Jackson County residential property assessment to rise to 15% in 2025
Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr. and County Assessor Gail McCann Beatty say that after collaboration with legal experts, the decision 'reflects the only responsible course of action left as the State Tax Commission continues to shift rules.'
Jackson County's news release also claims that the 'shift' of rules is contradictory and that they leave local governments exposed both financially and legally.
KC man pleads guilty to federal gun charge from Chiefs' Super Bowl parade shooting
'While others point fingers or promise what they know can't be delivered, we're making the hard choice to protect property owners, preserve public services and ensure that our assessment process can continue under the most difficult of circumstances,' White Jr. said in the release.
The increase in property assessments comes after a judge found the STC's order in 2023 to be unenforceable. Jackson County's release says they've worked to comply with state law even as the STC shifts inconsistently.
'One day, we're told inspections must happen after January 1. The next, they say we can start before. We've asked, repeatedly what counts as a 'physical inspection.' We've received no answers,' Beatty said.
Now, any property that sees an increase of more than 15% is required to get a physical exterior inspection. Property owners will also be able to request an interior inspection at the same time as the exterior.
However, it cannot be determined whether or not a property exceeds the 15% limit until after the inspections, which prompted Jackson County to call the action a 'logistical and legal contradiction' in its release.
'With more than 300,000 parcels, who do we inspect? Who do we leave out?' Beatty said.
'And how is it fair that those we manage to reach may end up with higher taxes than those we physically couldn't? Why should either group be penalized?'
KCPD: Victim of predatory towing? Email property crime detectives
Now, Jackson County says that officials will continue to evaluate proposals to provide inforamtion as developments arise and issue additional notices. The county also says that officials know that the solution isn't perfect.
'Jackson County is under no illusion that this is a perfect solution. It is not. But in a landscape defined by legal contradictions, shifting interpretations and operational impossibilities, this is the most responsible and legally sound path available,' the statement reads.
'We need modern tools, not contradictory mandates. We need clarity, not political pressure. And we need a system that works,' Beatty said.
'Because right now, we're all being set up to fail.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
26 minutes ago
- Forbes
The Tax Advantage Of Playing In The NFL's AFC South Division
The 2025 NFL season is upon us with the Buffalo Bills and and Baltimore Ravens as the odds on favorite to win the Super Bowl in February. One team that is less expect to compete for the title is the Miami Dolphins. Pro Bowl wide receiver Tyreek Hill made headlines in 2022 when he signed with the Dolphins over the New York Jets. This football decision made headlines, in part, because a unique factor influenced his decision: taxes. According to The New York Post, Hill stated, 'Just those state taxes man. I had to make a grown-up decision.' Despite the tax advantage of playing for the Miami Dolphins in the state of Florida, which does not levy a state-level income tax, Hill missed out on a potentially bigger tax advantage by playing in the AFC South. This article examines how the location of an NFL team affects state tax liability, the tax benefits of playing in the AFC South, and how the Jacksonville Jaguars are the most tax-advantaged NFL team. The NFL Schedule And State Income Taxes The NFL operates on a formulaic schedule that makes it easy to determine players' tax liabilities. In particular, every team plays 8.5 home games per year (eight games one year, nine games the next). In addition, every team has three opponents within their division that they play away from home every single season, according to the NFL. This schedule formula enables players to predict their tax liability for 11.5 games per season. The remaining 6.5 game locations vary each year based on a formula that factors in a variety of determinants. All athletes participating in games in the U.S. will be subject to federal income taxes, which impose a 37% tax rate on income exceeding $626,350 ($751,600 if married filing jointly). Regarding state taxes, athletes must pay the jock tax, which taxes athletes based on where the games are played, according to H&R Block. This notion means that a player whose home games are in the state of Florida will pay no state income tax on the proportion of their salary assigned to those games, and the player will pay state income taxes on the proportion of their salary assigned to games outside of Florida. For an athlete like Hill, who plays 8.5 games in Florida but also one game a year in New Jersey (NY Jets), New York (Buffalo Bills), and Massachusetts (New England Patriots), he will, in fact, owe no income taxes for at least an average of 8.5 games. Still, he will pay 9%, 10.9%, and 9%, respectively. These other games mean that Hill's average state income tax rate across these 10.5 games is not 0%, but rather Hill will pay an average state income tax rate of 2.67% on the games that can be predicted based on the NFL's formula. NFL Players State Income Tax Liability While the state tax liability of players varies annually based on the number of games played, their tax liability is set each year for the majority of the games based solely on the team for which they play. Using the formula that the team plays 8.5 games at home on average every year and three games on the road each season against three set divisional opponents, the table below shows the average state income tax rates that players on every team pay for their set 11.5 games (all data provided by The Tax Foundation). Note that this table makes simplifying assumptions: each player pays the top state income tax rate in that state. It also does not factor in income tax rate progression or the location of the remaining 6.5 road games each season, which vary substantially from year to year. The Tax Dominance Of NFL Teams In The AFC South A total of seven NFL teams play their home games in states that do not levy an income tax, corresponding with a minimum average of 8.5 games played each season in a 0% state tax rate environment. However, because of the jock tax, that alone does not determine their state income tax liability. Significant variation results from the away games the athletes play. For instance, the Miami Dolphins have three road games in states with high tax rates on top earners (New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts). Meanwhile, teams in the AFC South face a low tax rate on the majority of their 11.5 predictable games. Three of these teams play in states with no income tax rate (Houston Texans, Jacksonville Jaguars, and Tennessee Titans), and the fourth team plays in a jurisdiction with a low state income tax rate (Indianapolis Colts – three percent). This results in an average state tax rate across the 11.5 predictable games of 0.26% for the Texans, Jaguars, and Titans, and 2.22% for the Colts. When contrasting the near 11% difference in tax rates for the Texans, Jaguars, and Titans relative to teams like the Los Angeles Rams and San Francisco 49es, and given the size of the NFL contracts (Dak Prescott, QB of the Dallas Cowboys will make $60 million), playing for a low-tax rate team can result in millions of dollars of tax savings annually for many NFL players. The Jacksonville Jaguars Offer The Strongest Tax Benefits In The NFL Among the teams with three lowest state income tax rates, players for the Jaguars appear to have the most substantial tax benefits as Florida has the 14th best sales tax rate and 21st best property tax rate (36th and 40th for the Texans and 47th and 33rd for the Titans for sales tax and property tax, respectively), according to The Tax Foundation. In fact, the differences in sales and property tax rates may be so significantly more substantial for Florida-based teams than those in Texas and Tennessee that players playing for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (1.10% average state income tax rate) and Miami Dolphins (2.67% average state income tax rate) may enjoy more substantial overall tax benefits relative to the Texans and Titans. Regardless of where these other teams fall in the pecking order when considering other taxes, playing for the Jaguars appears to have the most substantial tax benefits in the NFL. The Tax Cost Of Playing For the NFL In California On the flip side, teams playing their home games in California appear to be the most disadvantaged. Despite playing one road game a year in Washington (0% state income tax rate) and Arizona (2.5% state income tax rate), the Rams and 49ers players face an average state income tax rate of 11.20%. This tax burden is anchored by the steep 13.30% top state income tax rate levied by California. As the Rams and 49ers play at least 8.5 home games and one road game in California, athletes playing for these two teams typically face the highest state income tax burdens, on average, in the NFL. Other teams are also significantly burdened by the higher tax rates they face due to the location of their games. Teams like the Buffalo Bills, New York Jets, New York Giants, Minnesota Vikings, and New England Patriots play their home games in high state tax rate jurisdictions, and their divisional road games are also located in high-income tax rate states. Given the NFL's hard salary cap documented by Forbes, the differential tax liabilities can impact a team's performance on the gridiron. While Hill made a so-called grown-up decision to play for the Dolphins, this article highlights that the most grown-up decision would involve him playing in the NFL for fellow Florida-based teams, such as the Buccaneers or the Jaguars. This article highlights the significant tax benefits that the Jaguars offer incremental to those of other Florida NFL teams. A Forbes article documents the impact that taxes can have on where athletes choose to play. Importantly, as players often choose to play for multiple teams throughout their careers, given the significant variation in state income tax rates, the financial numbers highlight that taxes are not everything when making this important decision. However, for players like Trevor Lawrence (Quarterback of Jacksonville Jaguars earning $55 million in 2025), Danielle Hunter (Defensive End of the Houston Texans earning $35.6 million in 2025), or Jeffrey Simmons (Defensive Tackle of the Tennessee Titans earning $23.5 million in 2025) (all numbers provided by spotrac), the tax savings some NFL players have over others is clear, tangible, and material.
Fox News
4 hours ago
- Fox News
Cowboys legend Michael Irvin reveals details of cocaine arrest
Dallas Cowboys legendary wide receiver Michael Irvin opened up about an incident where he was arrested for cocaine possession in the prime years of the team's 1990s dynasty. During the seventh episode of the Netflix docuseries "America's Team: The Gambler and His Cowboys," Irvin spoke about the March 1996 incident that saw him arrested and eventually tried for cocaine possession. It came just one month after the team won its third Super Bowl in a four-year span, as Irvin had cemented himself as a league superstar and future Hall of Famer. "I had a routine, after you win the Super Bowl, before the next season starts, you get about a month, and that month you cut loose and have a good time," Irvin said of the incident that occurred just before his March 5 birthday. The documentary showed that, on March 4, 1996, police found Irvin, his former Cowboys teammate Alfredo Roberts and two females in a Texas hotel room with drug paraphernalia, sex toys, marijuana and cocaine. A hidden camera video showed Irvin discussing doing cocaine while in the passenger seat of car. Irvin faced potentially 20 years in prison. But he ultimately pleaded no contest to felony cocaine possession in exchange for four years of deferred probation, a $10,000 fine and dismissal of misdemeanor marijuana possession charges. He was also suspended the first five games of the 1996 season. Still, the incident resulted in a difficult conversation with his wife, Sandy Harrell. "My wife, she looked at me and she said, 'Don't say a word, God has already told me I am your wife and I am not going anywhere. But you have to make your peace with God,'" Irvin said in the documentary. "I don't think I ever felt worse in my life."
NBC News
4 hours ago
- NBC News
How the NBA got rid of microbets — and why it could be a blueprint for MLB
Sixteen months after a landmark decision opened the door for legal sports gambling in the United States, a high-ranking NFL executive sat before a House committee in the fall of 2019 to ask for help banishing a particular type of bet that has drawn the ire of sports leagues across the country. Proposition bets, better known as 'prop bets,' allow wagers not on the outcomes of games but on occurrences during them. A wager could be on the result the first play of a game, the first pitch of an inning or whether a player will compile over or under a certain number of rebounds, strikeouts or rushing yards. Leagues, as the NFL indicated that day in front of lawmakers, consider such props troublesome and more easily manipulated because many hinge on the actions of just one player. 'These types of bets are significantly more susceptible to match-fixing efforts and are therefore a source of concern to sports leagues, individual teams and the athletes who compete,' NFL Executive Vice President Jocelyn Moore testified in 2019. (Moore, who has served on the board of directors of DraftKings since 2020, declined to comment.) Had you placed a bet then that prop bets would go away, you would have ended up a loser. When the NFL staged the Super Bowl between the Los Angeles Rams and the New England Patriots five months after the NFL's testimony, bettors could still choose among hundreds of prop bets. And six years later, they are still a source of headlines, concern for leagues and income for sportsbooks. In 2024, the NBA banned the Toronto Raptors' Jontay Porter for life for sports betting after an investigation found he had, among other findings, 'limited his own participation to influence the outcome of one or more bets on his performance in at least one Raptors game.' In June, reports surfaced that a federal investigation into longtime NBA guard Malik Beasley was related to activity around prop bets. 'I do think some of the bets are problematic," NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said in July, the month Major League Baseball placed a Cleveland Guardians pitcher on paid leave while it investigated unusually high wagers on the first pitches of innings on June 15 and June 27, ESPN reported. Weeks later, after MLB placed a second Guardians pitcher on leave as part of a sports gambling investigation, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred told a group of baseball writers that there were 'certain types of bets that strike me as unnecessary and particularly vulnerable, things where it's one single act [and] doesn't affect the outcome, necessarily.' Whether MLB considers prop bets 'unnecessary' enough to try to have its gambling partners restrict the kinds that are offered is unclear. But if MLB does, it might look to the NBA for a possible blueprint. During the 2024-25 NBA season, the league's gambling partners including FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM and several others who make up upward of 95% of the legal U.S. sportsbooks agreed to no longer offer 'under' prop bets on players either on 10-day or two-way contracts. (Porter had been on a two-way contract.) Fans could still bet on the sport's big names, like Stephen Curry's 3-pointers or LeBron James' rebounds — but legal sports betting operators in the United States were no longer offering action on the NBA's lowest-paid players. The decision wasn't a mandate handed down solely by the NBA. 'We do not have control over the specific bets that are made on our game,' Silver said in July. Years earlier, the league had sought just that type of power, but it was unsuccessful in persuading state lawmakers to pass legislation that would have given the NBA the right to approve what types of bets could be offered on the league. It also doesn't hold veto rights over what its gambling partners can and cannot offer, according to sources with knowledge of the situation. Instead, much like the NFL's attempt in its congressional testimony six years earlier, the NBA had to ask for help. Representatives for DraftKings and FanDuel didn't respond to requests for comment on their back-and-forth with the league that led to the decisions to restrict certain prop bets. Multiple people with knowledge of the situation not authorized to speak publicly on sensitive discussions said the league had to rely on making the case to its partners that prop bets on 10-day and two-way players weren't worth the relatively small amount of business they brought in. 'It's a small part of the marketplace,' a person involved in the process said, 'but had outsized integrity risks.' Such dialogue between a league and a sportsbook would have been unthinkable before the Supreme Court's 2018 decision to overturn a federal prohibition on sports gambling freed states to decide whether to permit legal sports betting. (Thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia allow sports gambling, and Missouri is set to launch its own operation in December.) Almost overnight, leagues and sportsbooks that once steered clear of one another were now in business together. Sometimes, the back-and-forth between a league and its sportsbook partners has stopped bets from appearing before they are even listed. In 2020, with leagues still months away from making a pandemic comeback, ESPN scrambled to fill programming that included NBA players' competing against one another in video games and even HORSE. As those competitions were announced, the NBA was contacted by betting operators and regulators who wanted to know whether betting odds should be offered on the unusual action, according to the sources with knowledge of the situation. The NBA strongly advised against it because the tournaments had been tape-delayed, meaning a handful of people already knew the outcomes and could benefit from that information if bets were offered. Sportsbooks agreed. The NFL recently has also found success restricting certain types of prop bets, this time through legislation. The Illinois Gaming Board in February approved the NFL's request to prohibit 10 types of what it classified as 'objectionable wagers,' including whether a kicker would miss a field goal or an extra point and whether quarterback's first pass of a game would be incomplete — the same type of 'single-actor' bets that leagues have come out against and that have reportedly sparked investigations into multiple athletes. By seeking to influence which bets are offered, leagues and their gambling partners are attempting a delicate balance of limiting bets they consider risks to the integrity of their games while still ensuring that enough betting options are offered to keep fans wagering their dollars in legal markets, rather than through offshore sportsbooks where tracking suspicious activity is much more opaque. Proponents of sports betting suggest that although the headlines about players or league staffers being investigated, or caught, for betting manipulation isn't good public relations for the sports, they're a sign that a 'complex system that detects aberrational behavior,' as Silver said in July, is working as intended. As part of their partnership agreements, leagues, betting operators and so-called integrity firms have data-sharing agreements that allow them to communicate with one another to monitor suspicious activity. "The transparency inherent with legalized sports betting has become a significant asset in protecting the integrity of athletic competition," DraftKings said in a statement. "Unlike the pre-legalization era, when threats were far more difficult to detect, the regulated industry now provides increased oversight and accountability that helps to identify potentially suspicious activity.' In the case of the pair of Cleveland Guardian pitchers, the Ohio Casino Control Commission was notified June 30 by a licensed Ohio sportsbook about suspicious wagering on Guardians games and 'was also promptly contacted by Major League Baseball regarding the events,' a commission spokesperson said in a statement. 'Under the Commission's statutory responsibilities, an independent investigation commenced.' It's why leagues and sportsbook operators consider restricting bets a fine line. 'If you have sweeping prohibitions on that type of a bet, you're taking away the ability for your league to ensure the integrity of that activity,' said Joe Maloney, a senior vice president for strategic communications at the American Gaming Association. 'You will not have the ability to work with an integrity monitor to identify any irregular betting activity on such a legal market. You will not have the collaboration of a legal operator who will share that information. You will not have the collaboration of a legal operator to say to them, 'Here's the do-not-fly list for betting activity for our league: employees, club employees, trainers, athletic officials, referees,' etc. ... 'Betting engagement on prop bets is largely a reflection of fandom. And so, by pushing that away, I think you absolutely lose the ability to properly oversee it and to root out the bad actors that would seem to exploit it. Because it will still take place.' In 2022, legal sports betting accounted for $6.8 billion in legal revenue, while illegal sports betting accounted for about $3.8 billion, according to research from the American Gaming Association, a trade association. Last year, it estimated that revenue from legal sports betting rose to $16 billion, while the illegal market grew to about $5 billion. A 2024 analysis by the International Betting Integrity Association, a nonprofit integrity firm made up of licensed gambling operators, questioned the efficacy of restricting prop bets. The IBIA reported that 59 out of 360,000 basketball games that had been offered for betting from 2017 to 2023 were 'the subject of suspicious betting.' 'There was no suspicious betting activity linked to match manipulation identified on player prop markets,' the IBIA report said. 'There is no meaningful integrity benefit from excluding such markets, which are widely available globally. Prohibiting those products will make offshore operators more attractive.' By persuading its partners to keep some prop bets off the books, the NBA nonetheless provided a precedent for how to remove bets leagues have considered, to use Manfred's term, 'unnecessary.' Would MLB, amid an ongoing investigation into two pitchers, follow? Unlike the NBA, MLB doesn't have easily defined classifications of contracts such as 10-day and two-way players. One method could instead be to target so-called first-pitch microbets. MLB is having 'ongoing conversations' related to gambling, according to a person with knowledge of the league's thinking. If baseball were to make such a push against microbets, its reasoning might mirror the NBA's last year, said Gill Alexander, a longtime sports betting commentator for VSiN. 'I think basically baseball's point would be, you know, this is the type of prop that is just begging for trouble, right?' Alexander said. Ohio, for one, would most likely agree. Last month, Gov. Mike DeWine asked the Ohio Casino Control Commission to ban prop bets on 'highly specific events within games that are completely controlled by one player," he said in a news release, while asking the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, WNBA and MLS commissioners to support his stance. 'The prop betting experiment in this country has failed badly,' DeWine said. Alexander said: 'I do think that we're in the era now where these leagues can exert some influence on these sports books, as long as it is of no financial pain to the sports books. This is one of these instances where, really, I don't agree with Rob Manfred every day, but I actually think he's probably going to get what he wants here.'
