rammieib Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Having checked up, the Spanish Tax Year is the calendar year (i.e. Jan 1st to Dec 31st). If you spend more than 183 days resident in span, you have to pay tax there. So in theory, if he moved back to Spain in the summer, he could end up with a huge tax bill. So interesting point, Herrera moved to Man Utd in August so he won't have spent six months in the UK for the financial year. So how did he get around paying 27% of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 We offered him a new contract and he signed that instead. Albentosa has already turned down offers for a new deal. They'll lose him for free in the summer so it seems they're willing to do that rather than take Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernow Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I'm talking about all the bleating from Burnley, where they supposedly met a buyout clause and Derby rejected the bid. From the original news breaking to Bryson signing a new deal at Derby was the best part of a month. I was under the assumption you can't 'reject' bids if they meet the clause in the contract. Not legally. We could've accepted the Bryson bid then offered him a more lucrative deal but that's it. With this case it's the issue of Spanish rules meaning Albentosa has to pay off his own deal, so to meet his clause we'd have to pay more than the value of the clause itself. Eibar could take the amount of the buy-out clause as a "bid" if they want, but they clearly don't want to sell so aren't permitted to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Pre-season usually starts late June doesn't it? Lets say he has 7 weeks off between the end of this season and the start of pre-season and goes to Spain for the entire time. Add that to the time he's currently spent their this year, let's say that's 3 weeks to be on the generous side, that takes his time in Spain for 2015 to 10 weeks. 10 x 7 = 70 which is nowhere near the 183 days tax condition so he'd be fine. I meant a permanent transfer, if things didn't work out here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernow Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I meant a permanent transfer, if things didn't work out here. I'm sure there would be ways around it. He could be sold in the summer window back to Spain and still not have spent 6 months in Spain this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I'm talking about all the bleating from Burnley, where they supposedly met a buyout clause and Derby rejected the bid. From the original news breaking to Bryson signing a new deal at Derby was the best part of a month. there are different types of buyout clause - if a bid is made above a certain amount, one type allows the player to leave for that amount, the other gives the player the opportunity to talk to another club, but does not necessarily mean that he will be sold for that amount - I think Suarez had a a clause along the lines of the 2nd type when Aresnal were interested in him - they bid above the amount (think it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So interesting point, Herrera moved to Man Utd in August so he won't have spent six months in the UK for the financial year. So how did he get around paying 27% of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernow Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 there are different types of buyout clause - if a bid is made above a certain amount, one type allows the player to leave for that amount, the other gives the player the opportunity to talk to another club, but does not necessarily mean that he will be sold for that amount - I think Suarez had a a clause along the lines of the 2nd type when Aresnal were interested in him - they bid above the amount (think it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammieib Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Sage - forgot that a transfer fee will carry VAT on top of it. As our income is less than our outcome, we won't be able to offset this bill and thus paying a transfer fee is a lot more expensive than the player buying it out. Reading various contradictions on the Herrera case about the player paying tax now. However any money the club gives him is always taxable hence a viscous circle where the player is always paying more tax on any additional money given to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I was under the assumption you can't 'reject' bids if they meet the clause in the contract. Not legally. We could've accepted the Bryson bid then offered him a more lucrative deal but that's it. With this case it's the issue of Spanish rules meaning Albentosa has to pay off his own deal, so to meet his clause we'd have to pay more than the value of the clause itself. Eibar could take the amount of the buy-out clause as a "bid" if they want, but they clearly don't want to sell so aren't permitted to do so. I'm only stating the way in which it was actually being reported at the time - and you are just making a whole heap of assumptions with no evidence one way or the other whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahjames08 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 He looks a quality player, so I am sure the boys Rush and the team are doing the best they can with the right legal team. He will join a club that is almost packed every home game, great facilities and coaching staff. So fingers crossed.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete2 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So interesting point, Herrera moved to Man Utd in August so he won't have spent six months in the UK for the financial year. So how did he get around paying 27% of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernow Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I'm only stating the way in which it was actually being reported at the time - and you are just making a whole heap of assumptions with no evidence one way or the other whatsoever. I don't see how I am? I just think the point of a buy-out clause is it gives a set value that must be accepted by the selling club. We could offer him a new contract to cancel out that clause, but Burnley would also be able to offer him a contract. As already mentioned, Spain have unusual rules which means that we'd have to pay more to Albentosa than the buy-out clause is worth in order for Eibar to receive the sum of the buyout clause. So unless we pay an amount that has tax considerations included then they are in no position to allow him to leave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammieib Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Couldn't the club lend him the money? No tax to pay on a loan. Then he makes repayments out of his salary. Pistol - good point. Rereading the article on Herrera's salary, it does look like this was how it was done as he went from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Pistol - good point. Rereading the article on Herrera's salary, it does look like this was how it was done as he went from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramit Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Feel dizzy just reading all this, will leave it to you folks with heads for figures and details El Bucko, i do like the sound of that though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammieib Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I take it your no accountant? Im not and am guessing, but anything over 5k (i believe) loan is taxable in this country. In addition, he would need around 40% more back to cover the loan in his wage packet as he would be paying tax on his additional salary. Im sure that the deal is a lot more complicated than lending him the money, there are bound to be tax implications all over this deal by the sounds of it. No I'm not (I stick to procurement) but I'm guessing you are not either as the Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Right... I'm really quite fed up of this now... Why don't we just have a whip round, chuck in a tenner each at the game on Saturday and pay Eibar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eustonstation Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Pistol - good point. Rereading the article on Herrera's salary, it does look like this was how it was done as he went from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't see how I am? I just think the point of a buy-out clause is it gives a set value that must be accepted by the selling club. We could offer him a new contract to cancel out that clause, but Burnley would also be able to offer him a contract. As already mentioned, Spain have unusual rules which means that we'd have to pay more to Albentosa than the buy-out clause is worth in order for Eibar to receive the sum of the buyout clause. So unless we pay an amount that has tax considerations included then they are in no position to allow him to leave This bit looks rather assumptiony to me... Eibar could take the amount of the buy-out clause as a "bid" if they want, but they clearly don't want to sell so aren't permitted to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.