When the Seattle Seahawks defeated the New England Patriots in Super Bowl LX at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California, it was a career-defining moment for quarterback Sam Darnold.
But while the Lombardi Trophy celebration was sweet, the tax consequences were anything but.
Here’s how California’s tax laws significantly affected Darnold’s Super Bowl earnings.
What Is the “Jock Tax”?
California imposes what’s commonly known as a “jock tax” on professional athletes who earn income while working in the state.
Because Super Bowl LX was played in California, every player — including Darnold — had to pay California state income tax on income allocated to duty days spent in the state, including:
- Practices
- Media obligations
- Team meetings
- Game day
This applies even if the player does not live in California.
How the Tax Calculation Works
Unlike standard employees, NFL players’ income is apportioned based on “duty days”. That means:
- A portion of a player’s entire annual salary is allocated to California.
- The percentage is based on the number of workdays spent in the state.
- California’s top marginal income tax rate (13.3%) is applied.
Because Darnold earns a multi-million-dollar annual salary, even a small allocation of days in California can create a substantial tax bill.
The Super Bowl Bonus vs. The Tax Bill
Winning players in Super Bowl LX reportedly received a $178,000 bonus from the NFL.
However, due to California’s high income tax rate and the way income is apportioned:
- Darnold’s estimated California tax obligation was higher than his Super Bowl bonus
- The tax bill was reportedly around $249,000
- That’s roughly $70,000 more than the bonus itself
Important: This doesn’t mean California taxed more than he made in the game alone. Instead, it reflects how a portion of his full-season earnings became taxable because of the game’s location.
Why This Happens in High-Tax States
California has one of the highest state income tax rates in the United States. When major sporting events like the Super Bowl are held there:
- Players from no-income-tax states (like Washington) are especially impacted
- High earners face the top bracket quickly
- The tax applies regardless of where the athlete resides
For a Seahawks quarterback based in Washington — a state with no income tax — playing the Super Bowl in California created a sharp financial contrast.
Did Darnold Actually “Lose Money”?
Technically:
- He still earned millions from his contract
- He still received his championship bonus
- He still gained long-term career value from winning a Super Bowl
But strictly comparing the California tax owed to the Super Bowl bonus received, the tax exceeded the bonus amount.
In simple terms, winning the Super Bowl triggered a larger state tax bill than the bonus payout itself.
Final Thoughts
While Super Bowl championships are priceless from a legacy standpoint, the financial realities can be surprising. For Sam Darnold and the Seattle Seahawks, Super Bowl LX delivered a trophy — but California’s jock tax ensured that a significant portion of that victory came with a hefty bill.
For fans, it’s a fascinating reminder that where the Super Bowl is played can matter just as much financially as who wins it.