View Single Post
Old 03-19-2004, 05:23 PM   #48
Bertchel Banks
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Kursk
Posts: 437
Send a message via ICQ to Bertchel Banks

I also live under a bridge and charge a toll to cross.

But, yes, the argument that Agassi spends 2 weeks a year in the UK and so should pay income tax on 2/52 of his endorsement income is a bit odd.
Not exactly. I'm no lawyer or legal expert, but from a legal perspective it could be argued that if Nike and Head "do business" in the UK then all employees are liable for imcome earned from those companies. Agassi as a paid endorser for these companies' products is subject to income tax for the two weeks that he in effect sells to the British public the Nike and Head brands.

Then again if soccer players are protected because their clubs already pay taxes, why aren't Nike endorsers and Head endorsers protected since Nike-UK and Head-UK, respectively, pay taxes as well?

If that indeed is what the case is about - I still suspect that he's done some sort of tax avoidance scheme
I doubt it.
Bertchel Banks is offline   Reply With Quote