Hockey Talks Silenced; Fate of Season Grim : Labor: Reintroduction of a luxury tax plan by owners leads to abrupt end of discussions but doesn’t kill all settlement hopes.

Any progress that the NHL and its players’ union made in recent days was derailed on Tuesday by the reintroduction of a controversial luxury tax, a development that both sides said further jeopardizes the season.

Labor talks in Chicago abruptly ceased with no further sessions scheduled after NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman unveiled a watered-down version of the previously proposed tax. Under the new plan, a 25% tax on the entire payroll would be levied against clubs that have total salaries exceeding $18 million in the first year of the agreement.

The league’s board of governors will gather Monday at New York in what is expected to be a critical meeting, limited to one representative per team. There, the governors could issue a firm deadline or tell Bettman to continue negotiations. Or the league could become the first to cancel an entire season because of a labor impasse.

However, some management and union sources cautioned that there is still adequate time to forge an agreement, saying that one final blowup was almost expected before a resolution. There is still believed to be a window of three or four weeks before the season would have to be scrapped.

“Maybe they felt that by throwing the tax on, they could get more concessions,” said the Washington Capitals’ Kelly Miller, a member of the players’ negotiating team. “The way I look at it, I’ve already given them my keys, I’ve given them my wallet, I’ve given them my car. At some point you’ve got to say, ‘Hey, no, you can’t have my kids and you can’t have my wife.’ ”

NHLPA President Mike Gartner of the Toronto Maple Leafs said, “I can’t see us going any further than we’ve gone. We’ve given them everything they wanted. We’ve made a tremendous amount of concessions along the way, and right now the owners are being gluttons about it. They’ve been gobbling up everything that we’ve been giving and now they’re saying we want more, more and more.

“We’ve given everything so far . . . and then a tax on top of that, I don’t think so. And that’s why I say that I think the chances of a season happening if they stick to their tax plan are close to none.”

Bettman had consistently said media reports that the tax had disappeared were erroneous. Union chief Bob Goodenow called the tax proposal “counterproductive” and said it “seriously endangers the prospects of a deal and the prospects of a season.”

Yet, one NHL executive disputed the union’s contention that the latest proposal could be called a luxury tax.

“My initial reaction is this is far from a luxury tax,” said Tony Tavares, the Mighty Ducks’ president. “If the numbers I’m hearing are correct, that amount is not going to keep anyone from signing anybody. It’s more of a nuisance tax.

“I wouldn’t put it in the category that (it) would cause a major drag (on salaries).”

As of September, six teams had payrolls of $18 million or more this season, led by the St. Louis Blues’ estimated total of $23.5 million. The Kings ranked second, at $23.42 million, followed by the Pittsburgh Penguins ($20.13 million), Detroit Red Wings ($19.16 million), the Buffalo Sabres ($18.95 million) and the New York Rangers ($18.037 million). The Chicago Blackhawks were close to the cutoff, at $17.84 million.

Several other clubs likely would have been affected by the proposed tax because payrolls rise during the season through contract renegotiations and trades. The Vancouver Canucks’ payroll was also more than $17 million, and the Toronto Maple Leafs’ and New Jersey Devils’ surpassed $16 million.

Toronto General Manager Cliff Fletcher called Tuesday probably the most disappointing day of his career.

“If it ends up that I was part of the process that results in hockey not being played for an entire season, it would be a tremendous black mark,” he said.

Almost everyone on both sides hinted after the meeting that the chances of saving the season were bleak. The lockout began on Oct. 1.

A source from the players’ side, who had said the reintroduction of the payroll tax would be a deal-breaker, was pessimistic the season could be saved, saying: “For the league to do this after they’ve gotten nothing but givebacks from the players is incredible. That’s exactly what it takes to blow the talks to hell. I would walk for a long time.”

The different tax proposals have always brought forth emotional responses. While players unanimously oppose the tax, owners do not unanimously support it.

Last month, the Blues tried to persuade other team executives to urge Bettman to start the season without a tax and without an agreement, but failed.

Initially, owners asked for a levy of 200% on clubs that exceeded a predetermined level and dropped the peak figure to 122% on Oct. 11 before Tuesday’s proposal. Progress had been slow in coming until two weeks ago, when the league shelved the tax and began to focus on other key issues such as salary arbitration, entry-level salaries and the rookie salary cap.

In Anaheim, Mighty Duck forward Stu Grimson said the union had operated under the assumption that the tax would not be part of the proposal. Grimson, the Ducks’ assistant player representative, felt more optimistic than the members of the union’s negotiating team.

“I am still optimistic in one sense,” he said. “I almost get the sense the owners are feeling us out. They may be in a position where they may not know what the best possible deal is unless they bring the tax back to the table. Knowing our response today, let’s hope they understand our response to a tax at any time is that it is inappropriate, and abhorrent knowing what we’ve conceded. . . . If they’re asking for a risk-free investment they’ve come to the wrong table.”

Bettman, who said the sides were “too far apart on substance” regarding arbitration, free agency and the rookie salary cap, contended that the negotiations concluded even before owners introduced the luxury tax.

“With or without the contribution plan, there was no basis for a deal,” he said.

Winnipeg owner Barry Shenkarow suggested that the NHL should unilaterally impose its system should the impasse continue.

“Baseball can do it because of their U.S. antitrust law exemption,” Shenkarow told the Winnipeg Free Press. “But football has already done it. They imposed their system, and the jury in Minneapolis upheld their position and said the NFL could impose the cap. The players then came back and said maybe we should talk. If we have to do it, I believe we’re in a position to do it.”

Times staff writers Helene Elliott and Robyn Norwood contributed to this story.