Undoubtedly, the news of the multi-million dollar contract extension that Mookie Betts agreed to sign with the Dodgers has been the subject of the moment, even from an early hour when the movement began to cook. It was in a matter of hours when it became official that the outfielder, not yet debuting with his new team, would play with Los Angeles probably until the end of his career as a player.
While that $ 365 million dollars the Dodgers put on the Betts table is a fortune, compared to the offer the Red Sox made in December last year, they fall short.
Remember that the Red Sox, former team of the right ranger and with whom he dressed in glory in 2018 when he won the World Series title, tried to convince Betts during the last dead season for him to sign a contract of 10 more years with the However, Mookie's team rejected that $ 300 million.
You might wonder: Why would Mookie Betts have made more money with the Red Sox than with what they got from the Dodgers? The answer is easy, because of the taxes that the governments of each State of the North American country establish. While in Massachusetts the percentage that is discounted to the inhabitants is only 6.5%, in California the deduction is more than double, that is, 13.3%.
So here's what Betts really would have charged the Red Sox against the net profit it will generate in 12 seasons with Los Angeles:
What I would have earned with the Red Sox:
-6.5% tax = -19.5 million tax in Massachusetts
10 years x 300 million - 19.5 million = $ 280.5 million = $ 28.05 million per year
What you will really gain with the Dodgers:
-13.3% taxes = - 48.5 million in taxes in California
12 years x 365 million - 48.5 million = $ 316.4 million = $ 26.3 million per year
In conclusion, Betts would ultimately have made $ 1.75 million more profit for each season if he had signed with the Red Sox, compared to what he will earn in a dozen years on the West Coast of California.