stonedsailor Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 'Unnamed source says something reasonably sensational' Must be legit. Is legit a new publication? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 (edited) You're trying too hard again.Your posts have no relevance again. Edited April 3, 2016 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 You keep on parroting the Rangers Football Monitor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 There's nothing new in this post, just pulling together all the points aready mentioned above. This is my understanding of the EBT tax issue. 1. The Chancellor has said that he WILL recover the income tax due. As far as I'm aware, HMRC will be looking for this tax whether BDO win the appeal or not. Whether the final sums will also include National Insurance, penalties and interest is possibly irrelevant for most recipients - even the base sums are going to beggar them. 2. Given how the trusts were set up and which company paid into them, I'm not sure which company the tax man will go after. But it doesn't really matter - they're all dead. 3. Assuming the loans are seen as coming from Rangers rather than from one of SDM's companies, the taxman might add his claim to the list of creditors being overseen by BDO but I suspect not - he's already going to be short-changed on the existing tax bill. 4. So, in these circumstances, the tax man has said he will go after the 'loan' recipients instead. Billy Doods, Tore Andre Flo et al can wave their indemnity letters in Hector's face but he's just going to shrug and say, 'the company can't so you'll just have to pay up'. 5. Next, I'd expect the recipients to turn to whoever guaranteed that they'd pay no tax and ask them to pay up. According to the side letters, that would appear to be The Rangers Football Club plc (RFC 2012 plc in liquidation). Even if BDO agreed that these were newly-identified creditors and added them to the list, I suspect HMRC would tell the loanees to GTF and pay up. Otherwise it would turn into an Alice-in-Wonderland scenario - 'We can't get the tax from the deadco so we're asking you, Mr Flo, and you're telling us you're passing the debt onto the liquidators of the very company that couldn't pay us in the first place.' Nah. 6. Next, the recipients will turn to RIFC/Rangers International plc as the spiritual sucessors to RFC 2012 plc. And that's when it gets interesting. Can anyone pick it up from there? What are ins-and-outs of the club and company implications, footballing debts, keeping the good bits and shedding the bad bits, etc? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 I think that quote from a former player proves the EBTs provided a massive sporting advantage. Also says he thought the EBT money was a "bonus" which would be taxable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 You keep on parroting the Rangers Football Monitor. Do you have a link? I would like to see who has similar views to mine. Or are you talking shite as per usual? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Also says he thought the EBT money was a "bonus" which would be taxable. Football players are not known for their accountancy skills, most employees would assume that PAYE employers are acting legally and paying the appropriate amount of tax. As has been stated journalists are not known for printing unembelished stories and the disclaimer is in the article where it indicates that no former players would talk about EBTs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 There's nothing new in this post, just pulling together all the points aready mentioned above. This is my understanding of the EBT tax issue. 1. The Chancellor has said that he WILL recover the ioneome tax due. As far as I'm aware, HMRC will be looking for this tax whether BDO win the appeal or not. Whether the final sums will also include National Insurance, penalties and interest is possibly irrelevant for most recipients - even the base sums are going to beggar them. 2. Given how the trusts were set up and which company paid into them, I'm not sure which company the tax man will go after. But it doesn't really matter - they're all dead. 3. Assuming the loans are seen as coming from Rangers rather than from one of SDM's companies, the taxman might add his claim to the list of creditors being overseen by BDO but I suspect not - he's already going to be short-changed on the existing tax bill. 4. So, in these circumstances, the tax man has said he will go after the 'loan' recipients instead. Billy Doods, Tore Andre Flo et al can wave their indemnity letters in Hector's face but he's just going to shrug and say, 'the company can't so you'll just have to pay up'. 5. Next, I'd expect the recipients to turn to whoever guaranteed that they'd pay no tax and ask them to pay up. According to the side letters, that would appear to be The Rangers Football Club plc (RFC 2012 plc in liquidation). Even if BDO agreed that these were newly-identified creditors and added them to the list, I suspect HMRC would tell the loanees to GTF and pay up. Otherwise it would turn into an Alice-in-Wonderland scenario - 'We can't get the tax from the deadco so we're asking you, Mr Flo, and you're telling us you're passing the debt onto the liquidators of the very company that couldn't pay us in the first place.' Nah. 6. Next, the recipients will turn to RIFC/Rangers International plc as the spiritual sucessors to RFC 2012 plc. And that's when it gets interesting. Can anyone pick it up from there? What are ins-and-outs of the club and company implications, footballing debts, keeping the good bits and shedding the bad bits, etc? Another one who has been on the monitor lol Hmrc has a claim in for two amonuts with bdo, depending on court case outcomes. They can't claim for the same money twice lol The newspaper said he may go after players, may.... The scheme was run by mih. Cheerybye now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Ach leave the fan of the team that play in orange alone, he has been predicting imminent admin since October 2012, he needs another fix and something to hang onto for the next 3 years, it gives his (and plenty of others) life purpose. You ARE effectively in admin. You're living on month-to-month loans. When the loans outweigh the value of the assets... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 (edited) Another one who has been on the monitor lol Hmrc has a claim in for two amonuts with bdo, depending on court case outcomes. They can't claim for the same money twice lol The newspaper said he may go after players, may.... The scheme was run by mih. Cheerybye now. Can you link to this Rangers monitor article? I would like to see how bloggers are plagiarising Div's copyright by stealing ideas from the BRALT.Unless you are talking shite? The scheme may have been run by MIH but the courts ruled Rangers were accountable. George Osborne said that HMRC will go after EBT beneficiaries. Edited April 3, 2016 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Ach leave the fan of the team that play in orange alone, he has been predicting imminent admin since October 2012, he needs another fix and something to hang onto for the next 3 years, it gives his (and plenty of others) life purpose. Are you not feeling any animosity towards your club for being the driving force behind the imminent bankruptcy of your former heroes? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 There's nothing new in this post, just pulling together all the points aready mentioned above. This is my understanding of the EBT tax issue. 1. The Chancellor has said that he WILL recover the income tax due. As far as I'm aware, HMRC will be looking for this tax whether BDO win the appeal or not. Whether the final sums will also include National Insurance, penalties and interest is possibly irrelevant for most recipients - even the base sums are going to beggar them. 2. Given how the trusts were set up and which company paid into them, I'm not sure which company the tax man will go after. But it doesn't really matter - they're all dead. 3. Assuming the loans are seen as coming from Rangers rather than from one of SDM's companies, the taxman might add his claim to the list of creditors being overseen by BDO but I suspect not - he's already going to be short-changed on the existing tax bill. 4. So, in these circumstances, the tax man has said he will go after the 'loan' recipients instead. Billy Doods, Tore Andre Flo et al can wave their indemnity letters in Hector's face but he's just going to shrug and say, 'the company can't so you'll just have to pay up'. 5. Next, I'd expect the recipients to turn to whoever guaranteed that they'd pay no tax and ask them to pay up. According to the side letters, that would appear to be The Rangers Football Club plc (RFC 2012 plc in liquidation). Even if BDO agreed that these were newly-identified creditors and added them to the list, I suspect HMRC would tell the loanees to GTF and pay up. Otherwise it would turn into an Alice-in-Wonderland scenario - 'We can't get the tax from the deadco so we're asking you, Mr Flo, and you're telling us you're passing the debt onto the liquidators of the very company that couldn't pay us in the first place.' Nah. 6. Next, the recipients will turn to RIFC/Rangers International plc as the spiritual sucessors to RFC 2012 plc. And that's when it gets interesting. Can anyone pick it up from there? What are ins-and-outs of the club and company implications, footballing debts, keeping the good bits and shedding the bad bits, etc? The "footballing debt" is simply my reading of the situation, an opinion, but an avenue I would pursue if I was in the situation. The 5 way agreement stipulated that all football related debts should be met by new Rangers as a condition of their continued membership of the SFA, the footballers union would be well advised to follow that up. The intricacies of the legislation for HMRC pursuing players can be read at this link. NI contributions will be pursued also. https://www.cchdaily.co.uk/budget-2016-clampdown-disguised-remuneration-schemes 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 You ARE effectively in admin. You're living on month-to-month loans. When the loans outweigh the value of the assets... His own club also uses soft loans but this is different..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Another one who has been on the monitor lol Hmrc has a claim in for two amonuts with bdo, depending on court case outcomes. They can't claim for the same money twice lol The lol is at you really. HMRC can go after as many relevant people and companies as it wishes until it is paid what is due. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njord Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 His own club also uses soft loans but this is different..... ? Soft loans to a PLC is different benny, and you know it. Especially in a swap for equity deal, that cannot be completed at the moment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 His own club is not under debate here though.. Comparison young sir, comparison. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 The lol is at you really. HMRC can go after as many relevant people and companies as it wishes until it is paid what is due. That is not what the dundonian said tho.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Comparison young sir, comparison. United's debt has fallen from 7.3M to 1.3M since 2007. Which direction is yours going? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 That is not what the dundonian said tho.... Hector's not going to get the full amount from BDO, though, is he? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 It looks as if this is some form of govt pincer movement. Chase the case via the courts and then make it recoverable from the recipients in case some companies go down the insolvency route. Means that no matter what the hmrc can go chase what's due back. Company goes insolvent - go after recipient Recipient is indemnified against it? Someone has to pay. Think any other company that followed this with using side letters similar to that of rangers must be bricking it. Getting the goodfellas scene 'f**k you, pay me' was some sort of inspiration for this 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.