In 2025, the gentlemen’s and ladies’ singles champions each received £3m, part of the total prize fund of £53.5m split across all rounds of the tournament. This generates sizeable taxable income that needs to be paid to HMRC.
All prize money relating to a UK sporting performance is taxed in the UK regardless of whether the player/performer is a UK tax resident. Any performance-related earnings connected to the Championships are therefore subject to UK tax. This can include appearance fees, endorsements, image rights and sponsorship revenue linked to a player’s participation or exposure during the tournament. For non-UK tax resident players, the UK tax legislation requires the tournament organisers to withhold tax at a flat rate of 20% on prize money where earnings exceed the UK personal allowance (£12,570).
Article 17 of the OECD’s model double taxation treaty covering ‘Artistes and Sportsmen’ gives taxing rights to the country of performance, with tax credits generally available in the player’s home country. So if, for example, 2025 ladies champion Iga Swiatek is tax resident in Poland, then she would likely have been able to credit the UK tax payable in relation to her Wimbledon performance against her Polish tax liability. 2025 gentlemen’s winner Jannik Sinner’s primary residence is in Monaco however so, assuming he is also tax resident there, he would not have a tax liability in the Principality to offset the UK tax against, and the UK tax payable on his Wimbledon performance would have been an absolute cost.
The added twist for professional athletes taking part in the tournament is that a proportion of any global endorsement retainers also need brought into the UK tax net when performing at Wimbledon and other events in the UK. This principle was determined in the Agassi v Robinson case from 20 years ago – a case taken by HMRC in relation to Agassi’s Wimbledon performances at the height of his success.
For high-profile players with global sponsorship agreements, the UK can be an extremely expensive country to perform in as a result. The Agassi case has historically led to criticism from some non-UK resident athletes who have argued that, rather than it being lucrative for them to perform to UK audiences, their performances lead to effective tax rates of over 100% of the income they earn.
Individual sports such as tennis, golf and athletics are particularly hard hit as the athletes concerned typically have large endorsement deals with minimal performances in the UK each year. A non-UK tax resident golfer who doesn’t make the cut in a UK tournament, for example, won’t receive any prize money but could have a UK tax liability arising on the global sponsorship agreement apportionment.
Despite the unattractiveness of the UK’s tax rules, Wimbledon remains one of the most attractive events in the tennis world. Alongside the opportunity for sporting success, strong performances at the tournament can significantly increase a player’s global profile, future sponsorship opportunities and long-term earning potential. A UK tax liability may just be a small down payment on this.
