OutKick97%
EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Andy Ogles Bill Takes Aim At Eileen Gu With 100% Tax On Certain Athlete Income64%
By Dan Zaksheske0%
2/26/2026, 5:00:37 AM
BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Negativity Bias, and In-Group Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 39.9% saturation with 375 hits. Analysis detected 1,551 faulty-reasoning hits from 940 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 58.3% and a BS Rank of 64% (8,015 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 63.40% of the article peer group.
Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) is pushing a bill his office is promoting in the context of the backlash involving Eileen Gu, the American-born freestyle skier who represents China in international competition, including the recently concluded 2026 Winter Olympics, OutKick has exclusively learned.
The proposal is called the "Officially Limiting Yearly Money Procured by Individuals Concerning Sportsmanship Act."
Why such a long and strange name?
Well, the bill goes by the "OLYMPICS Act" for short.
Get it?
"Any American who works with a foreign adversary has not only betrayed our country, but must be stripped of all benefits from doing so.
That is why I am ensuring that the IRS takes every dollar earned by athletes like Eileen Gu," Congressman Ogles told OutKick.
Ogles previously hinted at the possibility of ramifications for athletes like Gu with a recent post on X (formerly Twitter).
"Eileen Gu is a US-born skier who is working for Communist China, a regime that wants to destroy our country," Ogles posted.
"There must be consequences for those who betray the United States and support our adversaries."
What Does Ogles' Proposal Say?
As drafted, the act would create a new federal tax set at 100 percent on certain income earned by U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who compete in major global events on behalf of a "foreign entity of concern," defined in the bill by reference to ‘covered nations’ in 10 U.S.C. 4872(d)(2).
The list currently includes China, Russia, North Korea and Iran.
The bill targets two buckets of money.
First, it would tax amounts received from competing in a global athletic event on behalf of a foreign entity of concern.
Second, it would tax sponsorship payments received as a result of, or as an inducement for, competing on behalf of that foreign entity.
The definition of "global athletic event" is broad and includes the Summer Olympics, Winter Olympics, the World Cup, the Tour de France, and Wimbledon.
It also includes any other competition in which individuals participate as representatives of countries.
The bill defines a covered individual as any U.S. national or lawful permanent resident.
So the scope is not limited to U.S. citizens, but green card holders, as well.
If an athlete falls into those categories and is competing on behalf of a covered foreign country in the kinds of events listed, the bill is designed to take virtually all money earned from that representation.
One of the biggest practical questions is how sponsorship money would be treated.
Endorsement deals are not cleanly tied to one race, one tournament, or one national uniform.
They can be paid through agencies, brands, and international entities.
The bill’s language tries to capture sponsorships connected to the decision to compete for a covered nation, but it does not explain how those connections would be proven or enforced.
Ogles’ office said the IRS would enforce it through standard reporting and collection tools, like other federal taxes.
UC Berkeley professor Brian Galle, a tax law expert, told OutKick there are generally no hard limits on federal tax rates, and the tax code already contains penalty taxes above 100 percent in some contexts.
He said the strongest constitutional argument against a 100 percent levy would be to claim it functions as an excessive fine or punitive penalty rather than a tax, though he added that kind of challenge would likely face an uphill fight.
Stephen Moore, an economist with the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, criticized Ogles' proposal.
"This is punitive and unnecessary.
A 100% tax will raise zero revenue.
This is bad economics and bad for our foreign policy," Moore told OutKick.
Eileen Gu Controversy Sparks Backlash Among Americans
Ogles’ office is clearly tapping into a real cultural argument.
And, to be fair to Ogles, he has a point here.
Gu turned her back on the United States to collect huge paychecks from China.
She has criticized the U.S. while remaining silent on China's many documented human rights violations.
OutKick reached out to Gu's representatives for comment on the bill proposal, but did not hear back.
Gu was born in the U.S., lives in the U.S., trains in the U.S., and attends school in the U.S.
But she proudly wears the flag of China, a communist country, so she can collect massive paychecks.
Yes, there are other American athletes who compete for other nations in the Olympics (or other international competitions) because they aren't good enough to make the U.S. team.
That's not the case for Gu, who is arguably the best female freestyle skier in the world.
She won three medals at the 2026 Winter Olympics (one gold, two silver) and three medals at the 2022 Games (two gold, one silver).
To put it as plainly as possible: Gu is a sellout.
She claims that she wanted to 'inspire young Chinese girls,' which is ironic given that China previously discouraged families from even birthing daughters with its one-child-per-family policy that rolled out nationally in 1980 (the country shifted to a two-child policy in 2016 and later expanded to three children in 2021).
A Wall Street Journal report indicated Beijing sports authorities allocated multi-million-dollar funding connected to Gu’s training and qualification for Milan 2026.
She put money above her country, her morality and her integrity.
Yet, the left-wing media largely props her up as a hero.
Like a lot of proposals in Congress, the OLYMPICS Act could be more about signaling than passing.
But even as a message bill, it shows some politicians are interested in protecting American interests in all capacities.
This is not just criticism, but a punishment for what many see as a traitorous act, written as a tax.
Speakers
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.