Over spending penalty

[Alianora La Canta]

The other issue is that all of the holding companies for F1 are private. Some are subsidiaries owned wholly by public entities, but that does not rule out the possibility of receiving monies outside the public element, provided the consequences are correctly accounted for (both in terms of the effect on money circulating in/through the public elements and non-financial effects through the whole system).

[Jericoke]

The other issue is that all of the holding companies for F1 are private. Some are subsidiaries owned wholly by public entities, but that does not rule out the possibility of receiving monies outside the public element, provided the consequences are correctly accounted for (both in terms of the effect on money circulating in/through the public elements and non-financial effects through the whole system).

It is true that sports teams are usually part of complex corporation structures that I don't really understand.

However, an F1 team owned, partially or wholly, by a publicly traded company must be very careful about being caught at cheating when it comes to accounting, as that will call into question the public company's accounting as a whole.

[John S]

Whilst correct information about RB overspend is hard to come by there now seems to be some more gossip about just what the overspend consists of.

Here's a list of things rumored to be true:-

1. RB haven't received 1.4 mil tax rebate.

2. They have catering expenses, Fallows gardening leave, and sick pays amounting to 1.8 mil

3. They have unused parts that cost 2 mil+

For part 3, there is clear proof that the FIA left it as a grey area when the teams made their submission and made their regulations clear after they submitted their accounts in March.

Horner also says that they submitted interim reports last year as needed and the FIA did not inform them of any issues with the way RB submitted.

And many rumors indicate that RB submitted 4 million below the cap.

All I can say is this still looks like a Dogs dinner situation from FIA if the above list is true, especially the gardening leave aspect - how can you include a salary of a poached employee who adds nothing to team paying him/her during long absence.

[rmassart]

All I can say is this still looks like a Dogs dinner situation from FIA if the above list is true, especially the gardening leave aspect - how can you include a salary of a poached employee who adds nothing to team paying him/her during long absence.

I agree this looks like a dog's dinner, but for point 2, for me they should all be included. Fallows gardening leave is an investment in the future. Sick pay is just tough luck, but if you can exclude sick pay I feel it would be too easy cheat on this. Although I am not sure how sick pay is worked out anyway.

I have a feeling the result is going to be that they ditch the budget cap. It sounds to me like the FIA are not up to the task of dealing with it transparently...

[Alianora La Canta]

There's no consistency to the rumours I'm hearing. (The $20 m I mentioned a while ago wasn't plucked out the air by me, but someone has suggested it, if only due to the aggressiveness of the FIA's defensive tactics).

I think ditching the budget cap is part of the agenda here. That, and giving Red Bull 1-2 titles it has failed to earn.