Kyle Edmund

indiana · Tennis legend

Kyle Edmund

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

I agree with Oakland that he contributes more to British tennis than he has gotten out of the system, so I haven't got an issue with that point. However I do think that if kyle had been in the (lack of) Bahamas system, he wouldn't be where he is now, so I don't like his lack of gratefulness and loyalty to the people who 'made' him.

Spectator's point of everyone pulling out of paying taxes is good, but Kyle will still have to pay tax when he comes to the UK, and so will give back proportionally for the time he uses the services in the country. I have a bigger issue with the people who generally haven't worked or paid taxes and are getting free everything (housing, food and watered etc) from my taxes, Kyle's taxes and the rest of us that have got off our butts so we pay tax. (And before someone takes a pop, I don't mean the ones who genuinely can't due to disability e.g.)

the addict · Tennis legend

I have no issues with Kyle having residency outside the UK. After all, ten of the world's top twenty reside in other countries according to the ATP website - seven of them in Monte Carlo.

skibbarriz · Strong Club Player

It's a pretty unremarkable move for the world of pro tennis. Good old straightforward, honest Kyle is showing another side to his character which challenges the idea of who he is. It's clear he simply hasn't built up a big enough stock of goodwill towards him to pull this move off without causing a stir.

If Jay Clarke said right now he was moving to such a tax location, would those who were upset by Kyle's move feel the same way?

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

skibbarriz wrote:
It's a pretty unremarkable move for the world of pro tennis. Good old straightforward, honest Kyle is showing another side to his character which challenges the idea of who he is. It's clear he simply hasn't built up a big enough stock of goodwill towards him to pull this move off without causing a stir.

If Jay Clarke said right now he was moving to such a tax location, would those who were upset by Kyle's move feel the same way?

Of course. Why on earth not?

Oakland2002 · All-time great

I dont think it is a fair comparison, Jay is very much in development and needs support to get to the point where he is a self sustaining bussiness.

When hes at a point where he is capable of being financial independent with a set up that facilitates further improvement ie top 50 and turning 23. Absolutely if he doesnt want to be resident in the U.K. because the tax implications of a career where most of your money is earnt in ones youth and around the world that is absolutely fine by me. The British Tennis industry still benefits enormously.

Spectator · All-time great

I don't follow the question comparing one player with another: it's not about personality, it's about principle.

In terms of the top 20, I make it twelve living in either their own country or that of their spouse. AM lives in the UK. All the Spaniards (Nadal, Carreno Busta, Bautista Agut) live in Spain. The Americans (Querrey, Isner and Sock) live in the US. Kevin Anderson also lives in the US, but there are good reasons: his wife is American, he went to university in the US, he trains in the US and it is genuinely his residence for personal reasons. Federer and Wawrinka live in Switzerland, but it's their home. Dominic Thiem lives in Austria. JMDP lives in Argentina.

Of the remaining eight, who do live in different countries, all of which are 'low-tax jurisdictions', two are French (Tsonga and Pouille); two from the former Yugoslavia (Djokovic and Cilic ), two are from Eastern Europe (Dimitrov and Berdych), Goffin from Belgium, and Zverev from Germany. One is resident in the UAE (Pouille), six in Monaco, and one (Tsonga) in Switzerland.

There is an Italian article on Mr Edmund's switch: www.ubitennis.com/blog/2017/12/09/anche-kyle-edmund-cede-al-paradiso-fiscale/ which is actually quite interesting. It doesn't mince words about the practice of migrating for tax reasons (and applauds Mr Murray - 'a romantic', Ms Halep and Mr Nadal for staying true to their roots), but it has some interesting details - not least about why so many US tennis players live in Florida.

One can, of course, also see good reasons why some players would choose to live in other countries: in cases where conflict, large-scale corruption, excessive government control of athletes, etc are issues, it's a matter of safety and security.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

The Americans (and Anderson) mentioned are all optimising their tax positions Sam Query is a Californian (who would want to pay Californian state taxes if you didn't live and work their?) living in Las Vegas, Anderson and Isner live in the similarly tax efficient Florida the 5th and 4th most tax efficient states in the US. Only states with nobody in are cheaper! Wyoming, Alaska, South Dakota. Jack Sock lives in Kansas (Katie swan may be resident there too?) where the republicans slashed taxes in 2013 for small businesses, I think it may be 0% from about 6!

One could argue that Anderson is the least Patriotic of all with the opportunity to give most back to his country and has chosen to do less, or as is more reasonable, a pragmatist intent on bringing up his family in a safe environment, regardless he has chosen to do so in a very tax efficient way. Rafa is famous for his shell companies in the basque region of Spain to mitigate his income tax liabilities.

Federer and Warinka can afford to be Patriots. Let's face it almost all players have dedicated the vast majority of their lives trotting the globe focusing on their tennis and are relatively itinerant often from their mid teens, it is not a given they will succeed indeed the risk reward ratio make it a massive gamble.

They employ financial advisors to make sure they hang on to as much of the money they earn as they can, to be honest I am hoping for a whole DC team of tax exiles in a couple of years time, it is great that Kyle is in a position where there is any debate at all. Looking forward to going there with Jay, Cam, George, Jack etc.... and the sooner the better!

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Sunday 10th of December 2017 06:34:48 AM

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Sunday 10th of December 2017 06:36:09 AM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

It is not a given that anyone will succeed, tennis player or not. It is not a given that anyone who earns 45k a year will make as much as the top tennis players (obviously). But they pay their tax.
I'm with Spectator and others. It's obvious that people arrange their affairs to legally pay less tax - indeed, the government markets specific instruments via which to do so.
But when a player decides to deliberately change residency purely to avoid paying tax in his/her own country, and where the tax rate is perfectly reasonable (we're not talking days of 90% here), it leaves an unpleasant taste.

indiana · Tennis legend

I don't think that "they do that as well" is ever a great argument, when the "that" is very questionable. So yes other players, understandably or not, may do similarly, to differing degrees, and very many do not ( sometimes admittedly more due to practicalities than principle ). But it is at least very arguable that all who do similar are in the wrong ( and understandably we as a British tennis forum are focussing on Kyle ). Understandable by Kyle yes, but whatever some other players do or indeed what some of us would do, still can be argued as very questionable or indeed plain wrong. Unless you consider always looking after #1, to the detriment of others, is right. Structure and society rather relies on many not following that path though.

Re his tennis, after a rather stand still season in terms of very similar overall results, range of players beaten and lost to, and end ranking, 2018 will be a very importent year to push forward and if there have indeed been still improvements taking place in his game ( which I can see in some areas ) to turn these into better results.

I like Oakland's 'suboptimal' word, and while reading again his original use, I think that I may have misinterpreted what he himself meant, personally I do have some concerns that all this ( with some practical restraints and some clearly unwanted negative publicity if that effects him ) is suboptimal to him pushing on and being all he can be in his tennis. Probably not a huge factor, but probably not helpful either,

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Strikes me as being pretty honest, it's a two way street, he pays tax on any earnings in the UK but to avoid paying tax on money he earns around the world he gives up the right to work here for more than 30 a days a year. If he was working in the U.K. I would have a big issue, if his business was earning money in the U.K. I would also have a big issue and indeed believe should his image rights generate enormous revenue in the U.K. That should also be taxed at source. One of the things that is great about being British is the civil liberties afforded its citizens, freedom of movement being one.

The world is made up of lots of different people with very different values systems and arguably what is seen as a negative in one individual by another may actually be one of their strengths at work.

The Murray's moral compass and values are looking from the outside in pretty impressive, I like them; not being too fiscally driven I agree and comply with their social sensibility. However being fiscally driven is what gets a significant proportion of people up to go to work (hard), tax law is pretty clear and Kyle now only gets to drive on British roads while working here for 30 days a year, pays all his own healthcare, gets no state pension etc....he may also not get the love and respect Andy will get when he hangs up his racket ... but still gives the British Taxman a large slice of any pie he earns here.

Perhaps any fiscal aid made by British Tennis should be fully repayable should a player choose to reside outside the UK for tax purposes when successful. A significant clutch of our present British tennis elite are eligible to play for other nations but choose Britain as the nation they want to represent because of the support it offers in development when costs are high and prize money low. Would the British flag be quite so popular? I don't think so. To be successful we have to be pragmatic and the price of pragmatism is the odd sour taste but then I, being partial to sherbet lemons, don't see that as a price at all.

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Sunday 10th of December 2017 11:59:35 AM

the addict · Tennis legend

Good posts Spectator and Oakland.

BTW the ATP lists Warwrinka as residing in Monte Carlo

Tennis Nut · Social player

Just to help everybody understand Kyle's move to a warm tennis base you probably need to understand that firstly he was approached by Mark Knowles who lives in the Bahamas and along with his mother Vicky Knowles (tennis coach of many years) and Lleyton Hewitt have an interest in a brand new tennis academy in Albany. It opened in September and they have attracted a few players like Kyle, Shapovalov, Raionic and others to use the academy as a base for the future. Attracting pros help attract youngsters. Kyle has been considering a warm base for some time and this is well setup for exactly that.

The way tennis players are taxed are not in any way comparative to say Lewis Hamilton or Chris Froome who live in Monte Carlo. Racing car drivers and cyclists work for a team and as such the team get invoiced for services by the drivers. Where ever those drivers reside they will pay the appropriate amount of tax. So if you live in MC then very little. Tennis players on the other hand are taxed in the country where they perform the services. In every single country, apart from Dubai and UAE, tennis players are subject to withholding tax at approximately 30% before the money is paid to the player. In addition countries like the US and UK tax a proportion of a player's sponsorship income relative to the tournament winnings. So for example as more than 30% of the tournaments (points basis) are played in the US, the US demands 30% of the tax of the non-tennis income. The UK does the same thing to foreign players and this is why Nadal didn't play Queens for a few years.

Let's be real clear that living in a low tax jurisidiction does not stop the UK and US taxes on tournament winnings and a proportion of sponsorship income. I note the example of Federer being raised on this forum. The Swiss tax authorities have powers to negotiate with taxpayers and Roger will have a negotiated tax agreement in place in order to keep him in the country. Bedene was also mentioned in this discussion but what you need to know is he will be taxed as a foreign player probably which is very attractive. The state of Florida has zero state personal tax hence the gathering of tennis players.

Of course the tax rates in the Bahamas are attractive but lets be really clear the tax rates only have a small effect as 30% tax is already paid to the many countries around the world. Unfortunately for sports men and women there is no tax allowance for the risk in their profession in the UK. What I mean is businesses have tax incentives for taking risk in business and our city of London is full of hedge funds and money men who have huge tax incentives and even more so if you are a foreigner in the UK. Most of these large profit gains are taxed as capital for taking risk. Sports people earnings are taxed as salaries which can stop any day due to injury.

People are quick to judge but have very little understanding.

steven · Tennis legend

I was already aware that tournament earnings (indeed, prize money without any allowance for expenses, as far as I know) tend to get taxed mainly in the countries where the tournaments take place but thanks for that taste of quite how complex it is. It must be a nightmare keeping track, though of course those players who do really well can afford to employ an accountant to do that.

Re. the US players - US tax rules are such that citizens/permanent residents can't avoid paying US federal tax on worldwide income without giving up their citizenship or green card, though presumably they too can deduct withholding taxes paid in most cases.

indiana · Tennis legend

Thanks very much Tennis Nut for adding so much more detail. Much more relevant, at least to me, than say others do it.

Most of us are inevitably often lacking quite a bit of the picture on issues, but we are in a tennis forum to talk about tennis direct and indirect issues so I think it is inevitable that quite often comments lack these bits of the picture. More will often emerge, very often from someone contributing their knowledge to a thread. And in the end, we keep an active forum on matters other than just say results and rankings and are generally all better informed, even if occasionally probably not.

And my earlier "Clearly it's not to do with Bahamas tennis facilities ..." is clearly wrong ( I'd already subsequently wondered about that given particularly it's location ) and is apparently a big factor.

-- Edited by indiana on Monday 11th of December 2017 05:48:35 AM