IN PLAY WITH B&K

Welcome to the latest instalment of “In Play with B&K”, the regular update from the Bray & Krais sports law team.

“Image rights” were reportedly a focus of talks between Vinicius Jr and Real Madrid over his newly agreed contract.  This latest tug of war underscores their increasing value to club and player alike.  In Part One of this special two-part series, Alex Goodchild teams up with Gonzalo Sanz of leading international law firm Urίa Menéndez to discuss the legal framework in England and Spain, how image rights are exploited, image rights companies and the baseline position between clubs and players (4 min read).

What are image rights?

Image rights are, broadly, rights in a player’s name, image, voice and other personal characteristics, such as their likeness, nickname and signature.

English law does not recognise image rights as a standalone proprietary right, so players and image rights companies instead rely on a bundle of contractual rights, IP rights, including copyright and (increasingly) trade marks, and common law principles, such as passing off.

The position in Spain is different. The Spanish Constitution expressly recognises the right to one’s own image as a standalone fundamental and personality right, whose protection under Spanish law extends to identifying attributes such as a player’s name, voice and likeness for commercial purposes. Although the underlying right remains personal to the player, they may authorise others, such as clubs, sponsors or image rights companies, to exploit those attributes commercially.

The value to clubs and players

Whether or not protected as a specific right, image rights can be incredibly valuable. A whole web of sponsorship deals and endorsement deals are entered into by players, their clubs, competitions and national associations, which license image rights for exploitation and include promotional services, often by requiring players to make personal appearances.

In a world of spending controls (e.g. the Premier League’s SCR), clubs are constantly looking for ways to boost commercial revenues and may have networks of over 100 commercial partners. While players are recruited primarily for sporting ability, clubs increasingly look to harness a player’s brand, with younger fans more likely to follow individual athletes than clubs – at the time of writing, Erling Haaland has almost 50% more Instagram followers than Manchester City. That brand can be monetised both through the club’s own commercial programme and, in some cases, through a negotiated share of the income generated by the player’s personal endorsements.

Revolut, for example, launched a campaign in June 2026 featuring Haaland in his individual capacity while also serving as Manchester City’s back-of-shirt sponsor, illustrating how personal and club sponsorships can complement one another. To agree more lucrative sponsorship deals of their own, clubs therefore want to offer enhanced access to certain players, while also controlling their ability to enter into personal endorsement arrangements that conflict with a club sponsor.

From the player’s perspective, careers can be unpredictable and peak earnings are typically compressed into a short window. However, successful exploitation of their brand can generate recurring income long into retirement.

Image rights companies

If a player’s image has independent commercial value, players and their advisers may consider assigning image rights to a dedicated image rights company (“IRC”) to manage and license the commercial exploitation. By centralising licensing arrangements, revenues and associated costs, an IRC can support consistent and efficient management of the player’s brand during and after their playing career.

The taxation of image rights in the UK is a complex area and will be covered in greater detail in Part Two, but broadly speaking, profits generated by IRCs are taxed at the corporation tax rate (currently 25%) rather than as employment income subject to income tax, NICs and PAYE (provided the arrangements are accepted as genuine by HMRC).  In addition to these potential tax efficiencies, IRCs come with a behavioural benefit of encouraging players to accrue a pension pot of deferred income which they cannot dip into without a tax cost.

The position is similar in Spain, where IRCs can offer comparable tax deferral benefits. Income earned from independently negotiated third-party sponsorships is generally treated as ordinary corporate income: the company is subject to corporation tax on its profits (generally 25%), with further personal taxation generally arising when those profits are distributed to the player. The treatment of club-related payments is, however, more prescriptive. In particular, the so-called “85/15 rule” applies where a player grants an IRC rights to exploit their image and the club pays that company for the right to use it. Broadly, the player’s employment income must represent at least 85% of the sum of (i) their salary, and (ii) any image rights fees paid by the club. This means that up to 15% of the relevant club-related package may be paid to the IRC; however, if the threshold is exceeded, the relevant payment may instead be attributed to the player and taxed as personal income.

Baseline image rights in the club-player relationship

Before considering any separate image rights arrangement, the starting point is to determine how the club may already use the player’s image, and what promotional activities the player may be required to undertake, as part of the employment relationship.

In England, it is worth noting that clause four of the standard Premier League contract grants the club the bare essential rights to use the player’s image to promote themselves and their commercial sponsors:

4.1        … the Player shall make himself available for up to six hours per week of which approximately half shall be devoted to the community and public relations activities of the Club.

4.3        … [the Player] shall not … do anything to promote, endorse or provide promotional marketing or advertising services … to any… brand or services which conflict or compete with any of the Club’s club branded or football related products (including the Strip) or any products, brand or services of the Club’s two main sponsors/commercial partners…

4.6        The Player hereby grants to the Club the right to photograph the Player both individually and as a member of a squad and to use such photographs and the Player’s Image in a Club Context in connection with the promotion of the Club … so long as the use of the … Player’s Image … shall be limited to no greater usage than the average for all players regularly in the Club’s first team.’

Given the limitations in bold, clubs typically regard the standard contract rights as insufficient.  To leverage its star players in sponsorship activity, a club will likely enter into a separate image rights agreement with the player (or their IRC) granting rights over and above this baseline in return for an additional fee.

The Spanish framework is even less prescriptive, although contractual practice is clearer. Neither the LaLiga collective bargaining agreement nor the LaLiga standard form employment contract defines the scope of those baseline rights. However, both clubs and leagues (or other competition organisers) may rely on certain rights necessarily connected with the public and collective nature of professional football (for example, it would ordinarily be able to photograph a player as part of the first-team squad and use that image in its usual club communications or in league’s promotional activities).

In practice, individually negotiated terms are used both to clarify where the boundary of baselines rights lies and, where agreed, to grant the club broader commercial rights. These may be included in the employment contract or an accompanying schedule, or in a separate image rights agreement with the player or his IRC, and will typically address promotional appearances and photoshoots, club and sponsor campaigns, individual versus collective use, merchandising and digital media, and restrictions on conflicting personal endorsements. They will also determine the remuneration attributable to those rights, whether included in the player’s employment package or, where the rights are held by an IRC, paid under a separate licensing arrangement.

Looking ahead

In Part Two, we will turn to the negotiation of an image rights agreement, the typical issues at stake, and provide an overview of the tax treatment and forthcoming tax developments.

Image rights are a complex area and the information given in this post is high-level guidance only.  If you require any assistance or further information, please get in touch with Bray & Krais or Urίa Menéndez as appropriate.