The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[jamboruss]

Cached version of Doncaster blog piece about Ffp & sporting integrity. Now deleted [emoji6]

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20120715015422/http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s109

 

 

Now deleted?

 

Can't think why!

[berrasbraw]

There is nothing wrong with what Doncaster says in that blog from July 2012.  Some of the new rules were adopted, hence Hearts were sanctioned for non payment of wages on time, however the substance of the FFP rules was voted down by clubs.

Who was the ?250k fine Rangers got,going too?

[jambovambo]

Here's a wee reminder of the five-way agreement : http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8029/8017271667_d0ccc1340f_o.jpg

 

I know it's from a Celtic blog

[269miles]

The  scheme was not illegal at the time but the withholding of Tax has NOW been deemed to have been ilegal.

  I'm sorry but as a Hearts man I still donot see how the Oldco situation, while it DOES bring on field advantage, is " Illegal" when the sceme underlying, was legal

 

Maybe the HMRC will indeed go and crie the tax out of the shells of the old co players.

 

But that aside,  this has been like saying, now we can get away with diving in the box.  They dived in the box, got away with it.   That is what passes for acceptable sportsmanship,  so there is

no chance the SFA will revisit the Rangers (Oldco) story now.   Just my view, I don't mid if they did.

It's "illegal" because it is and was a tax scam. That's what the latest judgement says. It couldn't be clearer. How many times do we have to say

it? Rangers knew it (they hid and lied about the side letters) , CO knew it and so kept his mouth firmly shut.

 

This goes way beyond a tax scam : the behavior of CO in this (conflicted , but still in office) is a disgrace and he should have been investigated by the SFA. And he wasn't the only one.

 

The attitude of the SFA & SPFL has always been to look away and hope the problem didn't land on their desks. Well it has. Again.

[Unknown user]

It's "illegal" because it is and was a tax scam. That's what the latest judgement says. It couldn't be clearer. How many times do we have to say

it? Rangers knew it (they hid and lied about the side letters) , CO knew it and so kept his mouth firmly shut.

 

This goes way beyond a tax scam : the behavior of CO in this (conflicted , but still in office) is a disgrace and he should have been investigated by the SFA. And he wasn't the only one.

 

The attitude of the SFA & SPFL has always been to look away and hope the problem didn't land on their desks. Well it has. Again.

Exactly. 

EBTs are legal,  using them as a means of evading tax on earnings has never been legal.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

It's "illegal" because it is and was a tax scam. That's what the latest judgement says. It couldn't be clearer. How many times do we have to say

it? Rangers knew it (they hid and lied about the side letters) , CO knew it and so kept his mouth firmly shut.

 

This goes way beyond a tax scam : the behavior of CO in this (conflicted , but still in office) is a disgrace and he should have been investigated by the SFA. And he wasn't the only one.

 

The attitude of the SFA & SPFL has always been to look away and hope the problem didn't land on their desks. Well it has. Again.

 

And it will keep doing so until they actually do something about it, which is to the satisfaction of the whole of Scottish football not just to the satisfaction of one club.

[Hearts007]

269miles, on 10 Nov 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

It's "illegal" because it is and was a tax scam. That's what the latest judgement says. It couldn't be clearer. How many times do we have to say

it? Rangers knew it (they hid and lied about the side letters) , CO knew it and so kept his mouth firmly shut.

 

This goes way beyond a tax scam : the behavior of CO in this (conflicted , but still in office) is a disgrace and he should have been investigated by the SFA. And he wasn't the only one.

 

The attitude of the SFA & SPFL has always been to look away and hope the problem didn't land on their desks. Well it has. Again.

Agreed, the whole thing was a scam, still would love to know why Graeme Souness, received ?30k through an EBT in 2001, 10 years after leaving the club in 1991.

[Sidsnot]

Someone started a petition.

 

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/justice-for-football

[Unknown user]

Agreed, the whole thing was a scam, still would love to know why Graeme Souness, received ?30k through an EBT in 2001, 10 years after leaving the club in 1991.

I looked up where Souness was at the time and what transfers were kicking about, maybe between rangers and his club at the time, just out of curiosity, you know

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tugay_Kerimo%C4%9Flu

[Barney Rubble]

Here's a wee reminder of the five-way agreement : http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8029/8017271667_d0ccc1340f_o.jpg

 

I know it's from a Celtic blog

the text is so small even at 500% zoom i cant read anything , anychance it can be enlarged for mr magoos like me ??

[Footballfirst]

Who was the ?250k fine Rangers got,going too?

 

I don't see the relevance of your question in response to my post re Doncaster's blog.

 

FFP was nothing to do with Rangers being fined ?250K for non disclosure of payments to players.

 

In answer to your question, the ?250K fine was imposed by an SPL commission so should have been paid by the Oldco to the SPL, However, for reasons I don't fully understand (maybe related to the 5 Way agreement) the SPFL are seeking payment by the Newco.  Newco has appealed it and the tribunal held at the end of last month has yet to deliver a verdict.

[jambovambo]

the text is so small even at 500% zoom i cant read anything , anychance it can be enlarged for mr magoos like me ??

Just click on it ?

[Unknown user]

the text is so small even at 500% zoom i cant read anything , anychance it can be enlarged for mr magoos like me ??

[Hearts007]

Smithee, on 10 Nov 2015 - 11:24 AM, said:

I looked up where Souness was at the time and what transfers were kicking about, maybe between rangers and his club at the time, just out of curiosity, you know

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tugay_Kerimo%C4%9Flu

[Barney Rubble]

      much better 

[jambovambo]

Good blog on yesterday by the Clumpany guy :

 

https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/where-should-i-stick-this-asterisk/

[RobboM]

I know this seems slightly off topic but Rangers have released a statement following the WADA condemnation of Russia's cheating in athletics.

 

"It is our irrevocable belief that this Russia's olympic history, including its many successes, is beyond debate," added the statement from Ibrox.

"Rangers cannot countenance or accept any talk, attempts or actions designed to undermine what Russia's Olympics Team  has achieved throughout its long history.

"Rangers has made it clear it wishes to reach out and work with all clubs to help revitalise the Olympics, which has also suffered in recent years. There is much to be done and Rangers wants to be part of the way forward.

"The Olympics has to become more attractive to potential sponsors and partners if the finance levels required are to be generated but this can only be done if we present a coherent and united strategy. Therefore, a line must be drawn now if we are all to prosper."

 

[Hearts007]

Good blog on yesterday by the Clumpany guy :

 

https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/where-should-i-stick-this-asterisk/

"?The first thing to be said is that Rangers has made it clear it wishes to reach out and work with all clubs to help revitalise Scottish football" jeez coming from a club that's still being loaned millions to survive..laughable

[Fxxx the SPFL]

Agreed, the whole thing was a scam, still would love to know why Graeme Souness, received ?30k through an EBT in 2001, 10 years after leaving the club in 1991.

not sure but was there not some dodgy kickback involving Boumsong to Newcastle unless my memory is playing tricks

[Hearts007]

Ray the auld git, on 10 Nov 2015 - 11:48 AM, said:

not sure but was there not some dodgy kickback involving Boumsong to Newcastle unless my memory is playing tricks

Newcastle under new manager Graeme Souness, made an ?8 million bid for him, which Rangers accepted in a deal that was finalized once the January 2005 transfer window opened.

[Unknown user]

not sure but was there not some dodgy kickback involving Boumsong to Newcastle unless my memory is playing tricks

As above, Tugay to Blackburn was about that time, Boumsong was 2 years later when Souness was at Newcastle

[Unknown user]

4 years

[Poseidon]

Someone started a petition.

 

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/justice-for-football

1,000 signatures already

Edited November 10, 2015 by Allez Rossoneri

[DETTY29]

A damming part was if oldco Rangers thought everything was legal/above board, why did they not pass the side letters onto the Sfa as part of legal player registration process ?. They hid them hoping to get away with it..

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

And told HMRC they didn't exist in the first place.

 

And shredded the ones betweem the police finding some and HMRC checking again under warrant?

[reaths17]

I don't see the relevance of your question in response to my post re Doncaster's blog.

 

FFP was nothing to do with Rangers being fined ?250K for non disclosure of payments to players.

 

In answer to your question, the ?250K fine was imposed by an SPL commission so should have been paid by the Oldco to the SPL, However, for reasons I don't fully understand (maybe related to the 5 Way agreement) the SPFL are seeking payment by the Newco.  Newco has appealed it and the tribunal held at the end of last month has yet to deliver a verdict.

newco agreed to pay all footballing debt's etc going forward, as part of the agreement. i think we benefitted through this with lee Wallace monies.

Edited November 10, 2015 by reaths17

[Footballfirst]

Rangers paid a total of ?48M into the EBTs over 10 years.  The Tax and NIC due on that amount was approx ?25M. I appreciate that a proportion of the EBT payments went to non-playing staff, but that ?2.5M a year was the extra rewards (sporting advantage?) paid to their staff, that they had over clubs that had "normal" tax arrangements.

Edited November 10, 2015 by Footballfirst

[Samster]

And told HMRC they didn't exist in the first place.

 

And shredded the ones betweem the police finding some and HMRC checking again under warrant?

 

I was just about to say that.  Didn't the police eventually have to raid Ibrox and remove files because Rangers refused to voluntarily submit them despite repeated requests?

[reaths17]

It's "illegal" because it is and was a tax scam. That's what the latest judgement says. It couldn't be clearer. How many times do we have to say

it? Rangers knew it (they hid and lied about the side letters) , CO knew it and so kept his mouth firmly shut.

 

This goes way beyond a tax scam : the behavior of CO in this (conflicted , but still in office) is a disgrace and he should have been investigated by the SFA. And he wasn't the only one.

 

The attitude of the SFA & SPFL has always been to look away and hope the problem didn't land on their desks. Well it has. Again.

mr CO could be facing way worse than an asterix against his name, he seems to pop up at all angles of this, start,middle,end,left side,right side, outside,inside, above, under everywhere you turn theres traces of CO, i'm sure tax swindling is pretty serious, in real life under real rules of law and not the mickey mouse ones he helped incorporate into the GFA rule book

[132goals1958]

I know this seems slightly off topic but Rangers have released a statement following the WADA condemnation of Russia's cheating in athletics.

 

"It is our irrevocable belief that this Russia's olympic history, including its many successes, is beyond debate," added the statement from Ibrox.

 

"Rangers cannot countenance or accept any talk, attempts or actions designed to undermine what Russia's Olympics Team  has achieved throughout its long history.

 

"Rangers has made it clear it wishes to reach out and work with all clubs to help revitalise the Olympics, which has also suffered in recent years. There is much to be done and Rangers wants to be part of the way forward.

 

"The Olympics has to become more attractive to potential sponsors and partners if the finance levels required are to be generated but this can only be done if we present a coherent and united strategy. Therefore, a line must be drawn now if we are all to prosper."

 

 

In Rangers statement if you substituted synonyms for the two words countenance   and undermine.  it can be  rephrased as We ill not tolerate any challenge to the achievements in our long history. Absolutely breathtaking in its arrogance.

[Footballfirst]

newco agreed to pay all footballing debt's etc going forward, as part of the agreement. i think we benefitted through this with lee Wallace monies.

 

An extract from the LNS Decision

 

(7) As noted in the Commission?s earlier decision made on 12 September 2012 there is no allegation that the current owner and operator of the club, The Rangers Football Club Limited (?Newco?), contravened the SPL Rules or could be held responsible for any breach by Oldco;

(8) In all the circumstances the Commission has imposed a fine of ?250,000 on Oldco.

 

LNS was clear that the fine was on Oldco and that the Newco could not be liable.  The date of the commission's decision was 28/02/2013, a full seven months after the "5-way agreement".  That is why I don't fully understand why the Newco is being pursued now.

 

BDO's first report to creditors in May 2013 also contained the following passages:

In respect of the SPL tribunal, creditors will be aware that the Company was found to have contravened SPL rules in relation to the issue of dual contracts and was fined ?250k although not stripped of any titles. To date, no claim has been intimated to the Joint Liquidators in respect of this fine.

 

The issue of expenses in respect of the SPL tribunal is ongoing. However, we consider it unlikely that the liquidation estate will be held liable for any significant level of expenses and, as noted above, adequate protections are in place to cover this eventuality.

Edited November 10, 2015 by Footballfirst

[Sidsnot]

Good blog on yesterday by the Clumpany guy :

 

https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/where-should-i-stick-this-asterisk/

Agreed,I think that fella makes better points than Phil Wotsisnameagain,I've read a few on here and they're usually spot on.

[269miles]

In effect those players receiving an Ebt were not registered properly with the Sfa as the side letters/dual contracts were not revealed to them imo..

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

IIRC, it's important to remember that this is what LNS was asked to look at - proper (or not) registration.

 

What we are asking now (I think) is that the SFA/SPFL look at Rangers in the context of being convicted tax cheats. And while

they're at it , the role of their club officials who were elected to high office within the SFA who did and said nothing.

Edited November 10, 2015 by 269miles

[Footballfirst]

An extract from the LNS Decision

 

(7) As noted in the Commission?s earlier decision made on 12 September 2012 there is no allegation that the current owner and operator of the club, The Rangers Football Club Limited (?Newco?), contravened the SPL Rules or could be held responsible for any breach by Oldco;

(8) In all the circumstances the Commission has imposed a fine of ?250,000 on Oldco.

 

LNS was clear that the fine was on Oldco and that the Newco could not be liable.  The date of the commission's decision was 28/02/2013, a full seven months after the "5-way agreement".  That is why I don't fully understand why the Newco is being pursued now.

 

BDO's first report to creditors in May 2013 also contained the following passages:

In respect of the SPL tribunal, creditors will be aware that the Company was found to have contravened SPL rules in relation to the issue of dual contracts and was fined ?250k although not stripped of any titles. To date, no claim has been intimated to the Joint Liquidators in respect of this fine.

 

The issue of expenses in respect of the SPL tribunal is ongoing. However, we consider it unlikely that the liquidation estate will be held liable for any significant level of expenses and, as noted above, adequate protections are in place to cover this eventuality.

 

BDO's subsequent report in November 2013 stated the following:

3. SPL Tribunal

As previously reported, the Company was found to have contravened SPL rules in relation to the issue of dual contracts, and was fined ?250k.

 

The legal advisors acting for the SPL subsequently sought an award of costs, initially against the Joint Liquidators in their personal capacity and Newco (being the purchaser of the business and assets of the Company). However, following a further hearing the Tribunal awarded costs of ?150k against the Company, with no award against the Joint Liquidators personally or Newco.

 

Further to this, the legal advisors to the SPL attempted to seek payment of the fine and costs award as an expense of the Liquidation. This was immediately rejected by the Joint Liquidators, following advice received from their own legal counsel that this had no basis in law.

 

Following receipt of our correspondence, the SPL have modified their stance and have now submitted a claim in the liquidation as an unsecured creditor. We will adjudicate on this claim as part of the Liquidation process in due course.

Edited November 10, 2015 by Footballfirst

[Maroon tinted glasses 2]

In effect those players receiving an Ebt were not registered properly with the Sfa as the side letters/dual contracts were not revealed to them imo..

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

This is what my argument is, whilst the EBT thing was a bit of a grey area at the time what is clear as day is rangers withheld relevant contractural information from the SFA and therefor the players it affected were not correctly registered and rangers should then have received the same punishment as Sion did whereby they were historicaly deducted 3 points for each domestic game where one of the players played totalling a loss of 36 points.

[Mysterion]

Last weeks decision in a court of law blows the Lns enquiry out the water now. This is also why I think Bdo won't appeal this to the Supreme Court. Sevco knowingly circumvented uk tax laws in order to have players play for them they otherwise couldn't have afforded through normal legal means & Sdm was by far the biggest recipient of the whole Ebt scam too. [emoji6]

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Is there are reason why some players are highlighted in bold? I wasn't sure why other than to highlight that they are some of the biggest fuds around.

[269miles]

Last weeks decision in a court of law blows the Lns enquiry out the water now. This is also why I think Bdo won't appeal this to the Supreme Court. Sevco knowingly circumvented uk tax laws in order to have players play for them they otherwise couldn't have afforded through normal legal means & Sdm was by far the biggest recipient of the whole Ebt scam too. [emoji6]

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

great stuff , as ever.

[Maroon tinted glasses 2]

Last weeks decision in a court of law blows the Lns enquiry out the water now. This is also why I think Bdo won't appeal this to the Supreme Court. Sevco knowingly circumvented uk tax laws in order to have players play for them they otherwise couldn't have afforded through normal legal means & Sdm was by far the biggest recipient of the whole Ebt scam too. [emoji6]

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So Steven Thompson was one of those named as a beneficiary from the EBT yet the only thing he was asked on TV on Sunday was if he thought rangers should be stripped of titles. WOW investigative journalism at its best.  

[jambovambo]

http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2434059/advisers-in-invidious-position-after-rangers-ebt-ruling

Accountancy Age

[reaths17]

BDO's subsequent report in November 2013 stated the following:

3. SPL Tribunal

As previously reported, the Company was found to have contravened SPL rules in relation to the issue of dual contracts, and was fined ?250k.

 

The legal advisors acting for the SPL subsequently sought an award of costs, initially against the Joint Liquidators in their personal capacity and Newco (being the purchaser of the business and assets of the Company). However, following a further hearing the Tribunal awarded costs of ?150k against the Company, with no award against the Joint Liquidators personally or Newco.

 

Further to this, the legal advisors to the SPL attempted to seek payment of the fine and costs award as an expense of the Liquidation. This was immediately rejected by the Joint Liquidators, following advice received from their own legal counsel that this had no basis in law.

 

Following receipt of our correspondence, the SPL have modified their stance and have now submitted a claim in the liquidation as an unsecured creditor. We will adjudicate on this claim as part of the Liquidation process in due course.

I think its fair to say LNS was a sham as most evidence was with held and restrictions were placed on what could be looked into, it makes everything very murky, as what has now transpired changes every previous ruling/agreement whether 5 way or not.

 

a proper independent enquiry/investigation should now be conducted independent of the SPL/GFA as there seems to be way to much collusion going on between these bodies and oldco/newco.

 

it really is the grimest of times for Scottish fitba. the whole event is nothing more than a charade and devalued as a sporting occasion, outside the uglies it hasn't even been much of an entertainment.

[269miles]

Farin, can you clarify something. While the focus has been on the Rangers players, THEIR EBTs and the improper registration issue- what about SDM ?

 

Was his EBT kosher ?

 

Or does the recent ruling apply to all payments made under all EBTs ?

 

Cheers in advance.

[Hearts007]

Alex Rae ?569,000 :rofl:

[Jodami]

Farin, can you clarify something. While the focus has been on the Rangers players, THEIR EBTs and the improper registration issue- what about SDM ?

 

Was his EBT kosher ?

 

Or does the recent ruling apply to all payments made under all EBTs ?

 

Cheers in advance.

I am not an advocate of the honours system in the UK but surely if Lester Piggot was stripped of his OBE for evading personal tax then Murray should have his knighthood removed for orchestrating mass tax evasion.  

[corryjambo]

Alex Rae ?569,000 :rofl:

 

Marvin Andrews ?316,025     

[reaths17]

I am not an advocate of the honours system in the UK but surely if Lester Piggot was stripped of his OBE for evading personal tax then Murray should have his knighthood removed for orchestrating mass tax evasion.

the pig got jail for his indiscretions 3 years if I remember right, that's why I've said CO must be on a shoogly peg as he's been all over this from the start and his sidekick murray is lurking in the background.

[davieholt]

Last weeks decision in a court of law blows the Lns enquiry out the water now. This is also why I think Bdo won't appeal this to the Supreme Court. Sevco knowingly circumvented uk tax laws in order to have players play for them they otherwise couldn't have afforded through normal legal means & Sdm was by far the biggest recipient of the whole Ebt scam too. [emoji6]

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Not Sevco - Rangers.

[Hearts007]

corryjambo, on 10 Nov 2015 - 2:08 PM, said:

Marvin Andrews ?316,025     

Julie Andrews wasn't even worth that

[I P Knightley]

 

LNS was clear that the fine was on Oldco and that the Newco could not be liable.  The date of the commission's decision was 28/02/2013, a full seven months after the "5-way agreement".  That is why I don't fully understand why the Newco is being pursued now.

 

Apologies, FF. I appreciate you're all over this so it's probably me being stoopid but I understood that the findings of last week in favour of HMRC resulted in Oldco owing more to them rather than them chasing Newco. 

 

I don't see how Newco can be pursued over the tax liabilities of the company in liquidation. (The same as you're saying but you seem to imply that they are being pursued.)

 

Is there are reason why some players are highlighted in bold? I wasn't sure why other than to highlight that they are some of the biggest fuds around.

Can't be that. Barry Ferguson isn't in bold.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

I am not an advocate of the honours system in the UK but surely if Lester Piggot was stripped of his OBE for evading personal tax then Murray should have his knighthood removed for orchestrating mass tax evasion.  

 

And this is just one of the reasons why there needs to be a full independent investigation into this affair starting with the SFA/SPL/SPFL/Rangers, Sir David Murray and the whole lot of cheating bar stewards.

 

For far to many years honest hard working football players and us the cash strapped fans have been cheated in a game which was loaded and fixed in one teams favour and the authorities who should oversee fair play and sporting integrity for all were at worst complicit in or at best turned a blind eye to the cheating, either way the people running our game should be brought to book equally as much as Rangers should be.  

[reaths17]

Apologies, FF. I appreciate you're all over this so it's probably me being stoopid but I understood that the findings of last week in favour of HMRC resulted in Oldco owing more to them rather than them chasing Newco. 

 

I don't see how Newco can be pursued over the tax liabilities of the company in liquidation. (The same as you're saying but you seem to imply that they are being pursued.)

i'm still pretty sure it was covered in the agreement and it was considered a footballing debt as it was concerning them not disclosing their payments and not the tax dodging itself which was still to be decided.

Edited November 10, 2015 by reaths17

[RobboM]

Rangers paid a total of ?48M into the EBTs over 10 years.  The Tax and NIC due on that amount was approx ?25M. I appreciate that a proportion of the EBT payments went to non-playing staff, but that ?2.5M a year was the extra rewards (sporting advantage?) paid to their staff, that they had over clubs that had "normal" tax arrangements.

I thought HMRC treated the ?48m as the net figures after tax and NIC had been deducted? Wouldn't that make Rangers sporting advantage greater than ?25m?