Regarding the rule that has become essential in F1 of capped budgets, Sauber and therefore Audi suffer from a structural disadvantage: in fact salaries in Switzerland are much higher than those in the United Kingdom. Likewise on Audi's German base, salaries are also higher than in Italy, for example.
So for the same budget, Sauber/Audi can pay fewer employees. Almost 25 or 30% less. As if it were fighting with one hand tied behind your back…
However, there will be two good news for Sauber/Audi soon. First of all, the budget cap will increase for all teams in 2026, going from 135 to 215 million dollars, not counting the increasingly numerous reductions and exceptions.
But above all, the FIA will take much greater account of salaries in each country, so that there is no major distortion of competition (see our article).
The “consideration factor” now considered in the FIA's financial regulations will be calculated as the average annual salary of an F1 team, divided by the weighted average annual salary of the country where it is based, according to independent economic data.
In fact, Sauber/Audi could benefit from a budget of around 250 million dollars, compared to 215 for the other teams.
Mattia Binotto had also clarified: without this adjustment, it will be impossible for Audi to be competitive when it enters in 2026.
The change was agreed earlier this year…despite unanimous opposition from all F1 teams, except Audi of course!
“Why would a team based in Switzerland have an exemption? Everyone chooses where to install their team”thus vituperated Ayao Komatsu, the boss of Haas F1 (whose team is itself based between the United Kingdom, Italy and the USA).
“Between London and Oxford and the north of England there is a price difference. Where do we stop? Where do we draw the line? If you look at these aspects, you need to look at all the benefits. »
“Also, for people who live in Switzerland, the reason may be different. I remember a long time ago I tried to recruit someone from Sauber who loved skiing and loved the mountains, so he didn't want to come to England.
“A lot of things come into play. I think it's very dangerous to look at one aspect and say, “OK, it's more expensive here.” You could just look at the price of beer or something and say, “OK, it's more expensive, so you should get the exemption.”
“You are free to settle wherever you want. »
“The more detail you go into, the harder it is to cover everything, and that creates another problem. »
“I don't know if 'interesting' is the right word, but in the F1 Commission meeting, apart from Sauber, strangely everyone is against it”.
For Ayao Komatsu, the FIA would risk opening a Pandora's box and having to carry out a ton of ultra-complex checks, if this logic were to be pushed to the end.
“So, I don’t understand why the FIA is completely pushing for this. Again, you have to ask: what about the guys in Italy, like Ferrari and Red Bull, who have facilities in Italy, and we also have facilities that are half Italian, half British… where do we stop?
“An engineer moving from the UK to Italy enjoys some significant financial benefits in Italy. Is this compensated? Of course not. So where do we stop?
“Unless you look at every dimension, it's very difficult to make this completely equitable. Can you examine each dimension? I don't think so.
“So I think it’s very dangerous to do that, honestly. »
Finally, when asked why this measure was adopted when 90% of the teams were opposed to it, Komatsu showed bitterness.
“You said so, right? »
The FIA responds to the other 9 teams
Of course Ayao Komatsu is showing a bit of bad faith: it goes without saying that no team likes to strengthen its competitors. And Sauber is precisely a direct competitor to Haas F1.
The FIA is responsible for bringing fairness to the sport, as Nikolas Tombazis, FIA single-seater director, recalled earlier this year.
“Well, first of all, I will say that in a democracy where there are nine wolves and one sheep, I think you can guess who will be eaten by the wolves. »
“So while we of course want consensus and democracy and participation, it is our responsibility to try to be fair, and we will have opportunities every five or six years or so to make adjustments aimed at fairness, where, perhaps in competitive F1, it is difficult to achieve the necessary levels of majority among teams to support a change. »
“It has become clear to us that salaries in some countries are much higher and the cost of living is much higher in some countries. I see it myself, I live in Geneva. When I go to the supermarket, I think about it. »
“We estimated that for a roughly equal budget cap, a team based in a high cost of living country like Switzerland would have around 30% or even 40% fewer staff working on the car, which we found fundamentally unfair. »
“So we decided either to take regulatory action or it would ultimately mean that the teams could not operate and a team like Sauber would have to close and move to another country, which we believe is not the right way for a world championship to operate. »
Faced with accusations of bias which could be made for example by Ayao Komatsu, Tombazis specifies that the FIA will base itself on independent data which is a consensus in the economic community.
“This is why there is an adjustment in the financial regulations for 2026, which will essentially adjust the salaries taken into account in the budget ceiling, according to factors determined by OECD data [Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques] – this is not FIA data, to be clear; this is publicly available data. »
“Now I can add that, as we already have financial regulations in place and we receive data from the teams, we know that this OECD data is very consistent with the salary differences that exist even in the context of the F1 and among the engineers and teams. »
“So it’s not just the OECD data. We have compelling evidence based on what teams pay their aerodynamicists, designers or shop workers, and it all points in the same direction. »
“Therefore, I believe this settlement is completely fair. I will also say that we plan to improve it a little more; we plan to make it a little more transparent as well, so that teams who might be worried about something unfair happening are convinced. »
“I think if you looked at the data, I don't think anyone would doubt the fairness of this settlement. »
In any case, it is indeed a measure of justice which is carried out by the FIA. It is not surprising that the '9 wolves' want to eat the Audi sheep, but the FIA is here in its role of shepherd – a role which it fulfills, for once, satisfactorily.
Related News :