seagull wrote:

---

French Open list is out and Jodie has used her PR to get into main draw. Harriet is 11th alternate.

---

 Surprised she didn't keep it for the US Open (assuming she'll receive a WC for Wimbledon) and try her luck in the qualies instead given she'll be fortunate to get a R1 win in RG.

Lambda wrote:

---

dodrade wrote:

---

 

seagull wrote:

---

French Open list is out and Jodie has used her PR to get into main draw. Harriet is 11th alternate.

---

 Surprised she didn't keep it for the US Open (assuming she'll receive a WC for Wimbledon) and try her luck in the qualies instead given she'll be fortunate to get a R1 win in RG.

-- Edited by dodrade on Thursday 17th of April 2025 12:09:22 AM

---

 

Using it at the French is a no brainer IMO. Although I accept that she has a greater chance of a R1 win at the US, a R1 loss is still more likely than not. With nothing to defend and lots of low scoring counters, she'll be hoping to pick up a shed load of points in the grass season to put her back in the top 100. If she doesn't achieve that she should would be expecting to do enough to be seeded in USO qualy with a good chance of progressing to the main draw. If she doesn't qualify then she should have got more points and prize money than she would have done in French qualy. In short, taking it now gives her the best chance of maximising her expected return for prize money and ranking points over the 2 slams. (the US is also required to withhold 30% of prize money to non US/Canadian citizens for tax which might also factor into a decision)

---

 I agree with the analysis and was about to post the same - re the tax; does the player still pay their own tax in the UK on the 70 percent that isnt with held? Or can they claim the 30 percent back as an offset on their UK tax return and then pay just the balance in the UK (whether that is treated as corporation tax on their company or dividends paid to them, etc?) 

Witholding tax applies in the UK too (and France) - not just the US - and it can be more than 30%

"One of the key tax issues faced by non-UK resident athletes is withholding tax. This tax is deducted at source from prize money or performance fees earned in the UK and paid directly to HMRC. For example, if a non-resident tennis player wins £1 million at Wimbledon, they may have up to 45% of their prize money withheld for tax purposes."

A detailed description is here:

www.saffery.com/insights/articles/international-performers-and-uk-income-tax/

The double taxataion treaty is fine - as long as you come from a country that has one - I think we've suspended the double tax treaty with Russia and Belorussia, for instance.

But it only applies if you've got a tax bill big enough to cover it

For instance, if Jodie does really well in the US, earns £150k and is witheld £50k (approx), she can't 'claim it back' in the UK - she can only offset it against her tax bill in the UK. Which - if the rest of the year is skinny - might not be big enough to cover it. (You can roll it forward, though, for several years which helps but now you might have other witholding tax to offset too). 

ADD: No, the player doesn't pay tax in the UK on the 70%. They 'pay' tax on the 100% i.e. you're assessed for tax by HMRC on the pre-tax 100% of what you earn and then they take into account what tax you've paid elsewhere.

So if you've paid tax at 30% on £150k, say, in the US, you'll have 45% to pay in the UK, but they accept that 30% is already paid and you only owe 15%. So it makes no difference to Jodie if the 30% is witheld in the US (apart from on a cashflow basis - i.e. she's got less in her pocket for the time between getting the cheque and when her tax has to be paid in the UK)