aye, but the RFL are supporting the clubs on the matter so all [ushould[/u be well on that front.

I appreciate that, but it's my understanding that the clubs haven't done anything illegal so any retrospective payments that took them over the cap for a given year shouldn't cause any action to be taken. However, I'm more than happy for someone with more knowledge of accountancy / economics to put me straight.

I'd of thought the salary cap went on the net figure paid by the club to their players. As the players dont see the nic & paye. Also some players could fall into being higher rate tax payers and the clubs in question may have to raise their gross pay so it works out the same as other players' net pay.

Not relevant whether its illegal, just whether the amounts paid to.on behalf of players complied with the cap. If it transpires that club thought to be within the cap for a given year is now found to have exceeded it, the RFL will HAVE to treat that as a discovery of a breach and re-open the SC review for that year, surely?

Otherwise, clubs which complied with the cap - or were caught by other technical breaches and punished accordingly - will surely raise a challenge, and they and their fans will accuse the other club/s of cheating. Like you guys did to at least one other club in the past, in fact?

Wrong. Its the gross pay. Check it out in the detailed SC rules - link on the RFL site last time I looked, and I have a copy on my PC.

The Gross pay will be the same though surely as it was tax saving exercise for the players.

Well i'm sure it will all come out sooner or later and if this "loophole" is proved to have been used and used wrongly then the offender's will have to pay the money back.
How this can be deemed a SC breach i don't know because the wage will still of had to be "declared" to the rfl.

If they were entitled to pay tax then yes its fair enough to retrospectively review the SC. But if its something that has been brought in and then backdated then surely a club cannot be charged with anything.

FWIW I do believe that the Bulls were harshly treated over the Hape issue.

Surely if it's a loophole that is being closed means that it is a legal payment that the government is now stopping. If it was illegal it would be tax evasion and would be much more problematic.

No - the whole point was to save money for the CLUB. Because it meant that it cost you less to get a given amount to a player. The tax saving for the player meant the club could pay that player less (gross) than would otherwise be the case, and therefore get more bang for their bucks. Leaving more salary cap free to spend elsewhere.

I agree mate but the power's that be are clearly looking to close it and then try and "claw" back what they can,this in turn will apparently have an impact on that year's SC.

If they treat it as an avoidance loophole that's now being closed, then I agree. Indeed, that may happen.

But my understanding is that HMRC are treating this as evasion, in which case back-tax, interest and penalties will apply.

Good point though...until we know more of the facts it could be either, and if the former then it will only affect clubs going forward and will not raise historic salary cap issues unless (like Bulls were with Harris) there are contractual commitments that trigger a future breach.