A year removed from the NFL, former San Francisco 49ers
guard Jon Feliciano
stared at the number on his screen: $23,890,652. Nearly $24 million in career earnings across ten NFL seasons. Most people would call that a fortune. But Feliciano calls it a cautionary tale.
When an X user posted Feliciano's career earnings with the jab "sucks to be you," the former offensive lineman didn't argue. Instead, he reposted it with a reality check that resonated across the league.
Advertisement
"Unfortunately California fucked me outta half 😢," wrote Feliciano on X.
More than being a hyperbole, it was brutal math. Feliciano's frustrations capture a growing tension between NFL players and the Golden State's aggressive tax structure. California imposes the nation's highest state income tax rate at 13.3 percent. For players like Feliciano, who spent his final two seasons in San Francisco
, that meant watching a significant chunk of his $5 million in 49ers
earnings evaporate.
This burden extends beyond just state residents. California's "jock tax" requires out-of-state professional athletes to pay taxes based on "duty days" spent within state borders. Every practice, every team meeting, game, and media appearance counts. The state calculates the ratio of California duty days to total duty days, then claims that percentage of a player's annual income.
Advertisement
For visiting teams playing the 49ers, Los Angeles Rams
, or Los Angeles Chargers
, it's an unavoidable hit. For players who sign with California franchises, it's a career-long liability.
Jon Feliciano's journey from Miami
to the Oakland Raiders, Buffalo Bills
, New York Giants
, and finally the Niners gave him perspective on tax climates across the country. So his tweet doubled as a warning to younger stars negotiating contracts.
But Feliciano's career-long squeeze pales compared to what happened to one player in just eight days. Sometimes California's tax machine doesn't wait years to take its cut; it strikes when the spotlight is brightest. Sam Darnold
learned this lesson on football's biggest stage.
Sam Darnold's Super Bowl surprise
Darnold, the Seattle Seahawks
quarterback, just won Super Bowl LX, leading his team to a 29-13 victory over the New England Patriots
at Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara. His reward? A $178,000 winner's bonus and a championship ring. But against it, his bill came due at approximately $249,000 in California state taxes.
Advertisement
Forget about breaking even on his Super Bowl triumph. He operated at a $71,000 loss. The culprit was those right-plus duty days spent in California for the Super Bowl week, which triggered a reallocation of his $105 million, three-year contract earnings. California's formula applied those days against his annual salary, not just the Super Bowl bonus
. With this revelation, Stanford Finance Professor Joshua Rauh captured the absurdity of it all with a sarcastic quip.
"If his team wins, Darnold will receive $178k and pay $249k to California in taxes for his time here, losing $71k," notes Rauh. "If his team loses, he gets $103k and still pays over $235k in taxes, losing $135k. I presume California is declaring victory, as his incentive to win is preserved."
These tax implications are forcing difficult questions. Several states with NFL stadiums ( Tennessee
, Texas, and Florida) impose no income tax whatsoever. As players compare paychecks and calculate take-home earnings, California's competitive advantage for hosting marquee events faces scrutiny.
For Jon Feliciano, now watching from retirement, the math is settled. But for Sam Darnold and countless others,
it's a recurring annual reminder that winning in California costs more than you think.
