IPL Stars Seek Rs 40 Crore as Franchises Weigh Retention Costs Before 2028 Auction

A Rs 40 crore demand puts squad budgets under pressure

At least two leading Indian Premier League players are reportedly seeking Rs 40 crore each to remain with their franchises, setting up a costly negotiation before the next auction cycle. In at least one case, the demand is also linked to captaincy, making the discussion about both money and control of the team.

The proposed salary would be Rs 13 crore above the Rs 27 crore contract Rishabh Pant secured at the 2025 mega auction. It would also exceed the Rs 26.75 crore paid for Shreyas Iyer, whose move into the auction gave other established players a powerful example of what competitive bidding can deliver.

No Rs 40 crore agreement, revised retention rules or Rs 150 crore auction purse has been announced. The players seeking the increase have not been named. The demands have been described as part of negotiations for the 2027 season and preparations for the mega auction ahead of IPL 2028, leaving the intended start of any such contracts uncertain.

For franchises, the central question is how much of a limited squad budget to commit to one player. A larger purse would make a Rs 40 crore salary easier to accommodate, but teams with several leading players would still face difficult choices about whom to keep and how much money to reserve for everyone else.

Why players are looking beyond existing retention deals

Pant and Iyer demonstrated the financial attraction of entering the auction instead of agreeing to stay. After leaving Delhi Capitals and Kolkata Knight Riders respectively, Pant joined Lucknow Super Giants for Rs 27 crore and Iyer moved to Punjab Kings for Rs 26.75 crore at the 2025 mega auction.

A Rs 40 crore contract would be about 48% higher than Pant's price and about 50% higher than Iyer's. Those are substantial increases even in a competition where individual salaries have already overtaken the entire Rs 20 crore purse available to a franchise in the inaugural 2008 season.

Heinrich Klaasen and Nicholas Pooran provide another reference point. Their retention payments under the previous framework were reported at Rs 23 crore and Rs 21 crore respectively, above the highest standard retention slab of Rs 18 crore. Teams could pay more than the prescribed figures, provided they declared the actual amounts.

Captaincy adds another consideration. A franchise negotiating with a player who also wants to lead the side must weigh the salary against its plans for leadership and squad continuity. The reported connection between captaincy and one Rs 40 crore demand gives that negotiation a wider reach than a straightforward pay increase.

How much of the purse would one star take?

The auction purse is the budget a franchise can use to assemble its playing squad. Money committed to retained players reduces the amount available to buy others, so a larger individual contract directly affects recruitment elsewhere.

The established purse for the 2025 mega auction was Rs 120 crore, up from Rs 100 crore the previous year. The figure cited for 2027 is Rs 130 crore, although descriptions of the current retention negotiations also use the older Rs 120 crore baseline. The proposed Rs 150 crore purse for 2028 is an expectation, with no formal decision announced.

The financial effect of a Rs 40 crore salary changes with each budget:

• From Rs 120 crore, it would take 33.3% of the purse and leave Rs 80 crore.
• From Rs 130 crore, it would take about 30.8% and leave Rs 90 crore.
• From Rs 150 crore, it would take about 26.7% and leave Rs 110 crore.

Pant's Rs 27 crore contract represented 22.5% of the Rs 120 crore purse in 2025. Even with a rise to Rs 150 crore, a Rs 40 crore player would therefore take a larger share of the budget than Pant did.

Two players earning Rs 40 crore each would absorb Rs 80 crore, or about 53.3% of a Rs 150 crore purse. The franchise would have Rs 70 crore left for the rest of its squad before accounting for any other retained players.

What the previous retention rules actually cost

The rules introduced before IPL 2025 allowed a franchise to keep up to six players through a combination of direct retention and Right to Match, usually shortened to RTM. Direct retention means agreeing to keep a player before the auction. RTM gives the previous team an opportunity to bring a player back at the auction price.

Within the total of six, teams could keep up to five capped players and up to two uncapped players. A capped player has represented a national team. There was no separate restriction on how many of the five capped players could be from overseas.

The standard deductions for five capped retentions were Rs 18 crore, Rs 14 crore, Rs 11 crore, Rs 18 crore and Rs 14 crore. Together, those figures came to Rs 75 crore. An additional uncapped retention at Rs 4 crore took the commitment to Rs 79 crore.

From a Rs 120 crore purse, that left Rs 41 crore to build the rest of the squad. The Rs 79 crore commitment used about 65.8% of the budget, compared with a retention share of just over 50% under the earlier structure.

The fourth and fifth capped retentions were deliberately expensive: their deductions returned to Rs 18 crore and Rs 14 crore rather than continuing to fall. Keeping a larger established core therefore carried a substantial budget cost.

A retention slab is different from an agreed salary

The previous framework combined prescribed purse deductions with the amounts franchises actually agreed to pay. For five capped retentions, Rs 75 crore acted as the minimum deduction. If their combined declared pay exceeded Rs 75 crore, the higher total was deducted instead.

A team could therefore negotiate individual salaries above the standard slabs, as the reported Klaasen and Pooran deals showed. Paying less across those five retentions did not reduce the deduction below Rs 75 crore.

A future Rs 40 crore agreement would have to fit whatever accounting rules the BCCI adopts for the next cycle. The salary alone gives only part of the financial picture; the number of other retentions and the deductions attached to them determine how much remains for auction purchases.

Could Right to Match replace direct retention?

A proposal discussed before the previous mega auction would have removed direct retention altogether and relied on RTM options. Players would enter the auction, competing teams would bid, and their previous franchises could decide whether to match the resulting price.

Supporters of that approach argued that auction bidding could set a player's value without requiring a franchise to agree to a large retention demand beforehand. A team would see what rivals were prepared to pay before choosing whether to bring the player back.

The counterargument is that rivals expecting an RTM move could push the price higher. The original franchise might then have to spend more than planned or lose the player. Direct retention, by comparison, gives both sides certainty before the auction begins.

Under the revised RTM process used for the previous mega auction, the highest bidder received one final opportunity to increase its offer after the former team indicated that it wanted to exercise RTM. For example, a Rs 6 crore winning bid could be raised to Rs 9 crore. The team holding RTM would then need to match Rs 9 crore to secure the player.

The six available retention and RTM places were shared, rather than separate allowances. A franchise retaining three players before the auction had three RTM options remaining. Removing direct retention would change when teams make their biggest commitments, while leaving them exposed to the size of rival bids.

Why the BCCI faces a balancing decision

The BCCI's previous framework made continuity possible but expensive. If all 10 franchises kept six players, as many as 60 players could stay outside the open auction pool. Higher retention deductions created a financial reason for teams to release some established names.

Successful franchises have a different incentive: keeping the players who helped them win and whom supporters associate with the team. Committing nearly two thirds of a purse to six retentions can protect that core, but leaves less room to recruit replacements and fill gaps.

The uncapped category also affected those calculations. Under the rules introduced for 2025, an Indian player could return to uncapped status after five calendar years without an international appearance or a BCCI central contract. That provision created a route for Chennai Super Kings to retain MS Dhoni at the uncapped rate.

The Impact Player rule was continued for the 2025 to 2027 cycle. A separate match fee of Rs 7.5 lakh was also introduced for players taking part, including the Impact substitute. That match payment sits alongside the larger debate about season contracts and retention costs.

Trades and auction dates frame the negotiations

Franchises are also working through player movements before the next season. Mumbai Indians captain Hardik Pandya has reportedly attracted interest from as many as five teams, with Chennai Super Kings, Rajasthan Royals and Punjab Kings among those mentioned. The interest is at the discussion stage.

Chennai and Sunrisers Hyderabad have completed a four player trade, according to a BCCI announcement described in the reporting. Liam Livingstone and Jack Edwards moved to Chennai, while Khaleel Ahmed and Nathan Ellis moved to Hyderabad. Those movements change the squads around which each franchise must plan its next purchases.

The main dates and stages are:

• Before IPL 2025: The purse rose to Rs 120 crore and franchises used the revised six player retention and RTM framework.
• November 5, 2026: The detailed report of at least two Rs 40 crore retention demands was published.
• December 16, 2026: The mini auction ahead of IPL 2027 is reported to be scheduled in Goa.
• Ahead of IPL 2028: The next mega auction is expected, with a possible Rs 150 crore purse under discussion in reporting.

The difference between the two auctions matters. The coming mini auction concerns adjustments to existing squads; the mega auction brings broader decisions about which players stay and which return to bidding. For a franchise considering Rs 40 crore for one star, the next retention framework will determine how much flexibility remains to build the team around that player.

Key Points

• At least two unnamed IPL players reportedly want Rs 40 crore to stay, with one demand linked to captaincy.
• No Rs 40 crore retention agreement or Rs 150 crore purse has been announced.
• A Rs 40 crore salary would use 26.7% of a Rs 150 crore purse, compared with Pant's 22.5% share in 2025.
• The previous rules charged Rs 79 crore for five capped retentions and one uncapped retention from a Rs 120 crore purse.
• An RTM only system has been proposed, but rival bidding could still make players expensive to retain.
• The mini auction ahead of IPL 2027 is reported for December 16 in Goa; the next mega auction is expected before IPL 2028.