DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 18206--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Fursty
Date: March 5, 2019, 3:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Bucksquin link ---
>
> And, do the salary cap regulations include or exclude monies
and benefits paid directly or indirectly to players by a club's
major shareholders or their direct or indirect business
interests ('major' presumably being defined in some way)? This
is clearly an important question.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes these amounts would be included in the cap - essentially
anyway in which the club or associated people provide any
financial benefit to a player should be caught by the cap.
DOK et all, This has absolutely nothing to do with company law
or tax legislation
#Post#: 18208--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Joebe
Date: March 5, 2019, 3:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Listening to Danny and Ugo on the BBC Rugby Pod, they say the
lack of action by the league last time was a major reason why
Conor decided to leave.
#Post#: 18209--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Blucherquin
Date: March 5, 2019, 3:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Fursty link ---
>
> Yes these amounts would be included in the cap - essentially
anyway in which the club or associated people provide any
financial benefit to a player should be caught by the cap.
>
> DOK et all, This has absolutely nothing to do with company law
or tax legislation
>
--- End Quote ---
Exactly. For fear of going in circles -- it doesn't matter how
they are paying the players. It only matters if they are getting
money to the players that PRL doesn't know about.
If you tell PRL that you're paying Farrell £250,000 a year (by
whatever legal means), but you're actually paying him £350,000
by using a perfectly legal method that hasn't been declared
(whatever that is) then you're cheating.
The questions are - has that happened or not, and can you prove
it or not.
#Post#: 18211--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: DOK
Date: March 5, 2019, 3:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Fursty link ---
>
> ...
> DOK et all, This has absolutely nothing to do with company law
or tax legislation
>
--- End Quote ---
If I somehow gave you the impression I thought this had anything
to do with company law/tax legislation then I apologise. I've
always assumed Saracens pay their taxes. In BQ's example above,
they could claim they only pay £250,000 for the salary cap, but
as long as they tell the taxman they actually paid £350,000,
then all is OK regarding HMRC.
#Post#: 18213--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Fursty
Date: March 5, 2019, 4:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DOK link ---
>
> If I somehow gave you the impression I thought this had
anything to do with company law/tax legislation then I
apologise. I've always assumed Saracens pay their taxes. In BQ's
example above, they could claim they only pay £250,000 for the
salary cap, but as long as they tell the taxman they actually
paid £350,000, then all is OK regarding HMRC.
>
--- End Quote ---
Apologies having r-read your post you weren't suggesting that -
others however were :)
#Post#: 18217--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Pickled Pelicon
Date: March 5, 2019, 4:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the "investor" puts in £x into the players company, the
player plays out his contract(s), leaves the club, a short while
later the investor walks away from the business, but leaves the
investment in situ.
Is this a way to give a player money over a long term??
Does it fall within the cap, it's a separate business
arrangement and the player's left the club??
#Post#: 18218--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Blucherquin
Date: March 5, 2019, 4:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
All questions that the inquiry will no doubt be unable to answer
ultimately.
Prove that the investment was in lieu of salary and that there
was an agreement that a loan would never have to be repaid once
the player leaves so that they're effectively getting a whack of
free cash....
Can't think how you'd prove it.
#Post#: 18239--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Quinky
Date: March 5, 2019, 6:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DOK link ---
>
> The question for me is really "Who paid what for the houses
involved?"
>
> Say it's a 50/50 split in shares between a player and Nigel
Wray.
> Say the house is worth £1m, and each put in £500,000 to
purchase said house.
> Dividends from the property company will be paid 50/50.
> Presumably should the property be sold, that too would be
split 50/50.
> I can't see any problem with this.
>
> However, say Nigel Wray paid for the house and now the player
gets dividends, loans from the company and a 50% share of the
house selling price.
> Clearly, that's a different kettle of fish.
>
--- End Quote ---
Dividends are paid from post-tax profits. Profit on sale of
property is subject to Capital Gains Tax (usually). But the
point you raise is important - who paid for the house. At some
stage, the property (asset) would have been transferred into the
player's company. At that stage, two things concern me: firstly,
was the transfer at fair market value. This will concern HMRC
(definitely) and PRL (hopefully). Secondly, who paid the legal
fees and Stamp Duty (quite a lot of money on £1m= properties).
The latter is a way that I can see players benefitting, should
someone else be paying the bill.
The bottom line is that in spite of posters on here raising
valid points and being unhappy/suspicious of the arrangements,
it's possible that it's all kosher. Certainly the business model
is tried and tested so for tax purposes it's an easy one to
cover. On the other hand, what is reported to PRL is what really
concerns us, I believe.
#Post#: 18251--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Yareet
Date: March 5, 2019, 7:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Bucksquin link ---
>
> And, do the salary cap regulations include or exclude monies
and benefits paid directly or indirectly to players by a club's
major shareholders or their direct or indirect business
interests ('major' presumably being defined in some way)? This
is clearly an important question.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yup
HTML https://d2cx26qpfwuhvu.cloudfront.net/premier/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/03161651/Salary-Cap-Regulations-2018-19.pdf
Page 4
#Post#: 18253--------------------------------------------------
Re: Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?
DIR By: Monte
Date: March 5, 2019, 7:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Or paid after they retire and are not on Clubs book!
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 13
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page