Jacksgranda

Just as well he's not a spelling gangster, too.....

You had to edit an "emoticon"? And you got a green dot for it?

That's not what I said - Tom English praises RTC in places, you and Tedi have rubbished him (RTC) by highlighting some of English's article. And quite rightly, I'd do the same in your position. I didn't say it was possible to bolden more valid points, I said it was possible to bolden contrary points. Tom English's article is fair and balanced in my opinion, highlighting bits and pieces doesn't really bolster either side's "case". (The cases being "RTC was a liar, a thief and part of an anti-Rangers conspiracy" and "RTC was completely correct and the BTC Tribunal was obviously nobbled by a pro-Rangers conspiracy".)

Tedi and bennett - it's equally easy to take Tom English's article and bolden bits that are completely contrary to your positions. Apart from the fact RangersTaxCase got his prediction of the outcome wrong, of course! (He didn't get it completely wrong, but he got it wrong enough to look silly.)

I sincerely hope that that was unintentional, or do we have to watch out for exploding e-mails? Click on the "replies" for this thread to find out who has posted how many times.

From what I've read the bloggers are half right, or perhaps only a third right. Weren't there 30+ cases of EBTs where tax liability was admitted by Rangers/MIH?

If these had have been "loans" they would have to be re-paid, but they weren't loans as we ordinary people understand them, the re-payments, if any, were to be discretionary. They were never going to be re-paid, they were never loans, they were wages/salaries. That's why the "trust" never sought repayments and never will. Unless something comes out in the liquidation process.

So was there some wee man employed at the SFA who was supposed to add up all the players wages as registered by the clubs, allowing for win bonuses, appearance money, goals bonuses , image rights etc etc and allowing for incoming/outgoing transfers and then compare it to the accounts? First of all he'd always be at least a season if not 18 months in arrears due to the nature of publishing accounts. Secondly if players wages were not listed separately from all other employees he wouldn't be able to reconcile the figures anyway.

Only people living in Scotland are eligible.

Heartsh, shurely?

1100 + posts in a little over a month. That's pretty impressive. Or something.

No, but when he was being cross examined he said "I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition".

Have to agree - "something is rotten in the state of Denmark".

Aye, but someone else has posted that the information could have come from Ibrox. Murky waters, Holmes. (Was he a Mason, by the way?) Also, who's to say HMRC are not already conducting an investigation? I don't think this case shows HMRC in a good light - they seem incapable of conducting a tax investigation and/or recovering any money other than off Joe Bloggs. Joe Bloggs (International) PLC seems to get away with blue murder. (No adverse comments re the colour of "murder", please.)

I must have missed the question "Which football team do you support?" when i was filling in my tax return.

It's more likely that HMRC would be investigating how confidential material was leaked (if indeed it was) rather than Rangers fans forcing HMRC to admit that this happened.

Thanks

Is the repayment of the loans not discretionary, rather than mandatory? And were the loans not from some sort of trust?

Not so, you're in it

Should that not be in the Pidgin English Forum? Oh, aye, right enough.

If marmite is the answer, you're asking the wrong question....

"Once in a blue moon"? Bit of a give away that. "Now and again" would have been what a true fan of a smaller team would have written. Your cover is blown, Billy!

Posted from padded cell, imo (in my opinion).

Don't lump me in with the cheerleaders then.

Quote my "cheerleading" posts.