Andrew Tate, the self-proclaimed “king of masculinity” and controversial social media influencer, along with his brother Tristan, has been ordered to forfeit more than £2m after a British court ruled they evaded taxes on £21m in revenue generated from their online businesses. The businesses, which included platforms such as OnlyFans, War Room, Hustlers’ University, and Cobra Tate, were the focus of a damning judgment handed down at Westminster Magistrates’ Court by Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring.
The case was brought by Devon and Cornwall Police, who sought to seize £2.8m held in seven frozen bank accounts linked to the Tates and a woman referred to only as “J” for legal reasons. Goldspring described the brothers’ financial dealings as a “straightforward cheat of the revenue,” despite appearing as a “complex financial matrix”.
Tax Evasion on an Industrial Scale
The court heard that between 2014 and 2022, Andrew and Tristan Tate evaded all taxes on the £21 million they amassed through their ventures. In a July hearing, Sarah Clarke KC, representing the police, labelled the brothers “serial tax and VAT evaders.” Andrew Tate, aged 38, was shown to have publicly boasted about refusing to pay tax during his time in the UK, infamously stating in a video: “When I lived in England, I refused to pay tax.”
The brothers funnelled nearly £9.5m into accounts held by “J,” who had no apparent role in their businesses. Evidence presented to the court revealed that £805,000 was deposited into her Revolut account, with £495,000 redirected to Andrew Tate and £75,000 converted into cryptocurrency.
In his ruling, the magistrate wrote: “The brothers’ entire financial arrangements are consistent with concerted tax evasion and money laundering.” He found that the frozen accounts had been used to “launder undeclared revenues” from their businesses and to finance their extravagant lifestyles, including the purchase of luxury cars and properties.
Martin Evans KC, representing the Tates, argued that the transfers were typical of online entrepreneurs and claimed that any attempt to obscure funds was “singularly unsuccessful.” Despite this, the judge ruled that the brothers’ actions amounted to deliberate and long-standing tax evasion in both the UK and Romania.
Misogyny and Exploitation
The ruling comes as the Tates face a series of criminal allegations in Romania, including human trafficking, forming a criminal gang to exploit women, and rape. Andrew Tate, who denies all charges, has gained notoriety for his misogynistic rhetoric. Platforms including TikTok, YouTube, and Facebook banned him for hate speech, including comments suggesting women bear responsibility for sexual assault.
Despite this, he remains highly influential on X (formerly Twitter), where he has nearly 10 million followers, many of whom are young men and teenagers. Concerns have been raised by UK police about the radicalisation of young audiences into extreme misogyny, likening it to the recruitment strategies of terrorist groups.
Legal Troubles Continue
The Tates, currently barred from leaving Romania, are set to be extradited to the UK to face separate allegations of rape and human trafficking dating back to 2012–2015. Earlier this year, Romanian authorities seized a fleet of luxury cars from their Bucharest residence as part of the ongoing investigation.
In response to the UK court ruling, Andrew Tate dismissed it as a “coordinated attack on anyone who dares to challenge the system.” His defiance, however, does little to obscure the mounting evidence of financial misconduct, exploitation, and harmful ideology that defines his public persona.
A Stark Warning
The case against the Tate brothers serves as a stark reminder of the intersections between financial crime, misogyny, and online influence. As authorities continue to investigate their alleged exploitation of women and their deliberate defrauding of tax systems, the broader societal impact of their actions, particularly on young audiences, remains a pressing concern.
Their downfall reflects the dangers of unchecked influence and the urgent need for accountability in the digital age.
