The Dupont-Jelonch affair brings up to date a practice as old as professionalism: the misappropriation of image contracts. Between tax optimization and pure fraud, diving behind the financial scenes of a rapidly changing sport.
The team takes stock of this iceberg which threatens French rugby.
The mirage of phantom benefits
The current dispute surrounding stars of Stade Toulousain and the company 3S-Alyzia highlights a persistent issue within rugby authorities: the difficulty in proving the actual exploitation of player image rights. This isn’t a new development.
As early as the 2010s, the Soyaux-Angoulême club (SA) faced scrutiny over similar practices.
At the time, the club’s defense, led by Me Lionel Béthune de Moro, confidently asserted: “These image contracts correspond to real services provided by these amateur players. Photographer is the title that best suited these services. The SA XV took up a model that thrives elsewhere in the sporting world. »
However, courts disagreed, ruling against the club in 2021 and 2023 for concealed work, ordering a recovery of one and a half million euros. A former manager, speaking anonymously, described this case as merely “the tip of the iceberg,” warning that “the iceberg is gigantic.”
Last summer marked a turning point, as former Oyonnax third row, Uzair Cassiem, publicly denounced questionable methods employed by the Nice club.
The arrangement proposed was complex: utilizing unemployment benefits (ARE) to pay the player, then shifting to fictitious image contracts through a foreign company to offset the reduction in aid. Cassiem’s letters were blunt:
“this image contract with the Gavekal company which is only a salary supplement allowing you to save social charges. I am also aware that former players who had image contracts with the said company have never honored any services. »
A legal arsenal to counter the “Wild West”
Rugby has long sought a clear legal framework for these additional payments. The Collective Image Right (DIC), implemented between 2004 and 2010, aimed to reduce social security contributions for clubs, but its abolition sparked significant protest.
Mourad Boudjellal, then president of Toulon, warned: “I think people don’t understand the seriousness of the situation. French rugby is in great danger. »
To address the issues and prevent practices like the “Tahitian montages” seen in Biarritz or Béziers, the Braillard law was introduced in 2017. This more stringent law centralizes contracts within clubs and caps image rights income at 30% of a player’s salary. A senior official explained that it’s a crucial tool for moving beyond an era of opacity:
“Apart from the Braillard law, it’s the Wild West. Clubs can no longer believe the tips sellers who promise to have found the undetectable, legally concrete system, the idea that no one had ever thought of. The Urssaf risk is a serious risk. And cheating on that, morally, is indefensible. »
The Toulouse case: a paradox?
Surprisingly, Stade Toulousain, despite boasting the most marketable squad in the Top 14, has chosen not to utilize this centralized legal system. This lack of transparency, combined with recent sanctions related to the recruitment of Melvyn Jaminet, has placed the club under increased scrutiny from rugby’s financial regulators.
The issue extends beyond sporting concerns; it’s about the long-term viability of an economic model that can no longer afford to skirt the rules of Urssaf.
Worth a look
