[johnF1971]

When asked if he had any plans to compete in the UK in the near future Bolt made some comment about only if we change our tax laws.

Anyone know what that's all about?

(apologies if this has already been discussed but I couldn't find it anywhere)

[irishguy]

Heres the story,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/9744565.stm

[Aerial Alan]

After Usain Bolt won his last gold medal, in the 100m relay on Saturday where the Jamaican team set a world record, he spoke of why tax laws are stopping him coming to run in Britain.
Glyn Bunting, a partner at Deloitte, explained that was due to athletes having to pay tax in the UK on a proportion of their sponsorship and endorsement earnings.
He said Bolt was invited to an athletics event with a £100,000 fee, but his management worked out that by the time they had allocated his sponsorship and endorsement income to the UK, "his tax liability in the UK would exceed his appearance fee".

[frankie_baby]

Originally Posted by Aerial Alan

After Usain Bolt won his last gold medal, in the 100m relay on Saturday where the Jamaican team set a world record, he spoke of why tax laws are stopping him coming to run in Britain.
Glyn Bunting, a partner at Deloitte, explained that was due to athletes having to pay tax in the UK on a proportion of their sponsorship and endorsement earnings.
He said Bolt was invited to an athletics event with a £100,000 fee, but his management worked out that by the time they had allocated his sponsorship and endorsement income to the UK, "his tax liability in the UK would exceed his appearance fee".

If his tax would've been more than his appearance fee then he needs a new accountant

[johnF1971]

Originally Posted by Aerial Alan

After Usain Bolt won his last gold medal, in the 100m relay on Saturday where the Jamaican team set a world record, he spoke of why tax laws are stopping him coming to run in Britain.
Glyn Bunting, a partner at Deloitte, explained that was due to athletes having to pay tax in the UK on a proportion of their sponsorship and endorsement earnings.
He said Bolt was invited to an athletics event with a £100,000 fee, but his management worked out that by the time they had allocated his sponsorship and endorsement income to the UK, "his tax liability in the UK would exceed his appearance fee".

I don't see how his sponsorship and endorsements are anything to do with UK tax. Surely that's just part of his income and should therefore only be taxed by his country of residence (Jamaica)

What about other high earning sports people like Tennis players and golfers? Are they also taxed in the same way when they compete in the UK?

[Randomguy83]

Originally Posted by johnF1971

I don't see how his sponsorship and endorsements are anything to do with UK tax. Surely that's just part of his income and should therefore only be taxed by his country of residence (Jamaica)

What about other high earning sports people like Tennis players and golfers? Are they also taxed in the same way when they compete in the UK?

Yes tennis players are also subject to this law which is why Rafa Nadal no longer plays Queens and plays Halle instead because it costed him more money to play Queens than he could earn.

[vidalia]

Originally Posted by johnF1971

I don't see how his sponsorship and endorsements are anything to do with UK tax. Surely that's just part of his income and should therefore only be taxed by his country of residence (Jamaica)

What about other high earning sports people like Tennis players and golfers? Are they also taxed in the same way when they compete in the UK?

Deleted as someone got the answer in first

[walterwhite]

Originally Posted by frankie_baby

If his tax would've been more than his appearance fee then he needs a new accountant

No way round it i'm afraid.

[walterwhite]

Originally Posted by johnF1971

I don't see how his sponsorship and endorsements are anything to do with UK tax. Surely that's just part of his income and should therefore only be taxed by his country of residence (Jamaica)

What about other high earning sports people like Tennis players and golfers? Are they also taxed in the same way when they compete in the UK?

I agree, it's a ridiculous law. He could sign a sponsorship deal with a Jamaican firm, only ever do work for them in Jamaica and when he comes to the UK he gets taxed on the income. Doesn't make any sense.

[breppo]

Here's an article that explains it all:
http://www.sportandrecreation.org.uk...orsment-income

Here's another one:
http://www.stepjournal.org/journal_a...r_picture.aspx

[BrokenArrow]

Foreigners are not liable for UK income tax unless they reside in the UK.

They pay their income tax in their country of residence.

UK government may recover any tax difference between what they pay in their own country and what they would have paid were they resident in the UK.

Key point is that they have to have earned that money in the UK in the first place, so taxing it is fair enough.

[technologist]

But the issue is - they all agree to pay on active income -e.eg Prize money ,
But HMRC rules oon passive income (sponsorship etc) means that the tax due is greater than the Prize money..

[irishguy]

Does this mean that they have to pay tax on any prize money given by their countries or is that not considered an official prize as it comes from their nation and not the olympics...?

With the US awarding $25000 for each gold medal, it would make George happy to grab a chunk of that

[Alt-F4]

Of course, the man is skint and needs the money

[BrokenArrow]

Originally Posted by technologist

But the issue is - they all agree to pay on active income -e.eg Prize money ,
But HMRC rules oon passive income (sponsorship etc) means that the tax due is greater than the Prize money..

They can't tax passive income earned in foreign countries. They can only tax earnings in the UK.

[cactus]

And a special law was passed in UK to make the Olympics 2012 a tax free zone.

[Speak-Softly]

Originally Posted by BrokenArrow

They can't tax passive income earned in foreign countries. They can only tax earnings in the UK.

But they can and do, read the links and it explains how.

[Steve_Whelan]

HMRC are clueless. They belive these stupid tax regulations bring in more money but they are counter productive if the big names stay away making the sporting events non viable. At the end of the day a small percentage of somthing is a lot more than a large percentage of sod all.

[BrokenArrow]

Originally Posted by Speak-Softly

But they can and do, read the links and it explains how.

Well, if they are doing that, its legalised theft.

Foreign sports people should steer clear of this country.

[MARTYM8]

Similar issues apply to tennis players – that’s why all the top players no longer play Queens bar Andy Murray (who is obviously a UK taxpayer). Federer/Djokovic and Nadal now play in the German event at Halle.

[hamsta-food]

Originally Posted by irishguy

Does this mean that they have to pay tax on any prize money given by their countries or is that not considered an official prize as it comes from their nation and not the olympics...?

With the US awarding $25000 for each gold medal, it would make George happy to grab a chunk of that

No, but only because the IOC makes awarding the game to Britain conditional upon an exemption by HMRC. But for other major sporting events it would be.

Be fair: If they don't gouge somebody, how else could they afford to let bankers write off billions in tax avoidance?

[irishguy]

Originally Posted by hamsta-food

No, but only because the IOC makes awarding the game to Britain conditional upon an exemption by HMRC. But for other major sporting events it would be.

Be fair: If they don't gouge somebody, how else could they afford to let bankers write off billions in tax avoidance?

Ahh right, missed that important fact. Thanks for that... It probably would be exempt anyway as its not really an official prize.

Its strange the difference in additional prizes that the countries reward for medals... from nothing to millions.

[Tassium]

I wonder what the moral argument is for this?

Taxing sponsorship is perfectly fine, but the way it's being done is bonkers.

Is this correct?
You play in 4 events worldwide and 1 in the UK and your liability is 45% of 20% of the sponsorship?

Sponsorship say $10m. So taxed on $2m at 45% is $900k. For a working week in the UK.


Obviously compete in more events and it's not as bad. But for people who just do a few things a year it's punitive.

[swnymor1963]

Originally Posted by Tassium

I wonder what the moral argument is for this?

Taxing sponsorship is perfectly fine, but the way it's being done is bonkers.

Is this correct?
You play in 4 events worldwide and 1 in the UK and your liability is 45% of 20% of the sponsorship?

Sponsorship say $10m. So taxed on $2m at 45% is $900k. For a working week in the UK.


Obviously compete in more events and it's not as bad. But for people who just do a few things a year it's punitive.

If my understanding is correct...the above scenario used to be the case...but having read the second link it appears HMCR now take training days into account...nevertheless it seems to a ridiculous situation were a World class International Sportsman or woman would pay more in tax than their appearance fee or winnings....Especially when other nations other than the USA do not operate a similar tax regime....Listening to the Radio4 link it did make me chuckle when even the hard nosed interviewer could`t quite believe what he was being told.

[natalian]

The point of the law is that they are earning both prize money and sponsorship income when competing in the UK. Sponsors will require them to do things like - wear their gear, pop up on TV ads and do photo shoots etc in the UK as part of their sponsorship deal. On that basis the UK government consider that a proportion of their sponsorship income is earned in the UK and taxable here.