Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement has thrust renewed attention on a little-known state tax practice that affects athletes, performers and the people who work behind them: so-called "jock taxes," rules that can require individuals to file income-tax returns in every state where they perform or play.
In an opinion article, Andrew Wilford, director of the Interstate Commerce Initiative at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, argued the publicity around the celebrity couple highlights a disproportionate compliance burden on lower-paid workers in sports and entertainment. Wilford said that while headline figures for megastars are eye-catching, the same multi-state filing requirements often fall on daily-paid or modestly compensated production staff, trainers, drivers and background performers.
The term "jock tax" is informal and commonly used to describe state rules that tax wages earned in a state by nonresidents who perform services there. Those subject to the rules must, in many cases, file nonresident returns in every jurisdiction where they worked, even for short stays. Wilford’s column noted that the definitions of "professional athletes" and "entertainers" are broader than the public might expect, sweeping in many support roles that do not pay celebrity salaries.
Wilford and other critics say the compliance burden is not merely administrative. For workers who travel with teams or touring productions and earn modest wages, filing multiple state returns can be costly. Commercial tax-preparation services often charge extra for additional state returns; the op-ed cited examples of consumers paying up to roughly $65 for each additional state on some online platforms. Multiplied across dozens of states and many lower-paid employees, those charges and the time spent complying can amount to significant outlays.
Industry and academic data cited in the piece and related analysis underscore the point that many people covered by jock-tax rules do not have high incomes. The commentary references Major League Soccer players whose salaries can be as low as about $80,000 and a 2025 WNBA minimum salary floor of $66,000, figures that are far below the multimillion-dollar paychecks of top stars. It also cited a 2022 study that found more than half of minor league baseball players held secondary jobs, illustrating that professional status does not always equate to financial security.
States have long defended taxing nonresidents who earn income within their borders as a fair share of revenue from activities that take place locally. But Wilford noted that the actual revenue generated by taxing visiting athletes and entertainers is modest relative to total state income-tax collections. He cited a March 2020 study estimating that, across affected states, the loss of jock-tax revenue from pandemic-related sports cancellations would have been about $295 million — roughly 0.1% of total income-tax revenues in the 20 states and the District of Columbia included in the calculation.
Those figures are used by proponents of reform to argue that states could ease the compliance burden on lower-paid transient workers without jeopardizing significant revenue. Wilford suggested narrowing the definitions that trigger jock-tax obligations so that they apply more narrowly to the highest-earning performers and athletes rather than to all workers who accompany them.
Tax administrators and state lawmakers have offered a variety of responses to concerns about multi-state filing. Some states have simplified withholding procedures for visiting professionals or created reciprocal arrangements with neighboring states, while others maintain robust nonresident filing requirements to capture all taxable income earned within their borders. Officials have said the rules help preserve state tax bases and ensure that residents of other states who earn money locally contribute to the cost of public services.
Experts and advocates disagree over the best approach to balancing simplicity, fairness and state revenue needs. Proposals range from raising thresholds for nonresident filing to streamlining mobile reporting requirements, but any change would require legislative or administrative action within individual states.
The engagement of Swift and Kelce, both high-profile figures who travel extensively for work, has amplified public discussion about how the tax system treats transient labor in entertainment and sports. Advocates for reform say the spotlight offers an opportunity for policymakers to consider adjustments that could reduce compliance costs for the many lower-paid employees who move from state to state in support of larger productions and teams.
Any changes to state jock-tax treatment would leave intact obligations for high-earning performers and athletes to pay taxes where they earn income, officials said, but could alter how states define who must file and how compliance is enforced. For now, tax professionals and advocacy groups say that many working in sports and entertainment continue to navigate a patchwork of state rules that can impose hidden costs on those who make the industry run.