| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's 14:01 - Jan 22 with 7016 views | Bacon |
Living in Newcastle and not having a very good knowledge of FFP. I have a question, which I hope I can get an answer too.
What is to stop Newcastle selling a player (Like Migel Almiron) to one of the clubs in Saudi under the same ownership for an inflated amount that eases Newcastle's FFP worries.
I think this is similar to what I have read Forest do, but never really understood. |  | | |  |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 14:02 - Jan 22 with 7008 views | Northernr |
Nothing at all. It's what Watford do all the time. |  | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 14:04 - Jan 22 with 6989 views | Bluce_Ree |
I'm not sure about the intricacies of FFP but I think the rules are this;
Are you QPR: if yes, proceed directly to F**KED, otherwise crack on. |  |
| Stefan Moore, Stefan Moore running down the wing. Stefan Moore, Stefan Moore running down the wing. He runs like a cheetah, his crosses couldn't be sweeter. Stefan Moore. Stefan Moore. Stefan Moore. |
| |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 14:07 - Jan 22 with 6969 views | Bacon |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 14:02 - Jan 22 by Northernr |
Nothing at all. It's what Watford do all the time. |
Cheers Clive - Am amazed such a simple loop hole exists still! | | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 15:42 - Jan 22 with 6783 views | Jeff |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 14:07 - Jan 22 by Bacon |
Cheers Clive - Am amazed such a simple loop hole exists still! |
which begs the question, why don't we sell Taylor Richards to LAFC for £15million and sort ourselves out, and Taylor gets to play out the rest of his days in LA... |  |
| |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 15:48 - Jan 22 with 6715 views | TheChef |
Is your first name Biffa?
Favourite cheese? |  |
| |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 15:59 - Jan 22 with 6661 views | PBLOCK |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 14:02 - Jan 22 by Northernr |
Nothing at all. It's what Watford do all the time. |
Forest are the other one but with them facing FFP now maybe the loophole will close
Everyone has known Forest and Watford have been fiddling it for years
Hopefully chickens coming home to roost [Post edited 22 Jan 16:25]
| | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 16:33 - Jan 22 with 6557 views | terryb |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 14:07 - Jan 22 by Bacon |
Cheers Clive - Am amazed such a simple loop hole exists still! |
Premier League clubs voted to still allow this earlier this season. I think it needed 2/3rds of the clubs to vote in favour of banning it & failed by one vote.
The problem is that too many clubs rely on it to survive. | | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 16:34 - Jan 22 with 6553 views | aston_hoop |
Taylor Richards off to LAFC for 5 million quid....right Ruben? You know it makes sense [Post edited 22 Jan 16:34]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 16:53 - Jan 22 with 6469 views | Juzzie |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 16:33 - Jan 22 by terryb |
Premier League clubs voted to still allow this earlier this season. I think it needed 2/3rds of the clubs to vote in favour of banning it & failed by one vote.
The problem is that too many clubs rely on it to survive. |
I know that sponsorship deals now have to be in the expected marketplace ballpark figure, to close the loophole to stop the likes of Man City (them, again) and PSG sponsoring the broom cupboard for £100m a year but how do you do this for a player? Valuations are almost impossible to pin an exact figure on.
I guess it's obvious that any Forest or Watford or Newcastle player is not worth £100m but all they need to do is sell a few players for maybe 5-10% more than expected amount and that 5-10% could be enough to keep them just on FFP limits. |  | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 16:59 - Jan 22 with 6442 views | slmrstid |
I'd actually be interested to know if HMRC are taking an interest in some of these transfers. None of us are ever likely to know unless something goes to tribunal and hits the press, but in theory there are laws against companies in groups transferring cash from one entity to another for inflated values.
Its not something I have dealt with for years so not going to go into detail on scratchy memory and get it wrong - but in essence if Group A owns Companies B and C, then any transactions between B & C need to be conducted as if they were at arms length (ie unrelated). They wouldn't be able to over-inflate something without coming under HMRC's watchful eye. This is in essence to try and stop tax evasion or UK taxable profits being funnelled off overseas to non-UK countries, something Amazon do but in a way they can justify it to HMRC under transfer pricing laws.
I believe this is part of what Manchester City's financial charges relate to, though could be wrong.
Clubs in Serie A were once upon a time transferring players between themselves for over-inflated values so they had accounting asset values that matched requirements for them to play in the league, a house of cards that eventually came tumbling down. |  | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 19:44 - Jan 22 with 6188 views | dezzar |
Imagine having to fiddle the books and still be as shit as watford or saudia arabia fc . | | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 20:26 - Jan 22 with 6128 views | loftupper |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 16:59 - Jan 22 by slmrstid |
I'd actually be interested to know if HMRC are taking an interest in some of these transfers. None of us are ever likely to know unless something goes to tribunal and hits the press, but in theory there are laws against companies in groups transferring cash from one entity to another for inflated values.
Its not something I have dealt with for years so not going to go into detail on scratchy memory and get it wrong - but in essence if Group A owns Companies B and C, then any transactions between B & C need to be conducted as if they were at arms length (ie unrelated). They wouldn't be able to over-inflate something without coming under HMRC's watchful eye. This is in essence to try and stop tax evasion or UK taxable profits being funnelled off overseas to non-UK countries, something Amazon do but in a way they can justify it to HMRC under transfer pricing laws.
I believe this is part of what Manchester City's financial charges relate to, though could be wrong.
Clubs in Serie A were once upon a time transferring players between themselves for over-inflated values so they had accounting asset values that matched requirements for them to play in the league, a house of cards that eventually came tumbling down. |
Surely if they pay the Tax on the inflated amount then HMRC will be ok? | | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 01:05 - Jan 23 with 5833 views | johncharles |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 20:26 - Jan 22 by loftupper |
Surely if they pay the Tax on the inflated amount then HMRC will be ok? |
The more inflated the prices being paid the more tax HMRC collects so maybe they’re not too bothered ? |  |
| Strong and stable my arse. |
| |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 01:26 - Jan 23 with 5819 views | LazyFan |
We cannot sell Richards; you can only sell players, and he never plays; he just warms a shirt once every four months or so.
Even if we could sell him, he would then want an 8-year deal as he knows everyone else knows he's not going to play. Even a dodgy deal cannot sanction that. And remember in LA people have guns and dogs and all that scary stuff for people who are fragile this won't do.
Meanwhile, Cook and even glassman JCS are hobbling off the slab to pull on a shirt and do a shift. |  |
| |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 07:16 - Jan 23 with 5648 views | johnhoop |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 01:26 - Jan 23 by LazyFan |
We cannot sell Richards; you can only sell players, and he never plays; he just warms a shirt once every four months or so.
Even if we could sell him, he would then want an 8-year deal as he knows everyone else knows he's not going to play. Even a dodgy deal cannot sanction that. And remember in LA people have guns and dogs and all that scary stuff for people who are fragile this won't do.
Meanwhile, Cook and even glassman JCS are hobbling off the slab to pull on a shirt and do a shift. |
The fact that we are obliged to continue to pay the wages of this waster, wages that could possibly if used otherwise allow us to get in a loan player who would positively impact our chances of survival, is becoming a real annoyance in a situation where we’re obviously throwing everything disposable overboard to stay inside the invidious FFP limits. | | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 07:58 - Jan 23 with 5557 views | cpgerber |
Surely in our best interest to just pay off Richard's contract and let him go? How many years still and what sort of pay would he be on? |  | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 08:42 - Jan 23 with 5453 views | slmrstid |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 01:05 - Jan 23 by johncharles |
The more inflated the prices being paid the more tax HMRC collects so maybe they’re not too bothered ? |
Not really as in essence it is done to reduce tax payable to HMRC.
Even an inflated transfer is being done so a club's losses are below the allowable loss limit - still not generating any actual tax for HMRC.
I'm always fascinated to know if football transfers would count as a taxable transaction for VAT, but given its to a non-UK club it would be zero-rated anyway, so still no tax for HMRC. | | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 09:00 - Jan 23 with 5420 views | Esox_Lucius |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 07:58 - Jan 23 by cpgerber |
Surely in our best interest to just pay off Richard's contract and let him go? How many years still and what sort of pay would he be on? |
I doubt we have the leeway to pay him off the way things stand atm. |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 09:13 - Jan 23 with 5394 views | daveB |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 07:58 - Jan 23 by cpgerber |
Surely in our best interest to just pay off Richard's contract and let him go? How many years still and what sort of pay would he be on? |
It would be good to get him a loan this month and hope the penny drops, doesn't look like it will though |  | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 10:02 - Jan 23 with 5305 views | cpgerber |
Apart from the financial loss, having Richards around leaves a bitter taste in the mouth and I could imagine a bit of negativity around the squad. Would most certainly piss me off having such a guy around me at the club if I was a player. | | | |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfers on 19:48 - Jan 23 with 5023 views | Irish_Hoop |
| Serious question on FFP - Player transfer's on 08:42 - Jan 23 by slmrstid |
Not really as in essence it is done to reduce tax payable to HMRC.
Even an inflated transfer is being done so a club's losses are below the allowable loss limit - still not generating any actual tax for HMRC.
I'm always fascinated to know if football transfers would count as a taxable transaction for VAT, but given its to a non-UK club it would be zero-rated anyway, so still no tax for HMRC. |
Tax authorities only care about transactions between related parties in relation to the company that is either paying too much or not receiving enough - so they are reducing their taxable profits. As another posted correctly pointed out, if on the other side of the deal the company is paying too much tax (because profits have been inflated), then it is not their concern. Generally this is only a concern where there is a cross border transaction.
I’ve not worked on a football transfer since Tony Cottee left West Ham for Everton but I do recall that it was subject to VAT.😄 [Post edited 23 Jan 19:49]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
