A system that taxes a team whose payroll exceeds a set spending limit. This type of taxation scheme wouldn't prohibit teams from carrying large payrolls, or offering players big salaries, it would only deter it. Last year, Major League Baseball and its players' union agreed to adopt a payroll tax. Baseball's version of the system has been criticized for not being a strong enough deterrent for big spenders.

The players made several proposals that included some form of payroll tax during negotiations for the last CBA. The owners rejected those offers in 1994, and given Bettman's recent statements, the NHL isn't interested in a payroll tax this time around either. Bettman has promised owners "cost certainty." A payroll-tax system wouldn't necessarily deliver that.

On the other hand, the owners may consider this type of system if the salary limit is low and the penalties levied against teams for exceeding it were very stiff. While it wouldn't be "cost certainty," an extremely punitive tax coupled with a low payroll ceiling would act as a de facto salary cap.

According to speculation, players would probably go for a payroll-tax system, similar to the one currently being used by Major League Baseball.

Reports have the NHLPA proposing that a tax be levied against teams whose payroll exceeds $50 million.

Bettman is on record saying that a luxury tax like baseball's is not a model for hockey since "the economics are different."