Beckham's PSG switch less than taxing
Paris Saint-Germain's David Beckham at the centre of a political row as French MPs argue over his tax status
David Beckham’s move to Paris Saint-Germain last week has been widely debated.
Questions have been asked as to whether Beckham can still genuinely perform on the pitch at that level, or if the whole thing is a publicity masterstroke by PSG to increase the profile of the club both on and off the pitch.
Genuine move or not ‘Golden Balls’ managed to show his class by announcing that he will be giving his rumoured £170,000-a-week salary to a children’s charity in Paris, a smooth move by the man capped by England 108 times.
The move has caused uproar in French parliament, with senior MPs seething at the move which sees Beckham avoid the impending 75 per cent taxation rate for top earners and a three per cent surcharge on annual incomes above £450,000.
He will take home the footballer’s union minimum wage so that PSG can pay national insurance to the government, but that amounts to less than £2,000-per-week.
With his contract only being for five months and wife Victoria and the children remaining in England - thus allowing Beckham to claim his home in the UK as his main residence - he will also avoid a possible higher band of income tax only payable by people living in France for six months or more of the calendar year.
Politicians are at loggerheads over the move with conservative MP Gerald Darmanin stating: "He will be paid less than my parliamentary assistant!
"Be serious! It's necessary to convince the Sports Minister to stop this deadly tax process. I'd rather receive 50 per cent of a lot than 75 per cent of nothing!"
"Me, I see a symbol," he said. "He will create wealth around PSG, image rights, jerseys sold by PSG. This is proof that the tax system in France does not leak."
A PSG shirt adorning Beckham’s name and number will set you back nearly £100 for an adult, so it’s easy to see what PSG get from the deal and Beckham will have a cut of any media or imaging rights alongside his current multi-million pound endorsement and advertisement deals.
Whether this is a case of a startling act of generosity or a blatant case of playing the system, surely the money is better off in the hands of a deserving charity than the bulging coiffeurs of the government budget?
DISCLAIMER: This article has been written by a member of the GiveMeFootball Writing Academy and does not represent the views of GiveMeFootball.com or SportsNewMedia. The views and opinions expressed are solely that of the author credited at the top of this article. GiveMeFootball.com and SportsNewMedia do not take any responsibility for the content of its contributors.