Taxes and tennis players

[OhYes]

Kelsey Anderson (Kevin Anderson's wife and an accountant), gave us a glimpse of how tennis players pay their taxes: http://nochallengesremaining.podbea...erson/?token=3c9985388f059cdb67f3cff230fbb12d

So I found out some interesting things:

• If you spend more than 30 days in UK each year, UK has right to go after your income ! That's why Nadal won't play grass tournaments in UK before Wimbledon although he likes small events, and Murray who is destined to be there more than 30 days is the one who has no benefits of moving to Monte Carlo even if he would want to.
• Top players who are playing in small tournaments are usually paid just to appear, which cannot be taxable in that country as prize money. So it's not really about collecting trophies or points when you see someone famous in 250 tournament - it's all about the money.
• When France played against Switzerland in DC final, all 4 French players were resided in Switzerland. French taxing system is especially oppressive - happened in some cases that certain WTA players couldn't collect their prize money from RG because they didn't pay tax from French tournaments years earlier.

To conclude, all top players are searching ways to earn as much as possible without paying too much through taxes. All except one.

1. Novak Djokovic - Monte Carlo
2. Andy Murray -
3. Roger Federer - Switzerland
4. Stan Wawrinka - Switzerland
5. Rafael Nadal - Spain*
6. Kei Nishikori - Florida
7. Jo Wilfried Tsonga - Switzerland
8. Tomas Berdych - Monte Carlo
9. David Ferrer - Spain*
10. Richard Gasquet - Switzerland
11. Milos Raonic - Monte Carlo
12. Marin Cilic - Monte Carlo

 

[randomtoss]

Swiss citizens who reside in Switzerland don't have tax arrangements like rich foreigners do. Some places in Switzerland have lower taxes than others (that's why Fed bought an apartment in a place where many rich Swiss live), but it's a lot more than what Tsonga or Gasquet pay. From what I know, Wawa lives in the area where he grew up (Lausanne-Geneva area), where the tax rate for Swiss citizens is rather high.

 

[Krish872007]

The UK tax laws are pretty straightforward.

The first thing that needs to be determined is residency status.
In tax terms, you have "residency" in the UK if you fulfil either of the following criteria during the fiscal year (from 6 April - 5 April of the following calendar year):

1. you spent 183+ days in the UK in the tax year
2. you only own property in the UK and you spent at least 30 days there in the tax year (must have lived in it for at least 91 days total)


Next item:

Residents pay tax on all income (whether it is earned at home or abroad)
Non-residents only pay tax on UK income. This income usually refers to wages, pensions, rental incomes and the like
Now, residents who are "domiciled" outside the UK may not have to pay tax on income at the UK tax rate.

Edit: this short article explains (in words) what HMRC do regarding taxes on "major sporting events" (definitely applies to athletics, perhaps to tennis as well):

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...n-tax-work-for-sporting-events-in-the-UK.html

For Non-Residents: It's from 2013, so perhaps things have changed now - according to them, HMRC taxes prize money and appearance fees at 50%, and then taxes athletes on a proportion of their global endorsement income

 

[OhYes]

Swiss citizens who reside in Switzerland don't have tax arrangements like rich foreigners do. Some places in Switzerland have lower taxes than others (that's why Fed bought an apartment in a place where many rich Swiss live), but it's a lot more than what Tsonga or Gasquet pay. From what I know, Wawa lives in the area where he grew up (Lausanne-Geneva area), where the tax rate for Swiss citizens is rather high.

Like Florida is obviously different than the rest of US.

 

[bjsnider]

Due to the fact that US politicians copied their tax laws from dictatorships, US citizens have to renounce their citizenship to be tax exiles, which is why they're not going to appear on that list.

 

[Raindogs]

Kind of takes the shine off the lame argument of winning the Olympic gold "for country" when you see the lengths athletes go to to avoid paying taxes.

 

[djokerer]

Kelsey Anderson (Kevin Anderson's wife and an accountant), gave us a glimpse of how tennis players pay their taxes: http://nochallengesremaining.podbea...erson/?token=3c9985388f059cdb67f3cff230fbb12d

So I found out some interesting things:

• If you spend more than 30 days in UK each year, UK has right to go after your income ! That's why Nadal won't play grass tournaments in UK before Wimbledon although he likes small events, and Murray who is destined to be there more than 30 days is the one who has no benefits of moving to Monte Carlo even if he would want to.
• Top players who are playing in small tournaments are usually paid just to appear, which cannot be taxable in that country as prize money. So it's not really about collecting trophies or points when you see someone famous in 250 tournament - it's all about the money.
• When France played against Switzerland in DC final, all 4 French players were resided in Switzerland. French taxing system is especially oppressive - happened in some cases that certain WTA players couldn't collect their prize money from RG because they didn't pay tax from French tournaments years earlier.

To conclude, all top players are searching ways to earn as much as possible without paying too much through taxes. All except one.

1. Novak Djokovic - Monte Carlo
2. Andy Murray -
3. Roger Federer - Switzerland
4. Stan Wawrinka - Switzerland
5. Rafael Nadal - Spain*
6. Kei Nishikori - Florida
7. Jo Wilfried Tsonga - Switzerland
8. Tomas Berdych - Monte Carlo
9. David Ferrer - Spain*
10. Richard Gasquet - Switzerland
11. Milos Raonic - Monte Carlo
12. Marin Cilic - Monte Carlo

What with Federer and Dubai

 

[tennisaddict]

What with Federer and Dubai

Fed receives few oil rigs every year

 

[Bartelby]

You forgot to mention that setting up Foundations is a fabulous way inter alia to:

1. minimise taxation obligations

2. employ family members

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

Good for them. The amount of money the governments of the world wastes on enriching their friends and relatives as well as just plain wasting on stupid things, people should try to pay as little tax as possible.

 

[Raindogs]

Good for them. The amount of money the governments of the world wastes on enriching their friends and relatives as well as just plain wasting on stupid things, people should try to pay as little tax as possible.

Agree totally, only the "little people" should have to pay their proportionate share for healthcare, roads, schools and such incredible wastes.

 

[Bartelby]

Governments are lobbied to tax the rich less and therefore they tax everyone else more, so this is a high tax argument.

Good for them. The amount of money the governments of the world wastes on enriching their friends and relatives as well as just plain wasting on stupid things, people should try to pay as little tax as possible.

 

[Adv. Edberg]

I think the people moving to MC or similar should also then play for that country. Makes sense.

What's the star meaning after Spain? Is Nadal not greedy like Djoko and just wants to contribute to the country that gave him the opportunity to become a tennis pro?

 

[Bartelby]

All the OP means is that France is probably one of the few countries in the world that has a strict and fair tax policy.

 

[Adv. Edberg]

Governments are lobbied to tax the rich less and therefore they tax everyone else more, so this is a high tax argument.

This is correct. Not to mention how companies who make billions in profit tax less than a teacher.

 

[CrazyTennisFan]

Why is Nadal living in Spain then?
He makes around $35 M a year.
Is he paying half that money to Spain?

 

[Bartelby]

Yes, you'd need to know what you can get away with in Spain to know whether Nadal continuing to live in Spain was that detrimental to his wealth.

Given his investment and commercial profile leaving Spain might be the worst thing Nadal could do financially.

 

[Midaso240]

Why is Nadal living in Spain then?
He makes around $35 M a year.
Is he paying half that money to Spain?

Because he doesn't care about money

 

[West Coast Ace]

Agree totally, only the "little people" should have to pay their proportionate share for healthcare, roads, schools and such incredible wastes.

Uh, you do know, if you're in the US, the 'well off' (top 20%) pay a 84% of the total taxes. Sorry if the truth hurts.

 

[CrazyTennisFan]

Because he doesn't care about money

or because he does not like change!! which is THE problem lately!

 

[Bartelby]

The real question is what percentage of their wealth and income is actually taxed as opposed to what might be available to be taxed.

And what percentage of tax each decile pays as a percentage of their income, in particular, and there are other such questions.

At the moment all that statistic points to indirectly is the monstrous level of inequality in America.

Uh, you do know, if you're in the US, the 'well off' (top 20%) pay a 84% of the total taxes. Sorry if the truth hurts.

 

[OhYes]

I think the people moving to MC or similar should also then play for that country. Makes sense.

What's the star meaning after Spain? Is Nadal not greedy like Djoko and just wants to contribute to the country that gave him the opportunity to become a tennis pro?

That little star means that although he resides in Spain, he and Ferrer play a lot small tournaments which Djokovic as a top player avoids. What benefit has Rafa playing 250 tournament unless he is given big money just to participate ? Some other things come to my mind also why would Nadal pay tax in Spain, but that's for some other topic.

What with Federer and Dubai

Or Istanbul ?

 

[Russeljones]

Kelsey Anderson (Kevin Anderson's wife and an accountant), gave us a glimpse of how tennis players pay their taxes: http://nochallengesremaining.podbea...erson/?token=3c9985388f059cdb67f3cff230fbb12d

So I found out some interesting things:

• If you spend more than 30 days in UK each year, UK has right to go after your income ! That's why Nadal won't play grass tournaments in UK before Wimbledon although he likes small events, and Murray who is destined to be there more than 30 days is the one who has no benefits of moving to Monte Carlo even if he would want to.
• Top players who are playing in small tournaments are usually paid just to appear, which cannot be taxable in that country as prize money. So it's not really about collecting trophies or points when you see someone famous in 250 tournament - it's all about the money.
• When France played against Switzerland in DC final, all 4 French players were resided in Switzerland. French taxing system is especially oppressive - happened in some cases that certain WTA players couldn't collect their prize money from RG because they didn't pay tax from French tournaments years earlier.

To conclude, all top players are searching ways to earn as much as possible without paying too much through taxes. All except one.

1. Novak Djokovic - Monte Carlo
2. Andy Murray -
3. Roger Federer - Switzerland
4. Stan Wawrinka - Switzerland
5. Rafael Nadal - Spain*
6. Kei Nishikori - Florida
7. Jo Wilfried Tsonga - Switzerland
8. Tomas Berdych - Monte Carlo
9. David Ferrer - Spain*
10. Richard Gasquet - Switzerland
11. Milos Raonic - Monte Carlo
12. Marin Cilic - Monte Carlo

Interesting topic (although the UK angle is old) and I look forward to reading what Mrs. Anderson has said on the subject.

My question to you is why you reckon the Spanish players are in any way privileged?

 

[OhYes]

Interesting topic (although the UK angle is old) and I look forward to reading what Mrs. Anderson has said on the subject.

My question to you is why you reckon the Spanish players are in any way privileged?

Well maybe UK angle is old, but it is new for me. You can push play button and hear what Mrs. Anderson said about subject, provided in link I gave.

Spanish players (Nadal and Ferrer), as I said in my post above, play a lot small tournaments and I am certain they receive money invitations to them. What is odd that all other Spanish players have residence in Spain, and it makes you wonder are they different kind of people from the rest of the tour, or they get some benefits from their country or from their tennis federation. Now, this is just me thinking about some privileges, but maybe Dr Fuentes case when Spanish court ordered blood bags to be destroyed could be one of benefits they could get.

You forgot to mention that setting up Foundations is a fabulous way inter alia to:

1. minimise taxation obligations

2. employ family members

Like these:
https://novakdjokovicfoundation.org/
http://www.rogerfedererfoundation.org/en/home/
http://www.fundacionrafanadal.org/eng/default.asp

But let's cut them some slacks with it, because I know that Djokovic foundation invested serious money in their projects. So if they are doing the right thing with those foundations - great

 

[Chicharito]

Messi's lawyer complained that the government never went after Nadal and his illegal tax avoidance.

I am not sure if any of the other players have actually done anything illegal.

 

[Russeljones]

Messi's lawyer complained that the government never went after Nadal and his illegal tax avoidance.

I am not sure if any of the other players have actually done anything illegal.

Other tennis players? Other than whom?

 

[Chicharito]

Why are Stan and Ferrer listed?

Other tennis players? Other than whom?

Nadal. As I stated in the first sentence.

 

[jga111]

Too many greedy people, they should pay their taxes!

 

[Russeljones]

Nadal. As I stated in the first sentence.

Your statement refers to allegations made by people paid to deflect heat from their Customer. I am surprised you put any stock into that.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

• When France played against Switzerland in DC final, all 4 French players were resided in Switzerland. French taxing system is especially oppressive - happened in some cases that certain WTA players couldn't collect their prize money from RG because they didn't pay tax from French tournaments years earlier.

The bolded part: if France's tax system is oppressive it is not because it goes after those, who don't pay.

That is actually admireable and the reasons why the tax systems exist.

Now, if you think that the taxes in France are rather high and that is oppressive to the earners, that is a different story.

 

[citybert]

why wouldnt players do this, cant hate on a guy for trying to get an extra dollar.

interesting on the taxes on appearance fees those can be 2-3MM per tournament but only top 5 guys and kei/grigor get those.

also surprised Kelsey didnt mention the charge cards it is a very illegal way to dodge taxes but happens all the time. they pay you with a debit card with up to 100k on it and the players spend it on crap they want and as long as its not merchandise that requires registration like a car its usually untraceable.

 

[OhYes]

The bolded part: if France's tax system is oppressive it is not because it goes after those, who don't pay.

That is actually admireable and the reasons why the tax systems exist.

Now, if you think that the taxes in France are rather high and that is oppressive to the earners, that is a different story.

I believe it's much higher than in Switzerland, otherwise why would French players reside in that country ?

 

[Chicharito]

I believe it's much higher than in Switzerland, otherwise why would French players reside in that country ?

Switzerland is basically a tax haven like Monaco for non Swiss people.

Swiss people have to pay tax if they live in Switzerland.

 

[SoBad]

What kind of a tax deduction does Federer claim every year based on the fake African charities where worthless goods, including useless outdated textbooks, which often only exist on paper, are reportedly delivered to community youth organizations?

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I believe it's much higher than in Switzerland, otherwise why would French players reside in that country ?

Well, yes, it is.

I was just trying to figure out what you mean by "oppressive".

 

[OhYes]

Switzerland is basically a tax haven like Monaco for non Swiss people.

Swiss people have to pay tax if they live in Switzerland.

It's not about Switzerland. Gerard Depardieu departed France to Russia because France's president Francois Hollande, wanted to raise France's income tax on those making more than a million euros a year to 75% from 41%. In Russia is 13% flat.

 

[OhYes]

Well, yes, it is.

I was just trying to figure out what you mean by "oppressive".

75% would be oppressive.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

75% would be oppressive.

You could say that.

I was just somewhat confused by the word and the following line, which said that the tax authorities in France collected their share from the players in subsequent from the year of earning years.

It appeared as though the word is applied to the way the french tax authorities persist in their efforts to collect taxes (or even the activity itself).

 

[citybert]

75% would be oppressive.

75% would be oppressive.

isnt japan 75% or close to that at the very very top bracket?

 

[OhYes]

isnt japan 75% or close to that at the very very top bracket?

If it's 75% then it sure is.

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

In the US the top 50% of the income earners pay 97% of the federal income tax. The problem with governments is that no matter how high the taxes are, they cannot control how much they waste. Even countries that have high tax rates still tend to run deficits.

And the answer to corporations not paying enough taxes isn't to increase taxes on them(because they pass on the costs to the people) but to reduce taxes on everyone else so that people keep more of the money they have earned.

Also for US citizens living abroad the US tax code is one of the most complex and punitive in the world which is why many of the rich who were US citizens have renounced their citizenship(like Tina Turner) when they move permanently to another country.

 

[clayqueen]

Kelsey Anderson (Kevin Anderson's wife and an accountant), gave us a glimpse of how tennis players pay their taxes: http://nochallengesremaining.podbea...erson/?token=3c9985388f059cdb67f3cff230fbb12d

So I found out some interesting things:

• If you spend more than 30 days in UK each year, UK has right to go after your income ! That's why Nadal won't play grass tournaments in UK before Wimbledon although he likes small events, and Murray who is destined to be there more than 30 days is the one who has no benefits of moving to Monte Carlo even if he would want to.
• Top players who are playing in small tournaments are usually paid just to appear, which cannot be taxable in that country as prize money. So it's not really about collecting trophies or points when you see someone famous in 250 tournament - it's all about the money.
• When France played against Switzerland in DC final, all 4 French players were resided in Switzerland. French taxing system is especially oppressive - happened in some cases that certain WTA players couldn't collect their prize money from RG because they didn't pay tax from French tournaments years earlier.

To conclude, all top players are searching ways to earn as much as possible without paying too much through taxes. All except one.

1. Novak Djokovic - Monte Carlo
2. Andy Murray -
3. Roger Federer - Switzerland
4. Stan Wawrinka - Switzerland
5. Rafael Nadal - Spain*
6. Kei Nishikori - Florida
7. Jo Wilfried Tsonga - Switzerland
8. Tomas Berdych - Monte Carlo
9. David Ferrer - Spain*
10. Richard Gasquet - Switzerland
11. Milos Raonic - Monte Carlo
12. Marin Cilic - Monte Carlo

The rues have been relaxed since Nadal's protest that's why he returned to Queens.


Tax change may lure Rafael Nadal back to Queens

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/taxes-and-tennis-players.561705/

 

[citybert]

If it's 75% then it sure is.

It was 70% in the states in the early 80s. So mac, borg etc all coughed it up

http://taxfoundation.org/sites/default/files/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

Governments are lobbied to tax the rich less and therefore they tax everyone else more, so this is a high tax argument.

No it isn't. It is a "tax everyone less" argument because governments waste so much money, that the less they have the better for everyone.

 

[PrinceMoron]

Murray can be pretty taxing to watch


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Shbeals]

All the OP means is that France is probably one of the few countries in the world that has a strict and fair tax policy.

Fair??!? Hahahahahahahaha

 

[coloskier]

What kind of a tax deduction does Federer claim every year based on the fake African charities where worthless goods, including useless outdated textbooks, which often only exist on paper, are reportedly delivered to community youth organizations?

Do you mean "useless outdated" textbooks that haven't changed history to fit the liberal view of the world?????? And paper textbooks are better than no textbooks. I grew up with paper textbooks, and find them to be a lot better than digital textbooks that have been altered so much from reality that they are worthless, but do fit in with the liberal mindset.

 

[helterskelter]

No it isn't. It is a "tax everyone less" argument because governments waste so much money, that the less they have the better for everyone.

If that's the argument, it is wrong. The government having less money may indeed be "better" for wealthy people (from a financial point of view, at least). The government having less money is not better for poorer people. The "trickle down theory" is as close to be empirically wrong as a theory can be. But of course it would be: it's simply a self-serving theory made up to suit the whim of a few wealthy people.

 

[SoBad]

Do you mean "useless outdated" textbooks that haven't changed history to fit the liberal view of the world?????? And paper textbooks are better than no textbooks. I grew up with paper textbooks, and find them to be a lot better than digital textbooks that have been altered so much from reality that they are worthless, but do fit in with the liberal mindset.

I have no idea what you mean by “liberal,” but I agree that newer textbooks doesn’t mean better textbooks, and also agree that paper educational resources are better than digital.

All of that is largely outside of the scope of my post though, since the main points are:

- used textbooks collected at nominal cost under guise of charity
- no independent audit of delivery
- tax benefits far outweigh value of charity
- publicity generated used to satisfy requirements of sponsorship agreements.

 

[helterskelter]

In the US the top 50% of the income earners pay 97% of the federal income tax. The problem with governments is that no matter how high the taxes are, they cannot control how much they waste. Even countries that have high tax rates still tend to run deficits.

And the answer to corporations not paying enough taxes isn't to increase taxes on them(because they pass on the costs to the people) but to reduce taxes on everyone else so that people keep more of the money they have earned.

Also for US citizens living abroad the US tax code is one of the most complex and punitive in the world which is why many of the rich who were US citizens have renounced their citizenship(like Tina Turner) when they move permanently to another country.

Paragraph 1: Governments should run deficits. It would be economically inefficient not to do so, as it means taking money out of the economy, which is unproductive. Government debt isn't a real problem. The last sentence of your first paragraph should read "Especially" such countries, because high-tax countries intend to be redistributive and to provide services.

Paragraph 2: No, it isn't. People might have more money in their bank account, but they would have worse and worse public services, and that would prove detrimental to them. Look, for example, at the higher and higher levels of student debt because of underfunding of universities.

Paragraph 3: Yes, the US tax code is certainly far too complex and that is indeed oppressive.