By Tom Cary
Red Bull are said to be considering legal action against Zak Brown, the McLaren chief executive, for effectively labelling them “cheats” over their budget-cap breach.
The Milton Keynes-based team still disputes that it breached last year’s cap and is furious at being tried in the court of public opinion.
Red Bull team principal Christian Horner is not happy with speculation around claims of salary cap breaches.Credit:AP
Red Bull, for whom Max Verstappen tied up a second drivers’ title in Japan two weekends ago, were last week found guilty by motorsport’s governing body, the FIA, of “procedural” and “minor overspend” breaches of the 2021 cap, which was set at $US145 million (about $231 million) in its first season.
It is a charge that could, in theory, lead to Verstappen being stripped of his maiden title, although there is no expectation within the paddock that will happen.
Red Bull immediately responded with a statement saying they were “surprised and disappointed” at the ruling, since their submission was “below the cost-cap limit”.
The FIA has yet to announce a penalty, at which point Red Bull can either accept or challenge the decision. But the lack of clarity has not stopped their rivals from applying huge pressure on the FIA in the build-up to this weekend’s US Grand Prix in Austin, Texas.
Brown last week wrote a letter to FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem – subsequently leaked – arguing that Red Bull’s overspend “constitutes cheating” and calling for a reduction in their 2023 cap equal to double their overspend, plus a 20 per cent reduction in CFD (computational fluid dynamics) and wind-tunnel time.
Christian Horner, the Red Bull team principal, is said to be furious about that letter, and the speculation that has been allowed to take place both before and after last Monday’s ruling.
Central to Red Bull’s grievance are the specific areas of overspend in dispute, which they insist are not “performance-related”, a fact they want the FIA to clarify.
Trying to piece together exactly what has happened has not been easy, given the process is confidential, but details are slowly starting to emerge.
Red Bull’s submission, made in March, is understood to have been some $US4 million under the cap, but was eventually pushed over by between $US1 million and $US2 million due to various large-ticket items. Some of these items may not have been originally included in their submission, but other items were included that did not need to be, further adding to the confusion.
Much of the alleged overspend – more than $US1 million – is thought to relate to an “overpayment” of corporation tax, which was meant to be excludable but which Red Bull submitted. It is believed the FIA has recognised this as a mitigating factor in them being over budget, but the governing body will not now allow them to refile their 2021 submission.
Catering is another area that has been widely mentioned in dispatches in recent weeks, specifically Red Bull’s feeding of staff not included in the cap. It is thought about $500,000 or so was added to Red Bull’s submission after they excluded “non-F1” staff from their catering bill, only to be told they had to include them since it was unclear which were F1 and which were not.
Red Bull are understood to be arguing that their interpretation of this rule was not picked up by the FIA in the team’s interim submission.
This would contradict an argument Brown made in his letter when he said there was “ample opportunity to seek any clarification if details were unclear” and therefore “no reason for any team to now say they are surprised”.
Another $US1 million or so is said to concern “unused parts”, which were later reclassified and, again, might have been excluded from Red Bull’s submission.
There are other areas reported to be in dispute – sick pay, payments to employees on gardening leave – but sources suggest Red Bull’s central argument to the FIA is that their overspend was not “performance-related” and this should be made clear by the governing body.
The Telegraph, London
