand how that could be a factor worth considering.

[Aotearoa_Brad]

 

Late addition: If I were him, I'd probably move, too. I'm just confused about why he feels the need to make news about it. Pack your s*** and move like everybody else. You hit golf shots. No one (or at least not this guy) gives a poop about your political opinions.

 

Seeing as this is not political I don't feel too bad about chiming in on this one (re not living in the US). I agree that Phil has the right to do what he wants, and I'm sure his team of accountants is giving him some advice on the different options, but just make a decision and do it - talk to your wife, but why tell the rest of us. He might be upset about being forced to consider a decision (which actually he isn't), but I think its pretty clear that he wants to make this political.

 

I mean come on, maybe you should consider selling off the Gulfstream Phil, you could prob still get $50MIL for it and just fly first class with the rest of us and then you could still fulfil your tax obligations like the rest of the nation ... or you could complain about your situation and drag out your decision and play it out in the media ... again, your decision.

[Super Tuna]

100% agreement with T.

 

I also wish the US would abolish tax shelters within their own country, but that's a very different conversation.

[ZenGolfer]

To me, Phil comes across as a greedy crybaby who doesnt want to pay his taxes. Even at a 62% tax rate, Phil still takes him over $5 million a year to play golf. If Phil thinks he is getting such a raw deal, I'll trade with him. He can go work nights in a factory for $60K a year (which is also VERY good money) and I'll go travel the world playing golf for $5 million a year. Maybe then he will have a litle perspective and realize how good he has it.

[BK in TEXAS]

Just a side question.....but don't the players have to pay taxes in the state they earned their income in....regardless of where they live?

[revkev]

Somebody mentioned it and it may well be the case that Phil is positioning himself to run for some sort of political office - that's entirely true. It's clear that however such a run is made you're going to have close to half the people ticked at you anyway so who cares - I can name tons of people who would sympathize with what Phil said and others who would react as some have here. He needs to get 51 percent of the vote.

 

I suppose it's out of bounds but I'll try anyway without saying anything derogatory towards anyone because we should be able to have a discussion without getting upset with each other. I'm total agreement with Super T that we should simplify our tax code so that taxes are paid on the money that we earn - by the way that would not be beneficial to me as I'm allowed to double dip on my mortgage write off at this point - I think that's crazy - I do it because I'm allowed to - to me this should be friggin simple - you pay x percentage of the money you earn - fair to the guy who earns 10 million, fair to the middle income guy like me, fair to the greeter at Walmarts -

 

I know it's easy to say that people who earn big bucks are winers - they may well be - sometimes people who earn less are jealous of others' success - that's just as true - neither is healthy.

 

I do wonder about the run for office thing - well at least this thread will give Matt and T something to chat about over a beer in Orlando next week - be sure to let us know how much tax you paid on that beer.

[skihippy]

Guys I will be honest I always tended to like Phil.. Just in this case I feel that he is using this as an excuse for what is really happening.. Think about what he has been through in the last 5 to 6 years! Do you really believe that this has to do with winnings (especially when he hasn't won a lot) or more of what is going on with him and his family.

 

With arthritis how many more years do you think he can keep it up???

[RoverRick]

 

Let's put this in some real perspective. By his standards, Phil had a down week at the Humana Challenge. For the 20 hours or so he spent on the course, he earned $22,400. We're already creeping into territory that exceeds what some very hard working people are able to make in a year. Brian Gay, for his 20 hours or so earned 1.08 MILLION. That far exceeds what 99% of the population earns in a year...and for many, it well exceeds what they'll make in a lifetime...and that's for 20 HOURS WORK.

 

 

This will really simplify the math for you but Phil says if he stays in California he pays 62% tax rate. That means he gets $8,360 of that $22,400 he won last week. Yeah, $8,360 is still a lot of money to play golf for a week, but if he lived in another state and pays 33% he makes $15,008. Why should he pay the additional $6,648 dollars in taxes? For a week? Just to live in California?

 

If Phil wins at Bethpage Black, he has to pay taxes to the State of New York on those winnings. If he wins the John Deere, he has to pay taxes to Illinois, but if he wins money at the Byron Nelson, The Players, or Waste Management, he has to pay California. He also has to pay California tax on Bethpage and John Deere but at least gets to deduct what he paid the other states.

 

And let's not forget this is not just Phil. This is Phil, Inc. He has to pay Bones to tote the bag. I doubt Amy is dusting the furniture and running the vacuum while Phil is out wacking the ball. Phil ain't flying the jet himself or even flying coach. Is he seriously expected to trust his clubs to the airlines or even Fed Ex?

 

All these people are on the payroll and while they may not be in the 62% bracket. They all cost more simply because they live in an expensive state to live in.

 

Phil apparently stayed in California because of loyalty to San Diego and California. The Padres deal has apparently shown him that they were not loyal to Phil so he is wondering why is he loyal to them.

 

A few years ago, I set up a company in another country. We got a huge government contract in that country. But before all the paper were signed we read the fine print to where they were going to charge us a 75% tax on the profits. I talked it over with my partners and we decided that the tax rate was way too high. We dissolved the company and that country still has not solved their problem. I was not going to do all the work and then give them all of the profit. Let them find someone else to do the work for free.

[Firstkart]

I am of the opinion that it is not a topic that Phil or any other pro golfer should comment on whether they are asked or not. Just like singers who think they have the answers for all the world woes just because they chuck some words into a melody and earn a few million for their efforts.

 

Just play golf, manage your own finances quietly and shut the F***k Up.

 

AJ

[Matt Saternus]

New question/shifting focus:

 

I don't think anyone begrudges Phil the right to move (though if someone wants to jump in and take that position, feel free). Whether you want to say he's "doing what's right for his family" or anything else, doesn't matter, he can move, this is America.

 

My question/wonder is: why bring it up? Why make this a "thing"?

 

I've heard "he's thinking about a political career." What else have you got? What's the upside that I'm missing?

[Matt Saternus]

 

 

Just play golf, manage your own finances quietly and shut the F***k Up.

 

AJ

 

Hahaha, this might be my favorite comment so far.

[Walkerjames]

I live in CA and although I'm not anywhere near the 63% tax I don't agree with the passing of prop 30 because if you over tax the rich they will take there business and there jobs elsewhere. And that helps nobody just my opinion.

[RoverRick]

You people are saying he should just shut up. But he was specifically asked a question. The answer to that question is that because of Prop 30, he is thinking about moving to a different state. And you are saying shut up????

 

If you do not want to hear his answer, do not listen, but if he did not answer the question then he is shifty. If he answers the question he is told to shut up.

 

It is not like he said yeah," I missed that putt on 18 but I am glad I did because Prop 30 passed."

[Matt Saternus]

Rick,

 

My understanding, which may be entirely wrong, is that he brought this whole thing up. Yes, there were follow up questions once the issue of "drastic changes" was breached, but it seems that he started this ball rolling on his own. That's my "issue" (which I will lose not one second of sleep over).

 

If, after he quietly moves to Arizona, someone said, "Hey Phil, why'd you move?" that's a totally different deal, in my eyes.

[RoverRick]

 

 

Q. When you're asked about Stricker's semi retirement, with the political situation the last couple months, blah, blah, blah, what did you mean by that? Do you find it an unsettling time in a way?

 

PHIL MICKELSON: Well, it's been an interesting offseason. And I'm going to have to make some drastic changes. I'm not going to jump the gun and do it right away, but I will be making some drastic changes.

 

 

 

It sounds to me like the question was asked that lead into this line of thinking. It also sounded like he was not ready to discuss it, but that is certainly happening now. Obviously, the questioner, judging from the way the question was phrased, had some clue based on the Padres deal, that this was a hot button for Phil and he bit on it.

[Blade]

It sounds to me like the question was asked that lead into this line of thinking. It also sounded like he was not ready to discuss it, but that is certainly happening now. Obviously, the questioner, judging from the way the question was phrased, had some clue based on the Padres deal, that this was a hot button for Phil and he bit on it.

You gotta point there. It's not like he brought it up to whine about it.

[Firstkart]

You are of course absolutely correct Rick that I do not have to listen, however my point is that celebrities have fans and right or wrong they are influenced by what a celebrity say's publicly.

 

Why would you answer a politically biased question fielded by a sports writer?

 

AJ

[RoverRick]

You are of course absolutely correct Rick that I do not have to listen, however my point is that celebrities have fans and right or wrong they are influenced by what a celebrity say's publicly.

 

Why would you answer a politically biased question fielded by a sports writer?

 

AJ

 

Because if you do not then you are called shifty by some as he was on this thread. However, I understand why you may not like it when a celebrity says something. I am often mad when I hear one say something I do not like. By stating his opinion he may both create and run off fans.

 

But let's say this has been on his mind, and was the reason he back out of the Padres deal. He gets asked a question about it and before he knows it he has made the comment and is embroiled in a political debate that really all he wanted to do was go back to the hotel or airport.

 

This is not like a tweet. To me stupid twitter comments are just stupid. The should be some type of restraint before you hit send. I try to exercise that when I post, which is why this is the fourth response I have typed on this post. The first three did not have the proper restraint. In a live interview, you say things you really would rather not comment on right then but somehow just can not..

[sparnar]

I am not a fan of Phil. To me he has always seemed a bit on the cocky side.

 

I actually respect him more for some of the charity work that he does. So I am not anti-Phil, but on a Sunday I would probably be rooting for someone else.

 

I am not 100% sure how these comments were made. If this was in reply to a journalist fishing for some sensationalism, it wasn't very smart on Phil's part. I am sure they have been briefed many times on how to handle the press.

 

If he brought this up, just to complain for the sake of complaining, it was even less smart.

 

Can't argue with the logic to move, but the way he is airing his dirty laundry is not the way to go about it.

 

This whole thing won't really affect my image of Phil, unless he continues to talk about this to the press. That will be a negative for me. I can live with a once-off rant, that might not have been a rant, but more of a reply to a journalist's question. I hope that he learns from this, and refrains from similar comments in the future.

 

Even though he is most definitely not my favourite player, I love to watch him hit short game shots.

[Firstkart]

Great comments that all have merit. I am just not a fan of sports people or other celebs for that matter using their status to voice their opinions especially on personal subjects such as this with Phil.Granted it was more than likely a spur of the moment comment but he is a great golfer and that is what he gets paid to do so just do it.

As I mentioned previously we get singers who by and large are drug and alcohol addicts (yes I know not all are) telling us how to save the world or actors who think that they can run a country because they once read some lines in a movie and pretended to be the president.

Then I read today that some clown of a scientist says he can clone Neanderthals. Fantastic, I hope he is one the first that they send to colonise Mars.

As it says in my signature "Be normal and they will accept you, Be deranged and they will make you their leader" Sad but true.

AJ

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

Boy, nothin' gets the blood pumpin' than a good old fashioned "talk" about taxes!

 

My 2 cents - Phil (or anyone, for that matter), can do what he wants, say what he wants, think what he wants, live where he wants, complain all he wants and golf all he wants - but, like all golfers - he has to play by the rules. If the rules say 63%, then it's 63% - call it life's two-stroke penalty. One thing that Phil can do that many of us can't is declare an unplayable lie and move his ball to another state - without penalty, and in his case a multi-million dollar benefit.

 

Enough with the mixed metaphors...

 

To me, there's two takeaways here:

 

1. Phil, like a lot of successful athletes and entertainers, has a LOT of money, would like to keep as much of it as he can and perhaps has become unable to understand what we common folk have to deal with to make ends meet. Phil and others are dealing with crazy money and to sound like you're complaining about taxes drives a wedge between you and the public.

 

2. Phil, like a lot of successful athletes and entertainers - and many other people who have achieved some sort of mastery in a particular area - sometimes think that mastery or expertise applies to other areas, as well, and think their opinions on these matters carry extra weight, when it would be in their best interests to keep their thoughts private.

 

In other words, shut-the-f***-up....

 

As Twain said, it's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

And this just in....

 

Golf Digest is quoting Phil:

 

“Finances and taxes are a personal matter and I should not have made my opinions on them public. I apologize to those I have upset or insulted and assure you I intend to not let it happen again.”

[RoverRick]

I am sure they have been briefed many times on how to handle the press.

 

I have heard this said many times, and it makes total sense that the PGA Tour has experts that talks to the players about what they should and should not say. Just the weekend before last they had a story about one of the young players, who made his first PGA Tournament last year. He got the invitation and they did not even give him a parking pass. He had to park in a remote lot and carry his clubs but was given a ride by a delivery truck and when he got to the gate, he did not have a ticket and had a difficult time getting in. He was eventually let in, and I think has won on the tournament.

 

Bottom line is, while there is a pre-tourney players meeting, that discusses the local rules, there is no PGA lecture hall that explains how you should act. Even if there was, who would pay attention to it.