The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[The Gasman]

so the fallout is that anyone who got money has to give it back? or simply pay the tax due?

 

what's the story.

 

I'd guess that a lot of these individuals will be less than happy if that's the case, and may look at taking legal action to protect themselves, and what they'll see as "their" money.

[jambovambo]

Good luck to HMRC trying to get that tax money back from those that were paid.

 

"Who are these people ?"

[Auldreekie1874]

I'd guess that a lot of these individuals will be less than happy if that's the case, and may look at taking legal action to protect themselves, and what they'll see as "their" money.

 

Yep, Great isn't it?

 

The possible outcomes are endless.

 

[Goldstone Wonder]

Good luck to HMRC trying to get that tax money back from those that were paid.

 

"Who are these people ?"

Hopefully Alistair McCoist is one of them. We need transparency after all.

[jambovambo]

p58 :

 

It was conceded that advances in favour of certain players are taxable and liable to NIC, and

we have found that in certain other limited instances, there may be a similar liability.

To that extent the assessments should stand. In these circumstances we expect that it

is sufficient that we allow the Appeal in principle. Parties can no doubt settle the

sums due for the limited number of cases mentioned without further reference to the

Tribunal.

[davieholt]

A lot of detail to read through.

 

 

In practical terms the outcome is irrelevent. HMRC got the last laugh by not agreeing the CVA and Rangers died.

[IMA MAROON]

Rangers should take the taxman to court.

If i understand correctly oldco has won and still went into liquidation.

[tartofmidlothian]

Is this a decent summary?

 

Oldco won the tax case, but its presence a few months back was what forced them into liquidation and the third division.

 

HMRC will now go after those who were paid the money for the tax on it plus any overdue fees, which might not affect everyone but certainly will Doddsy, Murray and so on, according to the BBC's evidence. Good thing Ally and Wattie didn't have them, eh?

 

The side letters would have been due punishment from the SPL, if Rangers still existed of course.

 

Anything else?

[jambovambo]

57. We heard evidence on how Mr Red had a conversation with Mrs Crimson on the eve of Mrs Crimson?s giving of evidence, and passed her a brown envelope

containing copies of Murray Group company minutes of meetings deciding on the contributions to the trust.

 

People's names were anonymised ... but a) it reads like Cluedo and what about Mr White and Mr Green ?

[Goldstone Wonder]

A lot of detail to read through.

 

 

In practical terms the outcome is irrelevent. HMRC got the last laugh by not agreeing the CVA and Rangers died.

Which in reality is the best of all worlds. They died and then ended up winning the case anyway. No doubt Charles Green will be looking for a refund.

[jambovambo]

Is this a decent summary?

 

Oldco won the tax case, but its presence a few months back was what forced them into liquidation and the third division.

 

HMRC will now go after those who were paid the money for the tax on it plus any overdue fees, which might not affect everyone but certainly will Doddsy, Murray and so on, according to the BBC's evidence. Good thing Ally and Wattie didn't have them, eh?

 

The side letters would have been due punishment from the SPL, if Rangers still existed of course.

 

Anything else?

I'd love to be a fly on the wall of Hector paying Graeme Souness a visit and asking for tax back ...

[Goldstone Wonder]

Rangers should take the taxman to court.

I'm sure they would if they still existed.

[davieholt]

Rangers should take the taxman to court.

 

For taking a disputed assessment to appeal ? Really ?

[Harry Palmer]

HMRC considering an appeal as it wasn't an unanimous decision by the Tribunal.

[269miles]

Rangers tried to hide the side lettesr from HMRC and never disclosed them. HMRC only found them when they raided RFC.

The original trustees started getting cold feet about the EBT payments so they were dumped and replaced by "Trident". Whose witness gets slaughtered in the summing up.

 

Here's a snippet about the witnesses for the defence -

 

In the course of their enquiry there had been concealment from HMRC of

many relevant documents. In footballer employment files volunteered 5 to HMRC sideletters

had been removed apparently. However, in files seized unexpectedly from the

Club side-letters were present. No records had been produced in relation to the

approval of executives? bonuses. This was highly relevant, Mr Thomson stressed,

particularly as the onus of proof lay on the taxpayers. Mr Red and Rangers had not

10 been forthcoming in providing all relevant documentation, he suggested.

149. While Mrs Crimson emphasised Trident?s seeking ?World Check? information

about the sub-trusts? Protectors, the value of that information was useless other than

for money-laundering purposes.

150. In reviewing the credibility and reliability of the Appellants? witnesses

15 Mr Thomson delivered a coruscating attack particularly on Mr Red and Mrs Crimson.

He reviewed Mr Red?s attitude earlier towards HMRC?s investigation as well as his

evidence before the Tribunal. Mr Red, he submitted, had been uncooperative and

misleading in the course of the investigation. He had lied in material respects to the

Tribunal, Mr Thomson claimed. Most culpably, having given his own evidence he

20 ?approached? Mrs Crimson on the eve of her giving evidence, giving her

documentary records relating to company minutes in relation to payments into the

trust and other matters of its administration. Apparently he had asked her to consider

the terms of these documents before giving her evidence.

151. What emerged from Mrs Crimson?s evidence was that Trident was no more

25 than a cipher, prepared to act on the directions of the Murray Group, and which

disregarded the duties of trusteeship. Mrs Crimson?s answers were often in formulaic

terms. In her Witness Statement she had indicated that copies of the sub-trust

accounts had been sent to the Group companies. This was not in fact the case,

Mr Thomson said.

30 152. Mr Thomson?s criticisms extended to other officials of the Murray Group. For

instance, there was a collective hesitancy to describe the Scheme?s purpose as ?tax

avoidance?. Their evidence and Witness Statements spoke with a ?solidarity?

following a ?corporate line?. This to an extent might be explained away by the

English practice (followed here) of Counsel drafting the initial form of Witness

35 Statement, but major concerns remained. Mr Thomson made criticisms of the

evidence of Mr Black, Mr Blue, Mr Magenta and Mr Scarlet. Messrs Magenta and

Scarlet had, Mr Thomson suggested, given a rehearsed account of the negotiation of

the 2005/06 UEFA bonus on the eve of the crucial match at Famagousta. Only at the

last minute was it agreed that a payment into trust should be made, they claimed.

 

 

 

Cannae wait for the Glasgow spin machine to get working on this.

And still 100 pages to go.

[davieholt]

HMRC considering an appeal as it wasn't an unanimous decision by the Tribunal.

 

Wouldn't be worth it financially as old Rangers are goosed. But they may appeal to set the precedent to be used against other clubs in England.

[flecktimus]

The orcs will be seething at Mr White

[Jambo66]

Wouldn't be worth it financially as old Rangers are goosed. But they may appeal to set the precedent to be used against other clubs in England.

 

I am not sure I agree with that. The decision means that HMRC can go against the individuals for underpaid tax. However, if they have the decision overturned, everything can become much messier. HMRC would then have a claim against both Oldco and the individuals. Crucially, it also means that they may have an opportunity to go against the directors as individuals as well.

 

I think they might well appeal - especially given the tone of the dissenting judgement. That reads to me as the opinion of someone who finds it hard to believe that the other two have found in favour of Oldco.

 

The most important feature of any tax avoidance arrangement is its execution. Contrary to the propaganda sent out by HMRC, most tax avoidance arrangements do work. Where they fall down is nearly always in the implementation. From what is in the judgement, the implementation here was absolutely awful, but in spite of that, Oldco have won. I think HMRC will be spitting teeth over this judgement and will appeal.

 

Having said that, I don't think it matters one way or the other. The real issue for Scottish football is and always has been, the side letters. The evidence seems to be that there were side letters and they were deliberately concealed from both HMRC and the football authorities. Since Chuck continues to tell us that Newco is the same club it has always been, I look forward to them receiving a suitable punishment for playing virtually every football match in the last 10-15 with improperly registered players.

[The Gasman]

 

Based on what..?

[The Gasman]

 

Based on what..?

[The Gasman]

 

Based on what..?

[Pistol1874]

A lot of detail to read through.

 

 

In practical terms the outcome is irrelevent. HMRC got the last laugh by not agreeing the CVA and Rangers died.

In which way did Rangers die?

 

They still have their SFA membership, as a result of which they still have their history (according to the SFA, SFL and in due course the SPL or whatever). They still play in the strip on sale whilst members of SPL and their home fixtures are fulfilled at Ibrox.

They still get crowds 3 times the size we usually do, and this will only increase once there is glory to hunt. They've also signed 2 players whilst in the third division that we couldn't afford whilst in the SPL.

Died?

Pffft. We'd be delighted to come out of our current crisis that dead.

[The Mighty Thor]

Rangers should take the taxman to court.

I hope so. Oldco is still due Hector ?11m plus in unpaid PAYE/VAT

[Jammy T]

Its interesting - I think reading the detail of the case rather than the decision will be enlightening

 

It appears that the Rangers directors basically did set it up as a way of paying people remuneration and avoiding tax, and did think that what they were doing was dodgy.

 

But what "lay" people thought of the scheme didnt impact the legal status of the documents involved in the scheme.

 

So Oldco's directors actually thought they were cheating the system.

 

Also, as is so often the case when reading legal decisions, it is the dissenting opinion that is often the most entertaining, and presents the best sound bites....

[Munch]

Tainted titles must now be stripped from the record books and former players and staff should be chased by Hector for the 46 million.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20412919

[jamboinglasgow]

Interesting, so

Its interesting - I think reading the detail of the case rather than the decision will be enlightening

 

It appears that the Rangers directors basically did set it up as a way of paying people remuneration and avoiding tax, and did think that what they were doing was dodgy.

 

But what "lay" people thought of the scheme didnt impact the legal status of the documents involved in the scheme.

 

So Oldco's directors actually thought they were cheating the system.

 

Also, as is so often the case when reading legal decisions, it is the dissenting opinion that is often the most entertaining, and presents the best sound bites....

 

Thats the thing, the headline seems to be that Rangers did not cheat, but what is actually saying is that as long as the loans are recovered and tax is paid on it they will not be cheating. So in other words, Rangers need players to pay up for it to be ok. As someone has said already, I think there could be a few players consulting their lawyers about this and it can still haunt Rangers.

 

As for Rangers fans saying the SPL investigation should be now be stopped, they have again missed the point of what they are investigating, its not whether the payments were legal in a tax sense, it was whether they were declared like they should have been.

[flecktimus]

Interesting, so

 

Thats the thing, the headline seems to be that Rangers did not cheat, but what is actually saying is that as long as the loans are recovered and tax is paid on it they will not be cheating. So in other words, Rangers need players to pay up for it to be ok. As someone has said already, I think there could be a few players consulting their lawyers about this and it can still haunt Rangers.

 

As for Rangers fans saying the SPL investigation should be now be stopped, they have again missed the point of what they are investigating, its not whether the payments were legal in a tax sense, it was whether they were declared like they should have been.

 

As someone just Tweeted on the BBC site If they are loans then they are not part of the contract.

 

My head hurts

[Malinga the Swinga]

It does however clearly point out that Hector does not always win and get their own way. Maybe we will getthe same result in our case, provided of course we have the paperwork in order and can produce the required documentation.

 

As for RFC, pay the tax due on the loans and everything is rosy in the garden. Now strip the titles for hiding these EBT's and we are nearly at the end of this sorry saga.

[Munch]

• 
   
   
  
  Giovanni di Stefano @DEVILSADVOKAT: "I will be writing an open letter to BDO/DP and Court of Sessions seeking as a shareholder of RFC PLC a revocation of admin/liquidation." Seems like it was! An interesting twist from the Italian businessman who failed in an attempt to buy Dundee Football Club.
  
• 
   
  

  1744:

  
   
  
  Giovanni di Stefano @DEVILSADVOKAT: "The next step is for a shareholder to apply to court to reverse/revoke administration/liquidation...I wonder which shareholder will do that?" Is that an indication of intent from the former Dundee director who bought a share in Rangers as they headed for liquidation?
  

[davieholt]

In which way did Rangers die?

 

They still have their SFA membership, as a result of which they still have their history (according to the SFA, SFL and in due course the SPL or whatever). They still play in the strip on sale whilst members of SPL and their home fixtures are fulfilled at Ibrox.

They still get crowds 3 times the size we usually do, and this will only increase once there is glory to hunt. They've also signed 2 players whilst in the third division that we couldn't afford whilst in the SPL.

Died?

Pffft. We'd be delighted to come out of our current crisis that dead.

 

They are no longer in the SPL by right.

They suffered the humiliation of Sevco not being admitted to the SPL

. . . and then Div 1.

They are in the hands of a bunch of shysters whose share issue is predicated on a joke.

The SPL is still to decide what to do about dual contracts.

They could still be heading for oblivion.

[Barney Rubble]

Think this means that since the EBTs were loans it would have been the players responsibility to repay the loans , its not actually saying that they should repay them now , what it also means is the SPL have found the perfect excuse to let the old Rangers off the hook regards titles and trophies won during that time because loans are allowed i think , so now its back to as you were regards the league all we do now is await the arrival of the sevco franchise into the top league so we all can all start getting it rammed up our ***** again !

[Jammy T]

 

 

As someone just Tweeted on the BBC site If they are loans then they are not part of the contract.

 

My head hurts

 

No - they were part of the contract. They were derived from and were part of the contract as I understand it. Players could choose to get payments for certain bonuses by PAYE or EBT.

 

 

[Pistol1874]

 

 

As someone just Tweeted on the BBC site If they are loans then they are not part of the contract.

 

My head hurts

No doubt the loans will be fully documented, including clauses detailing or waiving interest and stating the loan is either repayable on demand or after an agreed period including any repayment schedule. You wouldn't lend money without understanding how and when you'd get it back surely.

Oldco will be able to produce these documents presumably?

[Hagar the Horrible]

The liquidators BDO are expected now to go after all employees who received an EBT to return the full amount of the loans, if however they have a contract stating this is a payment, then the tax will be required to be paid on it and also this will expose by admittion of guilt that there was dual contracts and as such those tainted titles need stripped. the other side of this is if they had disclosed these EBT's to the league, they would have been able to trade out of their status. I wonder if Ticketus and others can sue the taxman as their false tax claim misrepresented the voting structure for a CVA. so they have brough punishment on themselves, gone bust and having st start again all unecessary.

[Pistol1874]

The SPL is still to decide what to do about dual contracts.

They could still be heading for oblivion.

Here all week, try the chicken?

Seriously, nothing much more will happen to them, they are on their way back just as big, arguably stronger. Everything possible will be / is being done behind the scenes to get them back to the top league, particularly if it's the SPL not the SFL who control our game in future. Total sickener for anyone who doesn't like the OF and we should enjoy every minute of their absence whilst it lasts.

Same old shite from here on in, I'm not 40 yet and if they, or their colt teams, stay in Scottish Football I'll never again see a team other than Rangers or Celtic win the league.

Worst thing is, the authorities and media are not in the least bit bothered by that, indeed they'll it up. Still the 11-1 rule in the SPL right?

[alwaysthereinspirit]

As the great man once said

"I object your honor. This trial is a travesty. It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty

of two mockeries of a sham. I move for a mistrial"

[Splog]

I lost all interest in this once New Rangers were confirmed in the 3rd division, but I fancied a read through of the decision. My, uneducated, reading:

 

 

In short:

1- Good(ish) news for Rangers Old Co the business.

2- Bad news for Rangers Old Co fans.

3- Potentially devastating news for Rangers Old Co employees.

 

The 1- The debt due to HMRC will be "reduced substantially". Although "It was conceded that advances in favour of certain players are taxable and liable to NIC, and we have found that in certain other limited instances, there may be a similar liability." Unfortunately it was a 2 to 1 decision (the 1 saying the whole lot should be taxable as tax evasion (see Dr Poon's appendix)), so it'll almost certainly be appealed and we won't know the actual figures for months... not that the figures actually matter as the amount due to HMRC already outstrips the assets.

 

The 2- "the side-letters were actively concealed" and "of course, had not been registered with the football authorities, the SFA and SPL. The spirit of their rules was that the whole contract terms should be registered. Suspiciously, no evidence was led as to who decided that the benefits in terms of the side-letters should not be registered. Non-registration of side-letters was incompatible with both authorities' policing and disciplinary powers."

So the title stripping will presumably go ahead.

 

The 3- This is a potentially fun bit, but I didn't actually spot it myself, but a lot of people are saying that any tax liability that doesn't go to Rangers Old Co... goes to the employee themselves. That'd be devastating considering "in one case [EBT payments] exceeded 20 times the employee's salary". Cue a multitude of lawsuits.

 

 

Result: All sides declare victory. Nobody wins.

[jamboruss]

The liquidators BDO are expected now to go after all employees who received an EBT to return the full amount of the loans, if however they have a contract stating this is a payment, then the tax will be required to be paid on it and also this will expose by admittion of guilt that there was dual contracts and as such those tainted titles need stripped. the other side of this is if they had disclosed these EBT's to the league, they would have been able to trade out of their status. I wonder if Ticketus and others can sue the taxman as their false tax claim misrepresented the voting structure for a CVA. so they have brough punishment on themselves, gone bust and having st start again all unecessary.

 

are you quoting that or hoping it HtH?

[kingdannyb]

The players are NOT liable due to the side letters.

 

Tax must be paid.

 

The only asset in existence to pay it - Ibrox.

 

Sevco will lose Ibrox and also be liquidated.

 

But it's going to take months.

 

Does anyone care anymore ?

[Jam Tarts 1874]

I lost all interest in this once New Rangers were confirmed in the 3rd division, but I fancied a read through of the decision. My, uneducated, reading:

 

 

In short:

1- Good(ish) news for Rangers Old Co the business.

2- Bad news for Rangers Old Co fans.

3- Potentially devastating news for Rangers Old Co employees.

 

The 1- The debt due to HMRC will be "reduced substantially". Although "It was conceded that advances in favour of certain players are taxable and liable to NIC, and we have found that in certain other limited instances, there may be a similar liability." Unfortunately it was a 2 to 1 decision (the 1 saying the whole lot should be taxable as tax evasion (see Dr Poon's appendix)), so it'll almost certainly be appealed and we won't know the actual figures for months... not that the figures actually matter as the amount due to HMRC already outstrips the assets.

 

The 2- "the side-letters were actively concealed" and "of course, had not been registered with the football authorities, the SFA and SPL. The spirit of their rules was that the whole contract terms should be registered. Suspiciously, no evidence was led as to who decided that the benefits in terms of the side-letters should not be registered. Non-registration of side-letters was incompatible with both authorities' policing and disciplinary powers."

So the title stripping will presumably go ahead.

 

The 3- This is a potentially fun bit, but I didn't actually spot it myself, but a lot of people are saying that any tax liability that doesn't go to Rangers Old Co... goes to the employee themselves. That'd be devastating considering "in one case [EBT payments] exceeded 20 times the employee's salary". Cue a multitude of lawsuits.

 

 

Result: All sides declare victory. Nobody wins.

 

I know of one ex Rangers employee who is busy today raising liquid capital from some of his investments.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Just woke up and have a headache already! To summarise my understanding: -

 

- The tribunal have said where side letters existed, the burden now falls on the employee to pay, not RFCRIP

 

- HMRC should now ask them to pay up. How much is Hector still owed?

[Floyd]

Rangers should take the taxman to court.

 

Why??

 

It was Craig Whyte not paying tax and national insurance that caused administration, nothing more nothing less.

[Munch]

The liquidators BDO are expected now to go after all employees who received an EBT to return the full amount of the loans, if however they have a contract stating this is a payment, then the tax will be required to be paid on it and also this will expose by admittion of guilt that there was dual contracts and as such those tainted titles need stripped. the other side of this is if they had disclosed these EBT's to the league, they would have been able to trade out of their status. I wonder if Ticketus and others can sue the taxman as their false tax claim misrepresented the voting structure for a CVA. so they have brough punishment on themselves, gone bust and having st start again all unecessary.

 

Excellent post now i have read this post i feel like

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Incidentally, they would still never have got a CVA. Hector, aside from the BTC, was owed over 25% and since that was mainly in respect of PAYE then they would have voted No to CVA by their own rules.

[Munch]

Just woke up and have a headache already! To summarise my understanding: -

 

- The tribunal have said where side letters existed, the burden now falls on the employee to pay, not RFCRIP

 

- HMRC should now ask them to pay up. How much is Hector still owed?

 

46 million :11100:

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

The Gasman 1754 Hagar the Horrible 1097 Geoff Kilpatrick 1065 Lovecraft 1003 jambovambo 1003 nortonjambo 979 Socrates 933 Francis Albert 911 Muhammad 815 jamboinglasgow

735

 

The above must be utterly seething

[The Gasman]

The Gasman 1754 Hagar the Horrible 1097 Geoff Kilpatrick 1065 Lovecraft 1003 jambovambo 1003 nortonjambo 979 Socrates 933 Francis Albert 911 Muhammad 815 jamboinglasgow

735

 

The above must be utterly seething

 

Err... ...why...?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

The Gasman 1754 Hagar the Horrible 1097 Geoff Kilpatrick 1065 Lovecraft 1003 jambovambo 1003 nortonjambo 979 Socrates 933 Francis Albert 911 Muhammad 815 jamboinglasgow

735

 

The above must be utterly seething

Why? They have to be proven to have been running an ineffective EBT scheme. The surprise here is that the liability has fallen on the employees where the side letters existed.

 

No reason now for titles not to be stripped.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

BTW, David Murray could end up ruined over this!

[John McClure]

BTW, David Murray could end up ruined over this!