Gary Lineker Wins £4.9m Tax Appeal Against HMRC: Victory for Freelancers or Tax Evasion?

Gary Lineker, the host of the BBC show Match of the Day, has won his appeal against HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) over a £4.9m tax bill. The tax authorities had claimed that he should have been treated as an employee rather than as a freelancer for his work at the BBC and BT Sport, and thus was liable to pay taxes on income received between 2013 and 2018. This was under legislation called IR35, which targets disguised employees who charge for their services via limited companies. Lineker argued that all taxes were paid on his income via a partnership he set up with his ex-wife in 2012. In February, he was dragged through the papers and accused of not paying income tax, which his lawyer claimed had been paid.

According to the Sky News, Tribunal judge John Brooks found that although Gary Lineker Media (GLM) was a partnership to which IR35 legislation applies, the appeal should be granted because contracts existed between the presenter and both the BBC and BT Sport. Lineker tweeted his pleasure at the decision and said that he had always contended he had paid all his taxes and national insurance by reason of the IR35 rules.

The HMRC is considering appealing the decision, stating that the tribunal has confirmed that the off-payroll rules apply to partnerships, but it does not agree with the decision that the rules cannot apply in this case. The tax agency maintained that it is its duty to ensure that everyone pays the right tax under the law, regardless of wealth or status.

This is not the first time HMRC has gone after a broadcaster over their tax affairs. Similar cases have been made against Lorraine Kelly and Kaye Adams. Lord Birt, the former BBC director-general, also appeared before a hearing and told MPs that presenters such as Lineker should have to abide by impartiality rules, stating that their status, standing, and power arise above all else from presenting this extremely important program.

The decision in Lineker's case is a victory for him and the other freelancers in the entertainment industry. However, it also highlights the ongoing debate over employment status and the use of limited companies. The case will also affect other high-profile cases where presenters and performers have been accused of tax avoidance.