A Nebraska football player signs an NIL deal with the university’s multimedia rights partner. The College Sports Commission rejects it. The player files for arbitration.
Meanwhile, a state senator introduces a bill that would prevent any collegiate athletic association from forcing disclosure of NIL contract terms. And the university is simultaneously writing revenue-sharing checks to athletes for the first time in its history.
That is not a hypothetical. That was Nebraska in the spring of 2026.
The landscape for name, image, and likeness in Nebraska has changed substantially since the House v. NCAA settlement took effect on July 1, 2025. The House v. NCAA settlement, approved on June 6, 2025, introduced direct institutional revenue sharing, a new enforcement entity, third-party deal review, roster limits, and $2.8 billion in back damages. It also created a collision between federal settlement terms and state NIL statutes that is now playing out in real time, with Nebraska at the center of the fight.
This guide explains where NIL law stands in Nebraska right now, what the House settlement changed, what the new enforcement regime means for athletes and businesses, and what legal issues Nebraska athletes, families, collectives, and sponsors need to understand going forward.
Horgan Law LLC is an NIL and sports law firm in Omaha, Nebraska, and Tom Horgan is a registered athlete agent under the Nebraska Uniform Athlete Agents Act. We represent college and high school athletes, NIL collectives, and businesses engaged in athlete endorsement deals throughout the state.
Current status (as of September 2026). The House v. NCAA settlement rules remain in effect, and on September 3, 2026 Judge Claudia Wilken overruled objections to the continuation of the injunctive relief settlement (Dkt. 1158). The benefits cap was $20.5 million for 2025-26 and rises 4% for 2026-27 (NCAA Q&A, February 11, 2026). Back-damages payments remain on hold while the Ninth Circuit appeals await oral argument, tentatively in November 2026 (College Sports Litigation Tracker, September 26, 2026). An arbitrator upheld the College Sports Commission’s rejection of Playfly deals with 18 Nebraska players on May 11, 2026, and the Commission approved restructured deals, reported at $7.5 million, on July 30, 2026 (AP). Nebraska’s NIL Act is unchanged since LB 1393 (2024), and LB 370 was indefinitely postponed on April 17, 2026. In Congress, the Senate voted 77-22 on September 17, 2026 to advance the Protect College Sports Act; final passage was not confirmed as of this update.
What Did the House v. NCAA Settlement Change?
The House settlement resolved three consolidated federal antitrust lawsuits: House v. NCAA, Hubbard v. NCAA, and Carter v. NCAA, and fundamentally restructured the economic relationship between colleges and their athletes. The settlement was approved by Judge Claudia Wilken on June 6, 2025, and the injunctive relief provisions took effect on July 1, 2025.
The settlement has three core components that every Nebraska athlete and business needs to understand.
Revenue Sharing
For the first time in the history of college athletics, NCAA member institutions are permitted to pay athletes directly. The settlement caps each participating school’s annual benefits at 22% of the average of eight categories of athletics revenue across the five defendant conferences and Notre Dame. The cap was $20.5 million for 2025-26, increases 4% for 2026-27, to about $21.3 million, and is recalculated every three years under the same formula. The allocation of revenue-share payments is left to each school’s discretion, and published reports indicate that most power-conference schools direct the largest share to football.
Back Damages
The NCAA and its member conferences will pay approximately $2.8 billion over 10 years to class members who competed in Division I between June 15, 2016 and September 15, 2024. More than 95% of those damages are expected to go to football and men’s and women’s basketball athletes who played at Power Five schools. As of September 2026, back-damages payments remain on hold while objectors’ appeals, including Title IX challenges, await oral argument in the Ninth Circuit, tentatively scheduled for November 2026.
Roster Limits and Scholarship Changes
The settlement replaced the traditional headcount scholarship model with new sport-specific roster limits. Schools that opt into revenue sharing must comply with these limits. The settlement also allows schools to offer full scholarships to every athlete on a team’s roster, eliminating the old distinction between headcount and equivalency sports. Schools had until the start of each sport’s competitive season to reach compliance with the new limits, with grandfathering provisions for current athletes.
What Is the College Sports Commission and How Does It Affect Nebraska Athletes?
The College Sports Commission (CSC) is the enforcement entity formed by the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, and SEC to implement the House settlement rules. The CSC is separate from the NCAA and is led by CEO Bryan Seeley, a former MLB executive. The CSC’s responsibilities include enforcing revenue-sharing rules, monitoring roster limits, and reviewing and approving third-party NIL deals, which matters most for Nebraska athletes and businesses.
Under the settlement rules, every third-party NIL deal worth $600 or more must be reported to NIL Go, which launched in June 2025, within five business days of agreement to payment terms. The CSC uses data from Deloitte and LBI, firms that handle revenue management for professional sports leagues, to evaluate whether a deal reflects the athlete’s fair market value. Deals that exceed fair market value may be flagged as disguised pay-for-play arrangements and rejected.
The compliance numbers suggest significant gaps in enforcement. Industry analysts attribute part of this gap to a “money dump” by NIL collectives before July 1, 2025, when many collectives fully distributed their funds to avoid CSC scrutiny. But the gap also suggests that substantial NIL activity is occurring outside the reporting framework.
Why Is Nebraska at the Center of the NIL Enforcement Fight?
Nebraska has become the first major test case for the CSC’s enforcement authority. In early 2026, the CSC rejected NIL deals involving Nebraska football players and Playfly, the university’s multimedia rights partner. The CSC determined that the deals lacked sufficient information about what was specifically expected of the athletes in exchange for payment, raising concerns that the compensation looked more like pay-for-play than legitimate NIL endorsements.
The Nebraska players exercised their right under the House settlement to challenge the CSC’s rejection through arbitration. On May 11, 2026, the arbitrator upheld the CSC’s rejection, finding that Playfly was an associated entity, that the deals lacked a valid business purpose, and that the deals warehoused NIL rights rather than activating them.
What makes this case nationally significant is the collision between the CSC’s authority and Nebraska state law. The Nebraska Student-Athlete Name, Image, or Likeness Rights Act (Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 48-3601 to 48-3609, as amended by LB 1137) explicitly prohibits any “collegiate athletic association” from penalizing a student-athlete for earning compensation from NIL activities. After the arbitrator upheld the rejection, the players resubmitted restructured deals, which the CSC approved on July 30, 2026; the sources reviewed show no state court action under Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-3608 as of September 27, 2026.
Senator Megan Hunt’s LB 370 would have prohibited collegiate athletic associations from requiring NIL contract reporting, but the Legislature indefinitely postponed the bill on April 17, 2026. The bill would have directly conflicted with NIL Go reporting, and its failure leaves that reporting requirement unopposed by Nebraska statute.
Several states have enacted NIL statutes that conflict with settlement rules, and Executive Order 14400, signed April 3, 2026, directs the U.S. Attorney General to challenge state laws that conflict with interstate athletic rules.
What Legal Defenses Could the CSC Raise?
If the Nebraska-Playfly dispute moves beyond arbitration and into court, the College Sports Commission is likely to argue that national NIL enforcement cannot function if each state is allowed to impose its own rules on a settlement-based compliance system. In other words, the CSC’s best position is not just that it is enforcing House settlement terms, but that uniform oversight is necessary to prevent college sports from becoming a patchwork of conflicting state regulations.
One likely defense is the dormant Commerce Clause, based on NCAA v. Miller, 10 F.3d 633 (9th Cir. 1993), in which the Ninth Circuit struck down a Nevada statute regulating NCAA enforcement procedures; that decision is persuasive only and does not bind Nebraska or Eighth Circuit courts. The CSC could argue that Nebraska’s NIL protections, if used to block CSC review or enforcement, create the same type of fragmentation problem by letting one state override rules governing a national market for athlete compensation.
That argument is not bulletproof. Miller predates modern NIL, predates the House settlement, and involved a statute that more directly regulated NCAA enforcement procedures than Nebraska’s current NIL law does. Even so, Venable’s analysis is useful because it shows that any Nebraska challenge would not be litigated only as a state-athlete-rights issue; it would also likely become a broader fight over whether NIL regulation requires nationally uniform treatment.
What Does Nebraska’s NIL Law Actually Say?
Nebraska’s NIL statute, the Nebraska Student-Athlete Name, Image, or Likeness Rights Act (originally the Nebraska Fair Pay to Play Act), was signed into law on July 24, 2020, and has been amended since. The current version, as amended by LB 1137 (2022) and LB 1393 (2024), includes the following key provisions:
Nebraska college athletes at both public and private institutions have the right to earn compensation for the use of their name, image, and likeness (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-3603). The statute prohibits postsecondary institutions and collegiate athletic associations from penalizing athletes for exercising these rights. Athletes may obtain professional representation without penalty (Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-3606), athletes must disclose NIL contracts to a designated institutional official (48-3604), and athlete agents must register under the Nebraska Uniform Athlete Agents Act (48-2601 to 48-2619).
The statute imposes several important limitations. Compensation must be for services actually performed (Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-3603(7)(a)). Athletes cannot enter into NIL contracts that extend beyond their participation in the athletic program, involve the sale of awards received for athletic participation, or provide compensation for work not performed. Institutions may prohibit athletes from NIL contracts for products, services, entities, or activities “reasonably deemed to be inconsistent with the educational mission” of the institution (Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-3603(8)). Athletes cannot enter NIL deals that require sponsor apparel or advertising during official team activities when that would conflict with a team contract, and the institution must disclose the conflicting team contract to the athlete (Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-3605).
The 2024 amendments in LB 1393 provide that Nebraska institutions may not be prohibited from creating, identifying, facilitating, enabling, or supporting athletes’ NIL activities, or from contracting with third parties to do so (Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-3603(4)). The Act also provides that it shall not be construed to make a student-athlete an employee of the institution based solely on earning NIL compensation (Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-3603(11)); that provision does not resolve employee status under federal labor or tax law. This provision directly addresses one of the unresolved legal questions in college athletics: whether revenue sharing triggers an employment relationship with tax, benefits, and collective bargaining implications.
How Does Revenue Sharing Interact with Third-Party NIL Deals?
This is the question that is reshaping the economics of college athletics in real time. Under the House settlement, institutional revenue sharing and third-party NIL deals are treated as separate categories, but they interact in important ways.
Revenue-sharing payments come directly from the institution and count against the school’s annual benefits cap, which was $20.5 million for 2025-26 and about $21.3 million for 2026-27. Third-party NIL deals, such as endorsements, social media sponsorships, autograph signings, and camp appearances, are separate and do not count against the school’s cap. However, third-party deals worth $600 or more must be reported to NIL Go, and deals with associated entities or individuals can be rejected if they lack a valid business purpose or exceed a reasonable range of compensation.
The practical effect is that third-party NIL has become the primary mechanism for schools and collectives to supplement revenue sharing beyond the cap. Athletic directors across the country have acknowledged that “redirecting” revenue through third-party NIL structures is a common workaround to the revenue-sharing ceiling. This is exactly what the Nebraska-Playfly dispute involves, and exactly what the CSC is trying to police.
For Nebraska athletes, this means that the structure and documentation of third-party NIL deals is more important than ever. A deal that clearly ties compensation to specific promotional activities, such as social media posts, autograph sessions, commercial appearances, or camp instruction, is far more likely to survive CSC scrutiny than a deal that pays an athlete with minimal performance obligations. Athletes and their representatives need to ensure that every NIL contract includes clear deliverables, defined timelines, and compensation tied to identifiable services.
What About Nebraska High School Athletes and NIL?
The Nebraska Student-Athlete Name, Image, or Likeness Rights Act applies to college athletes and does not address high school NIL; LB 1046, a 2026 bill on high school NIL policies, was indefinitely postponed on April 17, 2026. This leaves regulation to the Nebraska School Activities Association (NSAA), which governs public high school athletics in the state.
The NSAA Board of Directors voted in December 2021 to allow high school athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness, subject to specific conditions. Under NSAA Bylaw 3.7.1.c, students may engage in NIL activities on an individual basis, but those activities cannot suggest the endorsement or sponsorship of the student’s NSAA member school. NSAA interpretations effective February 27, 2023 bar NIL images in a uniform or other gear provided by the school, use of school facilities, equipment, or game film, and promotion of alcohol, tobacco, vaping, controlled substances, or gambling. Violations can result in a determination of ineligibility.
For high school athletes and their families, this creates a narrow but real window for NIL activity. Social media endorsements, personal appearances, and product promotions are permitted as long as they are clearly individual and not school-affiliated. Athletes with significant social media followings or athletic reputations can begin building their NIL portfolio before college, but the line between permissible individual activity and impermissible school association requires careful navigation.
What Are the Tax Implications of NIL Income in Nebraska?
NIL income is taxable. Period. Whether the income comes from a third-party endorsement deal, an institutional revenue-sharing payment, or back damages from the House settlement, it is treated as ordinary income for federal tax purposes. Nebraska athletes must also pay Nebraska state income tax on NIL earnings.
Athletes receiving both revenue-sharing payments and third-party NIL income should anticipate a significant tax obligation. Nebraska’s top individual income tax rate was reduced under recent legislative changes, but athletes earning substantial NIL income, particularly those receiving both a full revenue-sharing allocation and multiple third-party deals, can face combined federal and state tax rates exceeding 30%.
Quarterly estimated tax payments are likely required for athletes whose NIL income exceeds their withholding. Failure to make estimated payments can result in penalties and interest from both the IRS and the Nebraska Department of Revenue. Athletes should work with a tax professional familiar with NIL income as early in the tax year as possible, not in April when the return is due.
The House settlement back-damages payments, when they are eventually distributed (currently delayed by appeals), will also be taxable income in the year received. Athletes who competed between 2016 and 2025 and are eligible for back damages should plan for the tax impact now.
What Should Nebraska Athletes, Families, and Businesses Do Right Now?
The NIL landscape in 2026 is more complex, and more valuable, than at any point since the rules changed. Here is what the different stakeholders should be doing.
College Athletes
Understand your revenue-sharing allocation and how it interacts with your third-party NIL deals. Ensure every NIL contract includes clear performance obligations and defined deliverables: vague contracts are the ones the CSC is rejecting. Disclose all NIL deals over $600 through NIL Go. Engage a licensed agent and an attorney who understands both Nebraska’s NIL statute and the House settlement terms. Do not sign contracts with perpetuity clauses, broad exclusivity provisions, or terms that extend beyond your college career without legal review.
High School Athletes
You can earn NIL income under NSAA rules, but keep it individual and school-neutral. No school uniforms, logos, or team affiliations in NIL content. Build your brand and social media presence now. It creates leverage for college NIL negotiations later. Document everything for tax purposes.
Families
Get involved early. NIL contracts are legal agreements with real consequences. A parent should not be the primary negotiator. Hire a licensed agent and an attorney.
Understand the tax implications before, not after, the money arrives. If your child is a minor, additional protections and considerations apply under Nebraska law.
Businesses and Sponsors
If you are a Nebraska business considering an NIL sponsorship with a college athlete, your deal will be submitted to the CSC for review if it exceeds $600. Structure the contract around genuine marketing services, such as social media posts, appearance events, and product endorsements, with clear deliverables and fair market compensation. Deals that look like gifts or booster payments will be flagged. Work with an attorney who can ensure the contract satisfies both Nebraska law and CSC requirements.
NIL Collectives
The pre-July 2025 model of pooling booster money and distributing it to athletes with minimal performance obligations is under direct attack from the CSC. Collectives that survive in 2026 will be the ones that operate like legitimate marketing businesses: matching athletes to sponsors, structuring deals with real deliverables, and documenting the commercial value of every transaction.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can Nebraska schools pay athletes directly now?
Yes. Under the House settlement, schools that opted into revenue sharing can distribute up to $20.5 million directly to athletes for the 2025-2026 academic year. These payments are separate from third-party NIL deals.
Do Nebraska athletes still need agents and lawyers for NIL deals?
More than ever. Revenue sharing creates a baseline, but third-party NIL deals remain the primary way athletes earn above the revenue-sharing cap. Every third-party deal over $600 is now subject to CSC review, and deals that lack clear deliverables are being rejected. A licensed agent and an attorney can structure deals that maximize value while surviving scrutiny. Under the Nebraska Uniform Athlete Agents Act, Neb. Rev. Stat. 48-2601 to 48-2619, a person who negotiates endorsement contracts for a student-athlete must register as an athlete agent.
Are Nebraska high school athletes allowed to earn NIL income?
Yes, with restrictions. The NSAA permits high school athletes to engage in NIL activities on an individual basis, but those activities cannot reference, suggest, or imply endorsement by the athlete’s school. Athletes cannot use school uniforms, logos, or team imagery in NIL content. Violations can result in loss of eligibility.
What happens if the CSC rejects my NIL deal?
Under the settlement rules, an athlete whose deal is not cleared may revise and resubmit it, cancel it and refund impermissible amounts, or seek review through neutral arbitration, and the arbitrator’s decision is final and binding. If the arbitration ruling goes against the athlete, it may be possible to seek judicial review, and in Nebraska, the state NIL statute may provide an independent legal basis to challenge enforcement actions by collegiate athletic associations. The Nebraska-Playfly arbitration, decided May 11, 2026, did not resolve whether the Nebraska statute independently limits CSC enforcement.
Is NIL income taxable in Nebraska?
Yes. All NIL income, whether from third-party deals, institutional revenue sharing, or House settlement back damages, is treated as taxable ordinary income for both federal and Nebraska state tax purposes. Athletes with significant NIL earnings should make quarterly estimated tax payments to avoid penalties.
If you are a Nebraska athlete, family, business, or collective navigating NIL in 2026, Horgan Law LLC can help. We are an NIL and sports law firm in Omaha representing athletes across Nebraska, and Tom Horgan is a registered athlete agent under the Nebraska Uniform Athlete Agents Act. Contact us at 402-965-0652 or visit horganlawfirm.com/contact-us to discuss your situation.
This article is intended for general educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every situation is different. Consult a licensed Nebraska attorney for guidance specific to your circumstances.
Ready to experience the difference? Contact Horgan Law today to discuss how we can assist. Your legal journey just got easier.