Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[hellbhoy]

3 hours ago, BobWilliamson said:

Who says we couldn't afford them?

Alex Rae , who received an EBT, turned down contracts worth more to play for Rangers.

Is money the one and only reason players sign for clubs? If you accept that it is not then your argument dies right there.

Now. Are you able to think for yourself and admit that the 'they couldn't afford these players' just doesn't stand up.

Other clubs and many players and officials have used tax avoidance schemes. Should they be stripped of trophies? 

Alex Rae?, received the princely sum of £569,000 for a two year period he spent at Rangers. His weekly increase from payments not declared to the SFA in forms of soft loans from the EBT scheme came to just less than £5,500 a week.

If we factor in the relevant tax deductions for him to receive that extra £5.5K a week in his pocket we have to add 40% more to his soft loan to reach the amount if using the proper PAYE channels then we reach an amount of £7.5K thereabout. So any other club you say were chasing him to sign for their club would have to compete with more than Rangers were offering including the EBT money which is £7.5K a week more than declared.

I don't think you know or understand the problem fully. Alex Rae was on technically a salary worth an extra £390,000 a year on top of his declared salary if Rangers had properly and legally used the PAYE system to pay their EBT players. And you think technically an extra £390,000 a year won't lure Rae to sign for Rangers? f**k aff.

[Sting777]

Glib making it clear it awe Celtics fault....lol. Honestly I think this guy needs medical help. 

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/1255012/rangers-dave-king-celtic-big-tax-case/

[hellbhoy]

Just now, Sting777 said:

Glib making it clear it awe Celtics fault....lol. Honestly I think this guy needs medical help. 

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/1255012/rangers-dave-king-celtic-big-tax-case/

Quote

King said: “As an investor and board member during the period of the so-called benefit I can categorically assure all supporters that the club received no benefit whatsoever.”

Aye Dave not having to pay the 40% tax rate on top of the EBT loans not declared as earnings won't give the club a benefit of not having to pay tens of millions of pounds to the HMRC.

Also great Gobbels type speech to rally The Rangers support into a frenzy at the possibility of their tainted titles getting binned. The support will now forget that Progres result all together now and focus on their tainted title trophy haul forgetting how shite Pedro and his plonkers really are until the next game. Great motivation and manipulation from the dodgy eyed fucker, he does know his market.

[bennett]

41 minutes ago, hellbhoy said:

.

Final conclusion!, we do not need to ever go around in circles about the legality of Rangers EBT trust and how it was implemented. The Supreme Court has judged the monies going into Rangers EBT scheme was in fact players earnings and was taxable earnings and Rangers were avoiding paying full tax. And now the players they signed and paid dodgy soft loans too have been improperly registered with the SFA because they had dual contracts one of which Rangers never declared to the SFA.

 

The evidence of Sandy Bryson, the SFA’s Head of Registrations, held the key as to why stronger punitive action was not taken by the tribunal.  Under questioning, he explained that a player, once registered with the ruling body, remained registered with them until such time as his contract ended or that player left their club’s employment.

 

Consequently, even though the complete details of his contract had been wilfully withheld or any other breach had occurred, that registration, once accepted, would stand.

As a result of that policy, it was not possible for Nimmo Smith and his learned friends to state that the players who had benefited from side letters detailing the amounts to be paid into Employee Benefit Trusts, should not have been fielded during the decade under dispute.

It therefore followed that the results of the matches played during that time were valid and that there could not be a case for stripping of titles. Hence the £250,000 fine on the oldco.

 

[hellbhoy]

Just now, bennett said:

 

The evidence of Sandy Bryson, the SFA’s Head of Registrations, held the key as to why stronger punitive action was not taken by the tribunal.  Under questioning, he explained that a player, once registered with the ruling body, remained registered with them until such time as his contract ended or that player left their club’s employment.

 

Consequently, even though the complete details of his contract had been wilfully withheld or any other breach had occurred, that registration, once accepted, would stand.

As a result of that policy, it was not possible for Nimmo Smith and his learned friends to state that the players who had benefited from side letters detailing the amounts to be paid into Employee Benefit Trusts, should not have been fielded during the decade under dispute.

It therefore followed that the results of the matches played during that time were valid and that there could not be a case for stripping of titles. Hence the £250,000 fine on the oldco.

 

Stopped reading at Sandy Bryson head of registrations at the SFA.

Why?, because the SFA are corrupt as f**k towards The Rangers their demented brainchild.

Next piece of pish to ignore Benny?

[bennett]

2 minutes ago, hellbhoy said:

Stopped reading at Sandy Bryson head of registrations at the SFA.

Why?, because the SFA are corrupt as f**k towards The Rangers their demented brainchild.

Next piece of pish to ignore Benny?

 

An average response from an average celtic fan.

 

[hellbhoy]

Just now, bennett said:

 

An average response from an average celtic fan.

 

Aye, that's what it is Benny. Nothing at all to do with how corrupt the associations were in the lead up to Rangers dying.

[bennett]

2 minutes ago, hellbhoy said:

Aye, that's what it is Benny. Nothing at all to do with how corrupt the associations were in the lead up to Rangers dying.

 

That was terrible so it was, you have every right to be angry imo.

 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Sevco fans definitely not taking the last few days badly at all. 

 

[bennett]

Whoever wrote that got it spot on, sounds awfy like a certain green n grey teams fans.

 

[Monkey Tennis]

Sorry to get all Denis Healey on you but it's like being savaged by a dead sheep:

Was that not to do with Geoffrey Howe? He did a thoroughly savage job in the end.

[Henrik's tongue]

11 minutes ago, bennett said:

Whoever wrote that got it spot on, sounds awfy like a certain green n grey teams fans.

 

63  

[The OP]

Must've missed Lionel Messi ceasing to exist then all of his assets and honours being sold to another guy who is now trying to impersonate him.

 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

5 minutes ago, The OP said:

Must've missed Lionel Messi ceasing to exist then all of his assets and honours being sold to another guy who is now trying to impersonate him.

 

From the same ***

 

[Monkey Tennis]

Who says we couldn't afford them?
Alex Rae , who received an EBT, turned down contracts worth more to play for Rangers.
Is money the one and only reason players sign for clubs? If you accept that it is not then your argument dies right there.
Now. Are you able to think for yourself and admit that the 'they couldn't afford these players' just doesn't stand up.
Other clubs and many players and officials have used tax avoidance schemes. Should they be stripped of trophies? 

Bloody Hell - are you for real?
Whether or not people might have played for them for less is utterly immaterial.

Other clubs have indeed used tax avoidance schemes, but none that I know of have deceitfully registered dozens of players over several years.

Do the distinctions regarding Rangers really escape you, or are you just being deliberately daft? x

[Benjamin_Nevis]

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Do the distinctions regarding Rangers really escape you, or are you just being deliberately daft? x

 

It's No8 on a trolling mission ffs. What do you think? 

[Thistle_do_nicely]

5 hours ago, BobWilliamson said:

Who says we couldn't afford them?

Alex Rae , who received an EBT, turned down contracts worth more to play for Rangers.

Is money the one and only reason players sign for clubs? If you accept that it is not then your argument dies right there.

Now. Are you able to think for yourself and admit that the 'they couldn't afford these players' just doesn't stand up.

Other clubs and many players and officials have used tax avoidance schemes. Should they be stripped of trophies? 

Without going into the huge headache of trawling through the personal allowances, NI rates or income tax for the EBT years, or the fun and games of any allowable expenses through self employment or tax credits through dividend income, a simple explanation would be this:

Say you have a player earning £100,000 through the payroll per annum as income from employment, through Old Firm Blue Ltd; as earnings these will fall under the scope of income tax and be subject to NI deductions. Lets say this amounts to 20% of that total, or £20,000; this leaves the player with £80,000 net salary after deductions. 

However, Old Firm Blue also offer interest free """'''loans""""" to their player, on the side, amounting to £20,000 a year, which aren't taxed.

Old Firm Green, meanwhile, pay a player £125,000 a year. After 20% deductions this amounts to £100,000 net for the player.

Effectively:

Old Firm Blue Total Outlay (Wages + """"loans""""')  = £100,000

Old Firm Blue Player Net Wages (and """loans""") = £100,000

Old Firm Green Total Outlay (Wages) = £125,000

Old Firm Green Player Net Wages = £100,000

So effectively, to offer the same player the same net income without the """"loans"""" Old Firm Green would have to offer £25,000 more per year. This all adds up to staggering amounts. As mentioned its more complicated by things like 1/9th tax credits on dividends which might be part of renumeration at other clubs or Rangers at the time which tbh im not familiar with (edit: although to clarify it isnt illegal to receive income from multiple sources - not paying tax due or hiding taxable income is though!) but all else being equal, with EBT's now being ruled, as far as I understand it, as falling within the scope of income tax since the "substance not the form" was that they were income from employment, not loans to be repaid, and without any proof of any sort of wrongdoing, illegal tax schemes or similar from Old Firm Green or anyone else that im aware of in scottish football I'd argue Rangers benefitted, illegitimately, for *years*, and should thus have titles stripped. If theres any other evidence coming to light of a similar nature at any other Scottish clubs who won trophies then they should be stripped too, but afaik theres nothing, and certainly not to the scale of what Rangers were up to.

Edited July 7, 2017 by Thistle_do_nicely

[Johnny van Axeldongen]

Quote

While I am Chairman, Rangers’ overspending will always be on a sustainable and robust basis and one that safeguards the future of our Club.

[Blue92]

Stopped reading at Sandy Bryson head of registrations at the SFA.
Why?, because the SFA are corrupt as f**k towards The Rangers their demented brainchild.
Next piece of pish to ignore Benny?

If the SFA are so corrupt, why are fans calling for their authority and demanding that they and the SPFL strip titles? If the SFA are as corrupt as folk make out then any ruling on stripped titles wouldn't hold much weight due to all of the said corruption? This isn't a dig just a genuine question.

[Insaintee]

2 hours ago, bennett said:

 

The evidence of Sandy Bryson, the SFA’s Head of Registrations, held the key as to why stronger punitive action was not taken by the tribunal.  Under questioning, he explained that a player, once registered with the ruling body, remained registered with them until such time as his contract ended or that player left their club’s employment.

 

Consequently, even though the complete details of his contract had been wilfully withheld or any other breach had occurred, that registration, once accepted, would stand.

As a result of that policy, it was not possible for Nimmo Smith and his learned friends to state that the players who had benefited from side letters detailing the amounts to be paid into Employee Benefit Trusts, should not have been fielded during the decade under dispute.

It therefore followed that the results of the matches played during that time were valid and that there could not be a case for stripping of titles. Hence the £250,000 fine on the oldco.

 

But this is not correct, nor even relevant. This is no longer about incorrect registration this is about making illegal payments to players. 

On the issue of registration this is now about wilful deceit. That's not the same as putting the dots and crossing tee's in the wrong place. The real reason the SFA is desperate to make this go away is because their chairman knew about and was complicit it in the whole scheme. 

I can see fan groups taking the SFA to court AND winning!