Daniel Dubois will immediately lose half of his purse from Oleksandr Usyk fight
Daniel Dubois set to lose half of his huge fight purse for his blockbuster rematch with Oleksandr Usyk due to tax deductions.
The British heavyweight suffered the second defeat of his professional career to Usyk when they first met back in 2023. The Ukrainian scored an impressive ninth round knockout victory in Poland - but their heavyweight dust-up was not with real controversy.
Dubois dropped his rival in the fifth round - but the shot was eventually ruled a low blow. It allowed Usyk plenty of time to recover before he would eventually run away with the fight. This time around, with the Brit looking to level the series, there is a little more on the line on fight night.
Both men will compete for the undisputed title. Not only that, the pair are expected to take home a career-high pay cheque. According to reports, the fight purse for the main event is a whopping £150m. Usyk will reportedly take home £97.5m, while Dubois is expected to pocket £52.5m from the rematch.
Should Dubois emerge victorious, he will quickly be handed a huge blow when the tax man comes calling. As a UK resident, the 27-year-old would be liable to pay tax at the highest rate. According to research from data experts at Ace Odds, 'Triple D' would face an income tax bill of £23,611,203 on his purse earnings from the fight.
For context, that would be enough to fund 965 entry-level nurses, 705 trainee firefighters in London or 630 people at the average UK wage of £37,430. The damage won't be done there, though. Dubois would also need to hand over another £1,052,011 in National Insurance contributions. After making both payments, Dubois would be left with £27,836,786 from his evening's work at Wembley.
Watch Usyk vs Dubois 2 live on DAZN
This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more
£24.99
DAZN
Order the fight here
Product Description
One man who will sympathise the heavyweight star is Tyson Fury. After securing over £70m for his rematch with Usyk in December, that was quickly decimated when HMRC considerations were taken into account. It is believed that the 'Gypsy King' was made to pay an estimated £35,250,000 in deductions, according to data collected by JeffBet. After all the deductions, he reportedly took home £39,750,000.
Speaking about the financial loss for Fury at the time, a spokesperson for Jeff Bet said: "If you are a resident in the UK you have to pay tax on overseas earnings in the same way, and that remains the same no matter how much someone might earn. Good tax advice is always important and in this case you can be sure the Fury camp will have looked at an agreement that would be the most beneficial."
When is Oleksandr Usyk vs Daniel Dubois?
The seqel between Usyk and Dubois is scheduled for Saturday, 19 July, at Wembley Stadium. The fight will be exclusively broadcast live on DAZN PPV. The entire fight card for the night can be accessed live on DAZN PPV, priced at £24.99 in the UK; $59.99 in the US; and $19.99/equivalent in ROW.
The DAZN coverage is set to kick off around 5:30pm BST (12.30pm ET / 9.30am PT), with the first undercard fight expected to start at approximately 5.40pm BST (12.40pm ET / 9.40am PT). Usyk and Dubois are anticipated to make their ringwalks at 9:45pm BST (4:45pm ET / 1:45pm PT).
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Metro
7 minutes ago
- Metro
Hamilton goes the extra mile in push to shake up Ferrari
This weekend's Belgian Grand Prix will give us the first glimpse of major management changes that have taken place in the last two weeks. Christian Horner will not be there, having been axed by Red Bull's Austrian HQ in some sort of power struggle. In his place, on the Red Bull Racing pitwall's primo position, is Laurent Mekies, who has been promoted from being team principal of the Racing Bulls to top dog at the senior squad. Racing Bull's new boss has also been promoted from within – Alan Permane, a British F1 engineer with 36 years' experience who previously helped Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso to world titles. Spa-Francorchamps is a circuit which challenges the cars, drivers and people's wardrobe choices in equal measure, thanks to its swooping high-speed terrain and bafflingly unpredictable weather. It's a test of aerodynamics and Racing Bulls have brought upgrades they hope will help them cut through the wind. Aston Martin, too, are bringing their biggest upgrade yet. With Nico Hulkenberg's amazing Silverstone podium, Sauber have scaled almost all of the midfield competition. Williams are winning that fight with 59 points but then it's the Swiss scuderia (41), followed by Racing Bulls and Aston (tied on 36), Haas (29), and the struggling equipe Alpine (19). Ferrari are best of the rest compared to the mighty McLaren but there is no doubt Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc hoped to be closer to the front. On the face of it, Spa's characteristics are perfect for the McLaren but Hamilton and Leclerc have strong form here, with theBritish driver last triumphing in 2024 and his team-mate taking his debut victory in 2019. Ferrari will try out a new suspension package but Hamilton doesn't expect it to make much difference this weekend, although it may prove beneficial at other tracks. Overall, he has not been impressed with the regularity of upgrades and is pushing extremely hard behind the scenes to get the team working in a new direction. 'We had an upgraded floor in Bahrain and we didn't get another upgrade until Austria. Pace-wise, we haven't had what I thought we would have. Other teams bring small pieces every single weekend,' said Hamilton. Over the last fortnight he has spent four days in the Maranello factory, sitting down with team principal Fred Vasseur, CEO Benedetto Vigna and chairman John Elkann, as well as each technical head of department, to address what he needs to get back on the top step of the podium. Hamilton revealed he had been submitting his own technical reports, and tested the 2026 car on the simulator last week for the first time. 'It's a big, big push. I've held lots of meetings, talking about the engine for next year, suspension for next year, things I want,' added the 40-year-old. 'After the first few races I submitted a full document to the team. Over this break I did another two documents, so I've gone in to address those. One was about structural adjustments we need to make to get better, and the other was about the issues I have with this current car. There are some things you do want to take on to next year's car, and some you don't. 'The reason for it is I see a huge amount of potential within this team. The passion – nothing comes close. It's a huge organisation with a lot of moving parts, but the parts are not firing on all cylinders like they need to be. That's ultimately why the team hasn't had the success I feel it deserves. 'I'm here to win. It's crunch time for me and I truly believe in the potential of this team, I believe they can win multiple championships. That's my sole goal. 'I feel it's my job to challenge every area and challenge everybody in the team, especially the guys at the top who are making the decisions. If you look at the team in the last 20 years, they've had amazing drivers and yet they didn't win a title with Ferrari. More Trending 'I refuse for that to be the case with me. I'm going the extra mile. I'm fortunate to have had experiences in two other great teams. For sure things are going to be different, it's a different culture, but if you take the same path all the time you're going to get the same result.' It is rumoured Vasseur won't have his contract renewed at the end of this year. Does that leave the door open for Horner? Well, he doesn't speak Italian and though Ferrari may offer to pay him handsomely, they won't offer him equity, which is what he really wants. I also doubt Hamilton would be happy working with him, not least because Horner has been so combative on Max Verstappen's behalf in the past. Three more likely options for Horner are if Toyota buy Haas, Cadillac decide to push current principal Graeme Lowdon out of the way or Alpine are taken over by a rumoured consortium which he may be invited to join. That last one feels the most likely, and I believe Bernie Ecclestone is pulling the strings. Watch this space. MORE: The Metro daily cartoon by Guy Venables MORE: Euro 2025 final: England have done it the hard way but I never lost faith and know they can beat Spain MORE: Wrestling legend Hulk Hogan dies aged 71 'after suffering cardiac arrest'
Reuters
8 minutes ago
- Reuters
BCG says some of its staff circumvented its controls in Gaza work
LONDON, July 24 (Reuters) - An investigation commissioned by Boston Consulting Group has found that some of its U.S.-based staff sidestepped its risk controls to do work related to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation and to "post-war reconstruction" for the Palestinian enclave, the consulting firm said. In a response, opens new tab to a British parliamentary committee inquiry published on Thursday, BCG detailed the role some of its staff played in establishing GHF during late 2024 and early this year, and then the efforts made by one of its managing directors to carry out further work in March. GHF is a U.S.- and Israeli-backed organisation that began delivering humanitarian supplies to Palestinian civilians in Gaza in May, bypassing traditional aid channels including the United Nations. Its operations have been beset by violence and chaos including deadly shootings of scores of Palestinians near its food distribution sites guarded by Israeli forces, Reuters has reported. The U.N. and other humanitarian groups have refused to work with GHF, questioning its neutrality and criticising the new distribution model as militarising aid and forcing displacement of Palestinians. "We deeply regret that, in connection with the work about which the committee has asked, we did not live up to our standards," BCG said in its July 22-dated response to the parliamentary committee inquiry. BCG's role in the setting up of GHF dragged the firm into controversy and raises questions over its internal risk processes and controls. Its decision not to publish the full investigation could lead to further questions about the level of that involvement. A "largely complete" review led by law firm WilmerHale had shown that "BCG's approval processes were circumvented" by now-former BCG staff, the Boston-based management consulting firm said, in relation to work carried out earlier this year. BCG said it "will not publish the findings of this investigation" by WilmerHale. BCG said a team led by two U.S.-based and now former employees "provided pro bono support" to establish GHF between October last year and January, including its subsidiary in Switzerland, and that such work was directed by a U.S.-based security contractor, Orbis Operations. BCG said the information provided by its staff related to the establishment of the foundation was "incomplete, inaccurate and/or untruthful". Later in March, a BCG employee started "a second, for-fee, project related to the operational and logistical effort to deliver aid", and entered into a contract with U.S.-based private equity firm, McNally Capital. BCG said it cancelled the invoice for this project "as soon as we understood more about the scope and nature of the work." Representatives for Orbis Operations and McNally Capital did not immediately reply to requests for comment. Despite being told by BCG's risk officer not to engage in such a project, the same employee started a team to model "post-war reconstruction" scenarios, BCG said in its letter. He did not enter into a contract with any counterparty for this work, BCG said. "This unapproved work was shared and discussed on Signal" and "those communications were not maintained," the consulting firm said. BCG added that "the only UK-based organisation with which we understand the team interacted during this work was the Tony Blair Institute," referring to post-war scenario planning for Gaza. The Financial Times reported on July 4 that BCG had modelled the costs of "relocating" Palestinians from Gaza and that the Tony Blair Institute participated in a project to develop a post-war Gaza plan, opens new tab. A Tony Blair Institute representative said the firm "has had many calls with different groups on post-war reconstruction of Gaza but none have included the idea of forcible relocation of people from Gaza."
The Guardian
8 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on global inequality: the rising tide that leaves most boats behind
This year's global wealth report by the City bank UBS confirms what is self-evident but rarely confronted: while riches are accumulating, their distribution remains starkly unbalanced. In the 56 countries and economic areas surveyed, the report says global personal wealth grew 4.6% in 2024. However, not all boats have been lifted by this tide. The gap is growing between those who hold assets and those who don't. The figures are shocking: just 60m of the world's adults – 1.6% of the population – have net personal wealth of $226tn, or 48.1% of all the world's riches. At the other extreme, four in 10 adults – 1.57bn people – have only $2.7tn, or just 0.6% of all the world's personal wealth. Economists now argue that inequality is no longer a by-product of growth but a condition of it. In the US, soaring bond markets and tech stocks have benefited the ultra-rich and deepened inequality. Nine households, it was reported, control 15% of wealth in Silicon Valley. By contrast, UBS says British median wealth rose while average wealth fell. This is a rare divergence, probably caused by prosperous households in London taking a hit from interest rate hikes as house prices dropped and debt costs rose. This wasn't a sign of shared prosperity but of paper losses at the top, while ordinary workers held steady. Unlike wages, wealth reflects not just income but also access to assets, favourable institutional conditions – such as low interest rates – and public policies like low taxes and housing shortages. In other words, wealth depends on political choices in ways that income currently does not. It's not just the inequality itself that is the issue but the erosion of mechanisms that once constrained it. As the report notes, wealth and income inequality are linked. But where wages have stagnated and collective bargaining has weakened, capital income – derived from profits, rents and interest – has been boosted by design. Productivity gains, once expected to feed through to broader living standards, now primarily serve to enhance returns to wealth. Taxes on wealth are necessary to make societies more equal. Unfairness is aiding far-right autocrats whose rise brings the risk of democratic collapse. In July seven Nobel laureates issued a powerful call for a minimum tax on the ultra-rich. Brazil, Spain and South Africa have demanded a global tax on the super-rich, placing the issue on the G20 agenda. Pioneering work by economists such as Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez led to the French national assembly passing a law this year for a 2% minimum tax on wealth over €100m. The legislation, regrettably, has not proceeded past the senate. Progressive taxation is necessary, but it doesn't address a core problem in many economies: when capital income outpaces labour income, redistribution may ease the symptoms of neoliberalism, but it leaves the underlying condition untreated. High inequality suppresses consumption, deters investment and slows growth. The gap between rich and poor is not just unfair – it's economically unsustainable. Without strong domestic demand, economies increasingly rely on debt, speculation and asset bubbles to fuel growth. Changing this would take more than fiscal transfers. It would require policies that boost wages: full employment, stronger labour unions and public investment. Private ownership itself may need to be reconceived – less perhaps in the sense of expropriation, and more in terms of widening access to productive assets and social wealth.
