Rodge Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) edit: Too slow Edited February 14, 2012 by Rodge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcjambo Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Duff & Gray (oops Phelps) appointed Already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Guys & Girls! It's not all that bad if they have time to get there own administrator in! Reason for this being is -10 points transfer embargo sell some of the players? end up a wee shite team instead of a big shite team? haha cheer up folks!! When the transfer window is shut that doesn't really mean all that much. Minus 10 points is hardly a punishment either? They league has been Celtics since New Year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 HMRC initially objected to Duff & Phelps - said there were concerns of "public perception" if they were appointed. #Rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Winchester Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Already? Will have had it prepared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjwilson95 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 When the transfer window is shut that doesn't really mean all that much. Minus 10 points is hardly a punishment either? They league has been Celtics since New Year. That is true, however, but surely they will need to sell some assets?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swavkav Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 count down clock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo, Goodbye Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Will have had it prepared. I suppose, I wonder where this leaves HMRC though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...a bit disco Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Duff and Phelps statement from 4 hours ago. http://www.creditman.biz/uk/members/news-view.asp?newsviewID=15248&id=1&mylocation=News&chksrc=NNow4251 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southcapital Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 When the transfer window is shut that doesn't really mean all that much. Minus 10 points is hardly a punishment either? They league has been Celtics since New Year. surely football rules on transfers cant over-rule legal rules in administration? if admin demand they be sold how can a football league legally stop them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 surely football rules on transfers cant over-rule legal rules in administration? if admin demand they be sold how can a football league legally stop them? They can be sold but the players won't be able to play for their new sides until next season. So aye, let the good times roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super_vlad Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 looks like this battle has being won by CW (anyone notice that makes Crook ######) but the war will be won by HMRC! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Has anyone worked out who owns Ibrox and the training complex yet? Not yet, but going by the last published accounts (2010) their fixed asstes included Freehold properties worth ?121 million and long leasehold properties of ?3.9 million. I don't know if that could be read as they own Ibrox (and maybe some other properties, e.g players flats/houses) and lease Murray Park? Another addition I've not seen mentioned; after 3.30pm today they will owe their debenture holders, repayment of their outstanding debentures, something like ?5 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 This is lie history, its like the last days of rome, Somebody get CW a fiddle quick!! Where were you when Kennedy was shot.....Where were you when Rangers imploded, on the Internet having to type changing hands regularily as the other is pre-occupied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Players seek advice! http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17028718 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergio Garcia Posted February 14, 2012 Author Share Posted February 14, 2012 Again I am just repeating most of above with my mates text but here is his latest "Case adjourned until 3.30 for Rangers to appoint an administrator if they don't then it will be in the hands of HMRC. It's come out that Whyte hasn't paid tax since he took over the club. Unbelievable!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Winchester Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I suppose, I wonder where this leaves HMRC though Not a lot for them to do if Rangers push it through by 3:30pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Depends on the official HMRC rate of interest at any given time, but I can't see that it would be anything like 5%. Essentially what happens is that instead of being paid say ?100,000, the EBT lends the player ?100,000 as an interest-free loan. The tax payable on that loan is calculated by reference to interest that would otherwise be payable if the ?100,000 was on deposit. HMRC publish the rate which is currently 4% (and has been since April 2010). Tax is then paid on that amount. In other words, a 50% taxpayer would pay 2% at the moment. The problem with the EBT is that the loan has to be repayable and is normally repayable on demand. Now if you had your own business and set up an EBT as a way of getting money out without paying too much tax, you would probably be quite relaxed about this arrangement, and confident that the Trustees would never demand repayment. If you are a footballer with no real connection to the club, you would probably want some comfort that no demand would be made for the loan to be repaid. My suspicion is that HMRC have some sort of evidence that the players were given some sort of guarantee and that is what would make the whole arrangement a sham. And Rangers avoided paying Employers NI on the entire amounts paid to the EBT's, a significant sum over an 8 -10 year period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCrae Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 They can be sold but the players won't be able to play for their new sides until next season. So aye, let the good times roll. Players can move to a different league before the end of the season and play. They would not be allowed to play in the SPL until next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 It seems the 3:30pm deadline is an agreement between both parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordeaux 03 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Why have HMRC waited until now to try and put them into administration? Did nobody there think that CW might try it himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Not a lot for them to do if Rangers push it through by 3:30pm. If Whyte chooses his own administrators, they still need to do a deal with their creditors to come out of admin. By the looks of things, HMRC aren't going to let them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swavkav Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I am loving the fact that its a East coast court thats gonna smash the weegie scum..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadKiller Dog Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I dont think Craig White wins ,HMRC will be watching every move the Administrator makes they will have to work with in the law . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 And PFA Scotland chief executive Fraser Wishart told BBC Scotland: "Players are uncertain. I've spoken to a number of them already and they are concerned. "Suddenly, contracts are perhaps not worth the paper they're written on if administration comes." Looks like they could all jump ship! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodge Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I assume this is their appointed administrators.... ...their site seems to have crashed with all the traffic! http://www.duffandphelps.com/Pages/default.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milky_26 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Why have HMRC waited until now to try and put them into administration? Did nobody there think that CW might try it himself? they were going to do it yesterday but rangers beat them to the punch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radio Ga Ga Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Can anybody explain the difference what Administrator is appointed ? I thought it was the Administrators duty to try and get the best value for all creditors ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Depends on the official HMRC rate of interest at any given time, but I can't see that it would be anything like 5%. Essentially what happens is that instead of being paid say ?100,000, the EBT lends the player ?100,000 as an interest-free loan. The tax payable on that loan is calculated by reference to interest that would otherwise be payable if the ?100,000 was on deposit. HMRC publish the rate which is currently 4% (and has been since April 2010). Tax is then paid on that amount. In other words, a 50% taxpayer would pay 2% at the moment. The problem with the EBT is that the loan has to be repayable and is normally repayable on demand. Now if you had your own business and set up an EBT as a way of getting money out without paying too much tax, you would probably be quite relaxed about this arrangement, and confident that the Trustees would never demand repayment. If you are a footballer with no real connection to the club, you would probably want some comfort that no demand would be made for the loan to be repaid. My suspicion is that HMRC have some sort of evidence that the players were given some sort of guarantee and that is what would make the whole arrangement a sham. I heard Andy Gray (on talksport) this morning briefly mention about the EBT, and from recollection he said along the lines that; lots of companies (football clubs) used them, but they were designed as a "trust" (as the name implies) and were for things like pension funds, medical insurnace (?) but that Rangers had used it just to pay salaries.... I guess he should know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Winchester Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 If Whyte chooses his own administrators, they still need to do a deal with their creditors to come out of admin. By the looks of things, HMRC aren't going to let them. The administrators can do a pre-pack though... Which is why who the administrators are can be so important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The next 90 mins is the best I have spent since the last Derby. Only this time you know you are going to win, its just by how much. I am going to be blind by the end of the day. Sales in Kleenex are going through the roof for lots of reasons, Buy Kleeenex chares now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Whyte shown to be a liar and Rangers shown to be cheats again. Last night Whyte stated clearly I'm an interview that administration "is a strong possibility, but working hard to maybe stop going into administration" yet according to the Rangers lawyer they had it all arranged to appoint administrators TODAY. This clearly shows lies either last night or today or both from Whyte and Rangers. This will only make HMRC more determined and in fact Whyte/Rangers by doing this and being sneaky may have just burned any bridges they may have had left effectively they have cut their nose off to spite the face. They will get NO leeway now and HMRC will take them for everything and that includes aggressively pursueing any "Phoenix" company for the full amount. Either way Rangers are now fecked big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The biggest creditor is HMRC and they can still refuse a CVA. Which, they probably will. The only bummer is that if they appointed an Administrator, they could effectively liquidate the club in days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swavkav Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The biggest creditor is HMRC and they can still refuse a CVA. Which, they probably will. The only bummer is that if they appointed an Administrator, they could effectively liquidate the club in days. Yep, choice between a quick death and a slow one. I think I would prefer a long one tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo66 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 And Rangers avoided paying Employers NI on the entire amounts paid to the EBT's, a significant sum over an 8 -10 year period. It all depends on how it was structured. If they paid money to an EBT, then Rangers may well have avoided NICs, but on the other hand, they will have paid corporation tax. If they tried to claim a corporation tax deduction, then I think it would be odds on that HMRC will win its court action on that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skivingatwork Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Whyte was playing a game of brinkmanship with HMRC yesterday by threatening administration and effectively saying "You'll get nothing if we go into admin..." HMRC have today called his bluff and forced him to take Rangers into admin, a process they cannot come out of without HMRC's consent to pennies in the pound, which they are very unlikely to accept Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Benoit Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 If HMRC refuse the CVA are Rangers still probably looking at liquidation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Derek Johnston "If the club aren't playing in Europe then where do they make their money" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 If HMRC refuse the CVA are Rangers still probably looking at liquidation? I think it would be unavoidable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Whyte shown to be a liar and Rangers shown to be cheats again. Last night Whyte stated clearly I'm an interview that administration "is a strong possibility, but working hard to maybe stop going into administration" yet according to the Rangers lawyer they had it all arranged to appoint administrators TODAY. This clearly shows lies either last night or today or both from Whyte and Rangers. This will only make HMRC more determined and in fact Whyte/Rangers by doing this and being sneaky may have just burned any bridges they may have had left effectively they have cut their nose off to spite the face. They will get NO leeway now and HMRC will take them for everything and that includes aggressively pursueing any "Phoenix" company for the full amount. Either way Rangers are now fecked big time. Ho told his own Supporters groups on Friday that Admin was only a possibility and not plan A or B, yet yesterday his Lawyers filed for Administration, they must have started the paper work before that meeting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Winchester Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The administrators can do a pre-pack though... Which is why who the administrators are can be so important. Just to add this means that they could transfer all assets to a new company. Creditors would get pretty much sod all. As a new company Rangers would need to reapply but they would pretty much have all their assets and start off debt free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 If HMRC refuse the CVA are Rangers still probably looking at liquidation? Yes and no probably about it - destruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivanhoe Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 If no CVA can be agreed then the club can be liquidated. Whyte with the ground and training park can set up Rangers mark 2. The key to this is how strong the league are. Do they put Rangers 2 into Div three or keep them in the premier for the sake of the TV deal? If they keep them in the Premier league then the SPL is finished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armageddon Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 1 Celtic 65 2 Rangers 51 3 Motherwell 42 4 Hearts 36 5 St Johnstone 35 6 Dundee Utd 30 7 Aberdeen 30 8 Kilmarnock 29 9 St Mirren 28 10 Inverness 26 11 Hibernian 19 12 Dunfermline 18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Winchester Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Yes and no probably about it - destruction. The problem is whether they can transfer assets to a new company with a pre-pack. Meaning Whyte would essentially win. The debt would be wiped, Rangers would still have their assets and their only problems after that would be getting back into the league (which, if sucessful would probably mean point deductions for a number of years as well as no Europe for 3). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartsfc_fan Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 1 Celtic 65 2 Motherwell 42 3 Hearts 36 4 St Johnstone 35 5 Dundee Utd 30 6 Aberdeen 30 7 Kilmarnock 29 8 St Mirren 28 9 Inverness 26 10 Hibernian 19 11 Dunfermline 18 :'> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dipped Flake Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Our tax bill has been paid in full today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) If no CVA can be agreed then the club can be liquidated. Whyte with the ground and training park can set up Rangers mark 2. The key to this is how strong the league are. Do they put Rangers 2 into Div three or keep them in the premier for the sake of the TV deal? If they keep them in the Premier league then the SPL is finished. But....it means that Hearts can go through the same route. They wouldn't treat one team in the league more preferably than another, would they? Edited February 14, 2012 by hughesie27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Baws. baws baws baws baws bawwwwwwwws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts