eckerslike Posted December 28, 2012 Author Share Posted December 28, 2012 But it's our tax system thats supported the UK athletes in the first place,in one way shape or form. But he's not British. ---------- Post added 28-12-2012 at 21:08 ---------- A spokesperson for the HMRC ........ "Any tax on other UK income such athletes receive can in most cases be set off against tax paid in their home country." And a good piece in The New Statesman: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/usain-bolt-wrong-oppose-our-tax-laws http://franhendy.com/2012/11/13/kenyas-elite-athletes-africas-newest-tax-exiles/ Kenya’s Elite Athletes: Africa’s Newest Tax Exiles? ---------- Post added 28-12-2012 at 21:14 ---------- she could, and simply pay the tax due, same as many businessmen do or she could and find a way of paying slightly less like many businesses do. so in what way is she prevented from competing? A marathon runner cannot compete competitively in several dozen races in a year. They have to pick a handful and skip the rest. So why run in the UK for the benefit of the taxman when you can race in New York for the benefit of yourself. ---------- Post added 28-12-2012 at 21:17 ---------- Bolt, nothing. But eckerslike has broadened the debate to include British athletes. You probably need to understand that an athlete can change nationality. 8 of the British Olympic team started competing for other nations. Now many of the Kenyan team are competing for other countries because of the tax placed on them in Kenya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I don't blame him, its not a level playing field, excuse the pun. Others who do not live int he UK are only taxed once they start spending more then half the year here. Why should sports men and women be penalised like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gym_rat Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 A marathon runner cannot compete competitively in several dozen races in a year. They have to pick a handful and skip the rest. So why run in the UK for the benefit of the taxman when you can race in New York for the benefit of yourself. . that`s a personal choice she makes, nothing prevents her from competing in your example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckerslike Posted December 28, 2012 Author Share Posted December 28, 2012 that`s a personal choice she makes, nothing prevents her from competing in your example. Tax? ...... ---------- Post added 28-12-2012 at 21:36 ---------- I don't blame him, its not a level playing field, excuse the pun. Others who do not live int he UK are only taxed once they start spending more then half the year here. Why should sports men and women be penalised like this? UK sport is the looser. You cannot have world class athletics if the world class athletes don't turn up. I think the Bolt scenario goes like this. Bolt earns around $30 million/year in sponsorship. If he turns up and competes in the UK he can get a fee of around £500,000 But the UK taxman would take around £1million off him in tax. That's a great incentive to come isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gym_rat Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Tax? ...... are you saying sports people shouldnt have to pay tax because they are special somehow? tax doesnt prevent her from competing here, greed prevents her from coming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckerslike Posted December 28, 2012 Author Share Posted December 28, 2012 are you saying sports people shouldnt have to pay tax because they are special somehow? tax doesnt prevent her from competing here, greed prevents her from coming Why would anyone compete in Britain if it cost them more in tax than they get paid for competing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fivetide Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Greed is gold. [edit - in this specific, Usain Bolt related context] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Why would anyone compete in Britain if it cost them more in tax than they get paid for competing? Possibly because competing in a premier UK event is what maintains their prominence which enables them to get and keep their multi-million sponsorship deals. Once you are at that level, your individual race income would become secondary. A parallel could be a pop star/band losing money on specific gigs because that is what you have to do to maintain exposure - which sells your recordings - which is where you make your killing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epic Fail Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 It doesn't bother me where he races. I have TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckerslike Posted December 29, 2012 Author Share Posted December 29, 2012 Possibly because competing in a premier UK event is what maintains their prominence which enables them to get and keep their multi-million sponsorship deals. Once you are at that level, your individual race income would become secondary. A parallel could be a pop star/band losing money on specific gigs because that is what you have to do to maintain exposure - which sells your recordings - which is where you make your killing. Wouldn't the event cease to be a premier event if top athletes didn't attend? ---------- Post added 29-12-2012 at 01:15 ---------- It doesn't bother me where he races. I have TV. Sorted............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.