• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

Available in other languages:

New FIBA Rule on Payment to Agents

The International Basketball Federation (FIBA) has introduced a significant regulatory change, effective from 5 December 2024, which prohibits clubs from paying agents on behalf of players

This change, detailed in the amendment to former Article 3-297, now Article 299(b)) of the FIBA Internal Regulations, aims to eliminate conflicts of interests and ensure that agents are paid solely by their clients, thereby reinforcing the integrity of the agent-player relationship. 

New Article 3-299(b) reads as follows:

“[…] A FIBA-Licensed Agent (and any legal entity or non-incorporated business through which one operates) shall not […] b. accept payment for his or her services by anyone other than his or her client […].”

Clubs are required to comply by ceasing any direct or indirect payments to agents and amending ongoing transactions accordingly. 

Enforcement of this rule, initially set for 1 February 2025, has been postponed to 1 July 2025 following opposition from certain European agents and clubs, providing clubs with a transitional period to adjust their practices. 

One of the reasons for some European clubs' opposition to that change is that this new rule will in practice constrain the clubs, at the players' request, to increase their overall remuneration to compensate for the amount that will be owed directly by the player to his agent, with the ‘extra cost’ in social security charges that the amount in question will represent.

Contracts signed before this enforcement date under the previous regulations will not be sanctioned, but any new or renewed contracts must adhere to the new rules, with non-compliance resulting in disciplinary measures.

The rationale behind FIBA's amendment is to uphold high standards of integrity and transparency in basketball, as FIBA argues the direct or indirect payment of players' agents by clubs has long posed a risk of conflicts of interests, potentially compromising agents' independence in representing their clients' best interests. By mandating that agents are paid exclusively by their clients, FIBA aims to strengthen the impartiality and integrity of the agent-player relationship, ensuring that all stakeholders act in the best interests of the sport and its participants.

In Switzerland, although the involvement of agents is not compulsory for the signing of athletes, it does provide added value in terms of networking and bringing clubs into contact with players available on the market, particularly for international transfers. Agents must be registered and authorised, with verification of their authorisation and representation by the clubs.

Swiss law (Art. 20 OSE and 3(2) OEmol-LSE) stipulates that if the agent is commissioned by the player, the maximum commission charged by the agent may be 5% of the first overall gross annual salary, plus VAT, which overrides FIBA’s allowance of up to 10%.

Our thinking

  • Relocating to Switzerland: trusts

    Alexia Egger Castillo

    Insights

  • Extra Time: The business of women’s football in Africa

    Sarah Johnson

    Podcasts

  • Singaporean Court Declines to Revisit SIAC Registrar’s Administrative Decision

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • New "In-House Counsel Privilege" in Swiss law

    Pierre Bydzovsky

    Insights

  • Swiss Anti-Corruption Laws: A Guide to Bribery Offences, Compliance, and Penalties

    Daniela Iselin

    Insights

  • The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - the inheritance tax Consultation on agricultural and business property

    Sarah Wray

    Quick Reads

  • Passage of the English Arbitration Act 2025 into Law

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • RTHK interviews Patrick Chan on the rise of sports arbitration in Hong Kong

    Patrick Chan

    In the Press

  • 5 trends to watch in International Arbitration in 2025

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • Maintaining the Integrity of Sport – Time for AI to Take the Lead ?

    Darren Bailey

    Quick Reads

  • A Closer Look at the Meaning of ‘Investor’ in Investment Treaty Arbitration

    Stephen Chan

    Insights

  • AML in decentralized finance and traditional finance

    Caroline Greenwell

    Insights

  • International Arbitration: 2024 in Review

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • Corporate deal round-up H2 2024

    David Coates

    Insights

  • Understanding Contempt of Court in Swiss Law: Key Provisions and Penalties

    Remo Wagner

    Insights

  • Understanding Civil and Criminal Remedies in France for Financial Crimes

    Frédéric Jeannin

    Insights

  • Why Man City took ‘Super “Dry”’ off its Training Kit

    Nick White

    Quick Reads

  • They think it’s all over … it is now! Are the changes to non-dom status an own goal against our footballers?

    Joshua Green

    Quick Reads

  • Promoting certainty in international trade and investment: The 2005 Hague Convention and the enforcement of foreign judgments in the UK and Switzerland

    Michael Wells-Greco

    Insights

Back to top