WNBPA submitted new proposal with 2 major concessions

For the longest of time, the negotiations between the WNBA and the WNBPA for a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) have gone on without a marked end in sight, with the financial gap between the two parties continuing to look daunting. With the 2026 season set to start on May 8, the WNBA must conduct an expansion draft, free agency, and the college draft before the season tips off, and the league and its players continue to be divided on key issues.

As things stand, the WNBPA’s latest offer calls for players to receive an average of 27.5% of the league’s gross revenue over the life of the deal, down from the 31% they previously sought, per ESPN’s Alexa Philippou. In the first year of the proposed agreement, players are asking for 25%of gross revenue and a salary cap of roughly $9.5 million, a reduction from the earlier $10.5 million figure.

News: The WNBPA submitted a counterproposal to the WNBA this afternoon.

Sources said they made concessions on revenue share % and on housing. Details TK

— Alexa Philippou (@alexaphilippou) February 17, 2026

While the latest proposal shows flexibility from the players’ side, the league still considers it too expensive to sustain. The WNBA’s offer is structured differently, which is at the heart of the dispute.

The league has proposed giving players roughly 70% of net revenue, meaning revenue after expenses are deducted, along with a $5.65 million salary cap for the 2026 season. That amounts to less than 15%, creating a substantial financial divide.

In practical terms, the two sides remain about 12.5% apart on first-year revenue sharing and nearly $4 million apart on the salary cap. Financial projections from the league also illustrate the tension.

WNBA officials previously estimated that the union’s earlier proposal would lead to roughly $700 million in losses over the life of the deal, per Yahoo Sports. Even after the union lowered its demands, the league believes the new proposal would still generate approximately $460 million in losses, reinforcing its position that the offer is not financially viable.

Housing benefits have emerged as another key issue in negotiations. The league has attempted to reduce or phase out the longstanding requirement that teams provide housing for players during the season.

Its latest proposal would provide one-bedroom apartments for minimum-salary players during the first three years of the deal, along with studio apartments for developmental players. The union, however, wants housing support to remain in place for the early years of the agreement before gradually phasing it out for players on fully protected, near-max or max contracts.

The players argue that short WNBA seasons and high living costs in major markets make temporary housing a necessity rather than a luxury, another key area where the two sides have found little common ground.