Frans Steyn wil nie n “GELDJAGTER” genoem word nie.
”Ek is nie ’n kind nie.”
Só het Frans Steyn glo op die laaste krisisvergadering tussen hom en die Suid-Afrikaanse Rugbyunie (SARU) gesê voordat hy opgestaan, uitgeloop en die Springbok-groep vaarwel geroep het.
Dit was nadat meer as een vergadering tussen hom en SARU oor sy terugkeer uit Frankryk skipbreuk gely het.
SARU het aanvanklik in 2012 skriftelik ingestem om Steyn se kontrak met ’n Franse bemarkingsmaatskappy uit te koop sodat hy weer heeltyds vir Suid-Afrika beskikbaar kon wees. SARU het die paaiemente daarvoor stiptelik betaal – tot in Januarie 2013 toe betalings skielik eensydig gestaak is.
Sport24
Steyn het op 10 Junie vanjaar – in die week van die Bokke se eerste toets van die jaar in Durban teen Wallis – besluit om aan die span te onttrek. ’n Vergadering vroeër daardie week tussen hom en sy agent, Gerrie Swart, en SARU se regsverteenwoordiger, Frikkie Erasmus, het skeef geloop nadat ’n soortgelyke vergadering in Mei ook skipbreuk gely het.
Ingeligde bronne, wat oor eerstehandse inligting beskik, sê:
- SARU het in Januarie 2013 eensydig opgehou om die ooreengekome paaiemente aan die Franse bemarkingsmaatskappy te betaal. Die Franse het Steyn daarna met regsaksie gedreig;
- SARU het ná ’n voortslepende twis met Steyn besluit om ’n enkele groot bedrag in sy rekening te deponeer sodat hy dit regstreeks aan die Franse kon betaal;
- Steyn is nie geken in dié besluit nie en was weens belastingimplikasies ontevrede daaroor; en
- Steyn het ’n Springbok-kontrak tot en met aanstaande jaar se Wêreldbeker-rugbytoernooi van die hand gewys omdat dit onder meer geen verwysing na die terugbetalings aan die bemarkingsmaatskappy bevat het nie.
Andy Colquhoun, SARU se hoof van korporatiewe dienste, wou geen vrae oor hul twis met Steyn en die bewerings oor terugbetalingsreëlings beantwoord nie. Volgens hom is daar geen uitstaande kwessies tussen SARU en Steyn nie en was die vroeëre onenigheid “ ’n dispuut oor meganismes”.
“SARU is nie in die gewoonte om besonderhede van werknemers se dienskontrakte in die openbaar te ontleed nie.” Hy wou ook nie sê of SARU sedert Junie in verbinding met Steyn was nie.
Steyn is sedert die Haaie se nederlaag in die halfeindstryd van die Super Rugby-kompetisie onbereikbaar. Daar word verneem hy het tyd op sy ouerplaas in die Oos-Vrystaat deurgebring. Hy is ook besig om sy visum vir Japan, waar hy voortaan vir die span van Toshiba Brave Lupus gaan speel, te reël.
Volgens bronne na aan dié senter het dit vir hom nooit oor geld gegaan nie, maar oor die beginsel dat ooreenkomste eerbiedig moet word.
Hy is ook lugtig om as ’n geldjagter bestempel te word en is steeds gretig om vir sy land uit te draf.
Hy is egter glo weens dié gemors jammer hy het ingestem om na Suid-Afrika terug te keer.
Here might be more than meets the eye:
E.g., contracts that have a necessary consequence of avoiding taxation are illegal and thus not enforceable.
Why is Fransie not legally enforcing contractual due performance from SARU?
(As he said, he is not child … nor is he a man of straw – so go for it … or is there some impediment that we’re not told about?)
@ Angostura:
correction:
‘avoidance’ should read ‘evasion’
Can someone translate this?
😆
I know there’s probably more than meets the eye here, but if this is the situation, then it just proves YET AGAIN, what a bunch of fecked up cnuts there are running rugby in SA.
@ gunther:
At your service, here’s the Zumastan dictionary, Herr Gunther:
https://www.google.co.za/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=afrikaans%20zulu%20dictionary
😀
gunther wrote:
Rugby Kama Sutra: Position 37
How to screw a Springbok?
nortierd wrote:
Position nr. 48, for the Kiwi readers is “How to screw an All Black” and it’s simply called “The Peyper”
@ nortierd:
LOL – kak snaaks!
I explained this all some time ago in another article. SARU paid the money, but it is taable in Steyn’s hand locally, when it wouldn’t have been if he was in France.
Simple.
Ergo he gets 40% less effectively than he would.
Should read he gets effectively 40% less than he would.
9 @ Stormersboy:
10 @ Stormersboy:
So he is/was paid by SARU for services rendered/to be rendered, whether in cash or in kind (the buying out of the contract) – and that is taxable income in the RSA
Dis k@k of betaal
@ Stormersboy:
Korrec.
Image rights mean nothing to SARS.
His agent made the whoopsie.
Now if they had paid it to a holding company on the Isle of Man……..
😆
Isn’t the major issue that SARU just unilaterally decided to alter the manner/method of payment without informing Steyn or his agent? Or was his agent informed and didn’t convey the message?
gunther wrote:
Exactly. He should have come and chatted to you or me…
The devil is in the detail in this case.
Also, a lump sum payment may have slipped under the radar, but regular payments scream income and not capital disbursements.
Still, he has only shot himself in the foot, each time he doesn’t play for the boks he gets zero, the contract that is keeping him here is his Sharks contract not his Bok contract. Ask Bryan, Flo, Morne, Ruan…..
@ Stormersboy:
Indeed any Captain of Industry would have told him that.
I hope he hasn’t been taking financial advice from Heavens Game.
😆
GoBokkeAndIreland wrote:
Possibly. They started paying him directly. It’s difficult to say for sure without the full details. I suspect that SARU received legal advice (or a notice from SARS) that changed the payment method as a result.
I used to do quite a bit of this sort of work (structuring) back in the days before SARS released it’s anti-avoidance provisions and spoiled all the fun….
gunther wrote:
Haha you win the interweb today. 😀
The initial impression still holds: FS should have chosen a credible agent to run his contractual and payment affairs, by agreeing to a SARU contract to replace the highly lucrative one with Metro clearly showed a complete amateurism and naive conduct at the time
And he won’t receive any of the shortfall from Jurie Roux, rest assured 😆
@ Hondo: @ 20
LOL Hondo – Jurie will put his hand in his pocket, take it out and say “Here, have some of this FUCKALL!”
Must agree with your sentiment – it shows someone somewhere didn’t do their homework, or knows nothing.
@ Stormersboy:
17
Exactly pal.Demonised by all and sundry but who is the ratbag here.
Regards Rye
i am not sure if i understood the report correctly…….
saru bought out steyn’s contract and paid the french marketing company a monthly fee…..
then they suddenly decided to pay a lump sum directly to steyn (assume his sa account)…..
who then was meant to reimburse the french company?
this is the part i am not sure of.
was steyn benefiting from the payments to the french co?
if not, why suddenly pay the money to him?
if he was benefiting, one would assume that saru got advice that sars did not approve and would investigate.
it will be interesting to see how saru react – if they even bother.
this whole thing leaves piles of egg on a lot of r-t bloggers’ faces.
Charo wrote:
Only those who were talking k@k about Mr Steyn without all of the facts.
SARU don’t always seem to be the best when it comes to good corporate governance (OK they’re terrible!), so why would they worry about things like inadvertantly selling one of their employees down the financial shyte creek with the only oar being held by SARS?
Seems to me that SARS and SARU are only T apart.
Surely if Steyn makes himself unavailable his contract with SARU is now void.
22 @ Charo:
“this whole thing leaves piles of egg on a lot of r-t bloggers’ faces.”
Why? The issue some of the bloggers had was with him walking out on his team mates 4 days before a test match.
I for one still say good luck in Japan and make lots of yen, but if you don’t want to play for the Boks, don’t, we will cope without him.
We all know he really only rates Jake and is 100% loyal to him only, otherwise he wouldn’t have pitched up fat and out of shape for Plum last year. He lost weight and got fit for Jake. He walked out on HM, he made it clear he had no interest in playing for Divvie.
I have no issues if he plays in Japan and for the Sharks. I would still prefer not to see him play for the Boks again.
On a line through another Mess (which might be apposite … or not): Messi & his Image Rights Mess
Perhaps SARU decided discretion is the better part of valour?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24292849
http://news.yahoo.com/tax-fraud-case-against-lionel-messi-goes-ahead-141828006.html
To reiterate, is Frans going to sue SARU?
If not, why not?
The taxation of image rights: A comparative analysis
http://www.dejure.up.ac.za/index.php/volumes/45-vol-3-2012/18-volumes/45-volume-3-2012/115-article-6
Charo wrote:
The “French Company” that holds the image rights is effectively Frans Steyn. It’s an old trick used in sports and entertainment circles to try and reclassify large parts of earnings as Capital receipts rather than Income receipts, the tax treatment of which is different.
Frans received the money either way, but the tax treatment would have been different. Also the second method of payment would have the money paid in SA as apposed to France (not Frans lol) and so there is also an exchange control implication.
Neither party is covering themselves in glory here IMO.
I doubt that SARU will try something like this again (accomodate a player this way).
I think that SARU realised that they were possibly a party to an anti-avoidance scheme and so changed the deal once they had recieved legal advice on the matter.
Than again, maybe this is all just one big mis-understanding. 😉
@ Stormersboy:
My I suggest a Comission into these shenanigans ?
Seeing as the Arms Deal Enquiry has been so successful?
gunther wrote:
Why does he have to honour his part of the contract while the other party does not, even before the “four days before a test match” arguement.
Especially since there has been a dispute for a year and a half.
Users Online
Total 197 users including 0 member, 197 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,791,887 Page Impressions
_