Legal status of a professional athlete: normative definition and problems of regulation

The aim of the work is to provide a comparative legal analysis of the legal status of professional athletes in the jurisdictions of Spain, Greece, Mexico, China and Ukraine to identify effective regulation models and develop recommendations for improving Ukrainian legislation. The study’s relevance is due to the rapid commercialization of sports, which increases the need for clear legal regulation of the status of athletes, their social protection and labor relations, and the lack of a single international standard, creating legal uncertainty. The methodological basis of the study is a comprehensive analysis of the literature and case studies on the legal status of a professional athlete. The author used a plethora of scientific methods, in particular, the methods of analysis and synthesis to clarify scientific positions and approaches to the study of the status of a professional athlete in the labor and employment context, and the dialectical method which allowed to establish the interrelationships between the labor sphere and the performance of athlete’s labor functions. The inductive method was used to analyze certain stages of the regulation of labor relations with professional athletes. The method of deduction was useful in analyzing the procedure for the emergence of labor relations with athletes. The method of comparative research was used in the comparative aspects of the experience of foreign countries in the use of labor of professional athletes. The results of the analysis show a comprehensive analysis of legislation, court practice and scientific approaches in the selected countries. In Spain (Royal Decree No. 1006/1985), the legal status of an athlete is determined by clear criteria (voluntary, permanent, subordination, remuneration), which ensures a high level of social protection. The Greek model (Law No. 2725/1999) combines legislative norms with flexible judicial practice, taking into account the actual labor relationship and the principle of economic dependence. In Mexico (Articles 292-303 of the Federal Labor Law), sports regulation is integrated into labor law, which guarantees social rights through the IMSS system. The Chinese system suffers from decentralization and the lack of a single definition of athlete status, which makes it difficult to protect their rights. In Ukraine (the Law of Ukraine “On Physical Culture and Sports”), the ambiguity of legal status and weak social protection create legal and tax risks. In conclusion, the key findings show that labor and legal models (Spain, Mexico) are the most effective in protecting the rights of athletes, while decentralized approaches (China) lead to inequality. For Ukraine, the author proposes a mixed model that combines labor guarantees with norms adapted to the specifics of sports (seasonality, injuries, etc.), taking into account foreign experience. The practical significance lies in the possibility of using the results to improve Ukrainian legislation, which will contribute to the harmonization of sports law in the context of globalization.