WiganWarriorsFans.com

cpwigan wrote:

Kittwazzer wrote:

cpwigan wrote:He can if he does so illegally (illegally as in breaching the RFL regulations) Under the cap how much money a club owner has is immaterial other than pay transfer fees.

Would it be illegal though? Surely the Salary Cap rules can only dictate what a CLUB spends on wages. Noone can dictate to a private individual what he does with his own money!!

No you are not even allowed to give money to players for other items/uses without declaring it, employing players wives etc. Even 3rd party sponsorship is governed by strict rules.

Strikes me Warrington just stick 2 fingers up at the RFL. I guess Whelan / Lindsay should have done the same rather than trying to argue they were acting within the rules.

So it must be a brown envelope jobe then!

cpwigan wrote:A worry for me is that the England Coach being a club coach is having an undue influence on players inducing them to leave their clubs for Wire.

Myler doesn't need to play for Wire to enhance his chances I wouldn't have thought. And Solomona and Fui Fui Moi Moi??

It helps KW. Myler and Atkins new England internationals.

It will all end in tears.

Probably mine!!

cp - you mentioned briers on a massive wage - i doubt it, he renegotiated this year didn't he - i doubt he would be on a lot now, they were debating whether to release him or not.

While we are on about the wage bill at Warrington, let`s not forget Mickey Higham, who we are told was discarded by Wigan because he was on a reputed salary of £120,000. Now either he signed for the Wolves for less, which I would doubt very much, or he must be included in the high earners at the `Bank Of Halliwell Jones` There was an old saying along the lines of; "There`s something stinks in the State of Denmark"
I feel that there is a pungent aroma down the Winwick Road area.

Do you think so Mike. Remember how scarce halfbacks are no matter what their age. Longy got a great deal at Hull and he is 30+ Briers could have got very good money thrown at him elsewhere.

Myler is on a fantastic contract. Sam T will be on less in the final year of his new contract than Myler will be on next year.

I have a hard time thinking Wire can have so many established players and be under the cap. Leeds and Saints have both had to release players as they age. We are similar but Wire seem to buck the trend of every other club in SL.

In answer to the question "are they staying within the salary cap?" the answer is yes.
This is now a live system whereby the RFL check the validity of a signing under the cap before it is approved.
The wealth of an owner is only valid up to the limit of the cap (£1.6 million I think). No matter how much money he has in the bank above this he can only spend up to this limit on salaries.
The overseas loop tax loophole has not been closed, but is under scrutiny. The way this works is that players are payed part of their wage as "Image Rights" which is a tax free method of payment. When an overseas player is signed, a percentage of his wage can be paid, tax free, into his account in Australia, NZ, or wherever. This means that the club can pay a large chunk of the cap Net (tax Free) instead of gross (including tax) meaning more of the limit goes directly into the players pocket.
What is being scrutinised at the moment is what percentage of the salary it is acceptable to pay in this way. More importantly, and this is where Warrington may drop through a trapdoor, is if a BRITISH player has money paid into an overseas account, thus avoiding UK tax laws.

Shaun1967 wrote:The overseas loop tax loophole has not been closed, but is under scrutiny. The way this works is that players are payed part of their wage as "Image Rights" which is a tax free method of payment.

I don't think image rights are tax free. The tax free status of payments to players comes into play if they are paid into an offshore employee benefit trust. It could be anything paid to the player, not just image right.

Also a players salary cap value is calculated on the gross payments made to the player including image rights not payments net of tax. See section 5.1 of the RFL operational rules http://www.therfl.co.uk/~therflc/client ... on%20E.pdf which specifically mentions image rights as being included.

Here is the text:

5.1 The “Salary Cap Value” of a Player is the total sum of the Gross payments and other benefits that are paid or payable by a Club or Accrue (or are deemed to Accrue, in accordance with this Clause 5) to the Player in the relevant Salary Cap Year, whether pursuant to a Playing Contract or other arrangement (verbal or otherwise), in consideration for or otherwise on account of the Player’s provision of playing (or related) services to the Club in that Salary Cap Year.

Comment to Clause 5.1: By way of example only (and without limitation), a Player’s grant to his Club of the right to use his name or image or other attributes for commercial and/or promotional purposes is a service ‘related’ to the playing services he provides to the Club and any payments made by the Club to the Player in consideration of the same must therefore be treated as part of the Salary Cap Value of that Player.

When an overseas player is signed, a percentage of his wage can be paid, tax free, into his account in Australia, NZ, or wherever. This means that the club can pay a large chunk of the cap Net (tax Free) instead of gross (including tax) meaning more of the limit goes directly into the players pocket.
What is being scrutinised at the moment is what percentage of the salary it is acceptable to pay in this way. More importantly, and this is where Warrington may drop through a trapdoor, is if a BRITISH player has money paid into an overseas account, thus avoiding UK tax laws.

The unclear area as regards tax relates to employee benefit trusts. Payments into them are captured for salary cap purposes i.e. the gross amount paid into them counts on the cap but they are tax efficient for the player but only overseas players.

Some clubs, Wigan being one, did not think this was legal under our tax laws. Some clubs did having taken advice off tax lawyers - I got this information directly from the RFL by he way quite some time ago. The first high profile case involving this was Arsenal who got stung for unpaid taxes as the Inland Revenue decided these payments were liable to tax. £11m tax bill in fact.

What the chap at the RFL also told me was offshore E.B.T's could only be used as a tax efficient vehicle for overseas players not UK ones. That is there was no way payments made to UK players into an overseas account were not taxable. If Wire have done that they made a big mistake because even the RFL know E.B.T's only worked tax-wise for overseas players.

Dave

I'm too inclined to think Wire are cheating the cap.

The quality they are accumulating just doesn't add up. I'm not sour graping our own players, but it just makes no fiscal sense.

I've mentioned it previously, but I know Paul Wood is currently on a contract of 120K. So that tells you the market worth of a decent bench prop within the Wire camp. Taking all the other quality they have and accomodating Matt Kings stupid inflated deal, just doesn't stack up. The stated point of the cap is to promote a level playing playing field and if this were the case, you'd see an even distribution of talent across the clubs. Why then are Wire bucking this trend??

I doubt we're seeing subtle interpretations of the cap or tax law here. I'd guess the owner is paying players from his own company for 'consultation services' or some other puppet front. Totally separate from the RFL and nothing they can do about it>