A lazy way to go far over the cap.

What are the details of your luxury tax?

if hockey had that teams like the leafs would have an unfair advantage. They can afford it, while many teams in the league cant.

The way I personally want it to be is that every team can make one player cap-exempt, but once made cap-exempt at the start of the season they cannot be traded.
However, if a team chooses (or cant afford) not to use the marque then then they are awarded compensation picks. It could look something like:
-100% of 13m used: 0 picks
-75% of 13m used: Additional pick at the end of the 4th round
-50% of 13m used: Additional pick at the end of the 3rd round
-25% of 13m used: Additional pick at the end of the 2nd round
-0% of 13m used: Additional picks at the end of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rounds
Picks cannot be traded

Not only does it compensate low budget or rebuilding teams, but it allows for more players to be drafted which is better for the game as a whole and allows for players from non-traditional countries to be drafted, similar to Kirk last year.

I know it's not a Luxury Tax, but I think it would genuinely help the game.

We all know the leafs would also sign Hall for 20mil and Piet for 18 mil

They'd sign the whole league

Yup and be unstoppable. Kind of the whole reason for the salary cap is stopping the leafs from just doing whatever they want

It'd be Toronto, Montreal and the Rangers battling it out in the east every year with no other team standing a chance

My favourite sport is baseball. In baseball we have a luxury tax and most of the time it’s not the super rich teams that win. Tampa spent something like 60million and won 90+ games.
For hockey if u draft right and have really good value deals like pasta, Bergeron, Marchand, MacKinnon Gallagher(for now) u could easily compete with the ‘big dogs’. The Yankees haven’t won since 09 and dodgers since 88
Drafting and developing is the most important in all sports

Baseball and Hockey are quite different though. If an NHL team can roll out 3 elite first lines all playing nearly 20 minutes a game and 3 1st pairings all playing 20 a game, it'll only be a matter of time before they win a few cups. No team will be able to match with their 2nd and 3rd lines and it would give them such a big advantage, not to mention if they had a full roster of first pairing dmen, outside of a really good teams top 6, teams would struggle to score

U roll out a huge batting order and pitching. It’s the same thing. A good system with good goaltending, and some huge value contracts like MacKinnon pasta Gallagher etc... you could match any team. And remember it’s not like everyone superstar would sign with the same team or even become free agents

But if you can go over the cap, you'd trade picks and prospects for actual NHL players. Plus lots of players would come to Toronto in free agency. Sure value contracts are great but if the Leafs 3rd line is much better than the Avs 2nd, I don't think Mackinnons cap hit is going to make a difference

Remember team Europe in 2016. No where near the talent and Canada barely beat them. Take away price and put an average goalie and Canada might lose
Not everyone will sign with the leafs

Here's how to do a NHL luxury tax using this ACGM.

Start the season with a full 23 man roster. Check

Set a salary cap. 81.5 mil Check

For every dollar above the cap you pay 2 dollars. This one would be 20.467066 mil.

For each year year you are over you lose your next drafts 1st pick. Year 2 1st 2 picks. Etc.

You cannot trade any future 1st rd picks when you are over the cap.

You can not Offer Sheet a player if you were over the cap the previous year or if you would be over the cap the season of the Offer Sheet...

I like this. More realistic implementation.

Leafs, Canadians, rangers would all be buying players or making deals like Toronto let's New York have hall and they sign pitrangelo

Personally I don't want a league with a luxury tax. This would make it so the same 3-5 teams won every year! That's no fun. Hence the reason I don't watch basketball or soccer. What's the point in watching the whole year when the finals turns out the same every year.

I would say costs a 2nd til 5% over the cap then it’s a 1st. 10% over the cap is a 1st & 3rd. 2nd year add a 2nd.

Like Detroit did at the end or the pre salary cap era. A couple of those seasons Detroit didn't break even until the conference finals.

There are other teams that can certainly afford the luxury tax.
Let's remember the NHL...does not lose or make money. The NHL is just an administrator of the "rules" set out by the owners, NHLPA and other jurisdictions. It's the individual owners that make or lose money for their individual clubs.
So many of the NHL teams are really don't make money or certainly little. It's partly a real estate or arena scam that the owners need their building used for 50 NHL games a year. Just look at the disastrous Phoenix/Arizona situation for years .
The reality is that many of the owners don't want a luxury tax. They need the certainly of revenue sharing so they can keep an NHL team viable. If the rich teams could luxury tax themselves to get the best players, the NHL hockey interest would dwindle in these smaller markets, due to having poor teams. Eventually some teams would be just money losing and fold. The NHL does not have a big TV contract now or ever that can a support a league. The NHL teams depend on butts in the seats.
The majority of NHLPA would not benefit from a luxury tax. The majority of the NHLPA don't like the top players making so much $$$, leaving less for them. We have seen teams going with 21 or 22 rosters instead of 23 because of the top heavy cap.
The last thing the majority of NHLPA would want is that their share of the players salaries going to the minority of top players. (luxury tax or not) And certainly the bottom end players would have not want the teams folding which costs them about 23 NHL jobs and another 25 in the minors .
In the NHL economics, I just can't believe the majority of the two parties that make the league, the owners and the players want a luxury tax.

That's pretty reasonable solution. But a do see a flaw. It allows the UFAs especially the top UFAs, to benefit from the luxury tax. The RFAs...who comprise more NHLPA members that the UFA would have less leverage. The majority of owners do not want luxury tax, cause it allows the rich or irresponsible cap owners get the best players which weakens the hockey interest in the iffy weaker NHL markets