End of the Pittsburgh Jock Tax

Background and Legal Challenge

On September 25, 2025, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed a lower court decision declaring that Pittsburgh's “jock tax” does not comply with the Pennsylvania Constitution. The case, NHLPA et al. v. Pittsburgh, centred on the legality of a tax imposed on non-resident athletes and entertainers.

Details of the “Jock Tax”

The “jock tax” was a 3% levy applied to income earned by non-resident athletes and entertainers who performed or played in publicly funded venues in Pittsburgh, such as PNC Park. This Non-Resident Sports Facility Usage fee was introduced in 2005.

Court’s Rationale

The plaintiffs argued that the tax violated the Uniformity Clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which requires taxes to be imposed on members of the same class in a uniform manner throughout the state. In contrast, the City maintained that residents paid a comparable total tax rate—1% municipal income tax plus 2% school district tax—amounting to 3%, and thus the tax on non-resident athletes and entertainers was justified.

However, the court found that the City had not provided sufficient reasons for taxing non-resident athletes and entertainers at a higher rate than residents. As a result, the “jock tax” will no longer be enforced in Pittsburgh, and those who previously paid it may be eligible for reimbursement.

Scope of the Ruling

It is important to note that this decision applies only to Pittsburgh “jock tax” and does not apply to similar taxes implemented by other municipalities or states.