Colin M Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) The RTC blog has the view that the story about HMRC ready to do a deal is just PR that Duff and Phelps have been fervently pushing to media outlets all week. Forsyth is the first journo to use it. Perhaps he has corroborating evidence. The logic behind this view is: How can they be ready to do a deal when the results of the FTT are not yet known? How can they say "yeah we'll do a deal if Whyte is out the way" when they don't know who would be taking over? Why would they want to do a deal with a company involving Dave King of all people, or indeed any director who was there and complicit during the time where the EBT scheme was in operation in the first place? In a quote from a comment from RTC: Please- before anyone mentions Roddy Forsyth again, can you at least read this first:http://rangerstaxcase.com/2011/12/03/sources-close-to-whyte-in-economical-with-truth-shocker/ I know the source of at least some of Forsyth’s information for today’s story- and it originates with me- several months ago and passed to him by a 3rd party. The tax calculation information is out of date but he has accepted a single source for those numbers. Has he accepted a single source (Jack Irvine again?) for HMRC eager to do a deal story? I heard the same story from a journalist last week who told me that D&P were briefing very aggressively that they would do a deal if Whyte was gone. However, what does that even mean? That Whyte does not benefit from the floating charge he holds? Or just sells his £1 shares? People are getting unduly agitated about a story that most likely is just PR fluff. If the last year tells us anything it is to be sceptical of ANYTHING we read in print. I am not saying that HMRC would not be more patient if Whyte was completely off the scene, but for Forsyth’s story to be credible it would need to answer a lot more questions than it does. The same media briefing I heard about last week did not provide any more details either. The only thing new in the Forsyth story is his claim that a deal has been sanctioned at Treasury level. That is remarkable given that the FTT(T) has not even determined a size of bill yet. It would have made for a Pythonesque discussion begging the man at No 11 to give up a yet to be determined bill of an unknown size. HMRC do not "want" to see companies go out of business. They want to see companies pay their taxes in full. The story could have some substance, it could be entirely accurate. It could certainly be there to attract potential bidders who are scared off by the Big Tax Case (ie every bidder who isn't totally mental). Edited March 8, 2012 by Colin M 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest_Fifer Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Aye. If you owe 100 grand it's your problem. If you owe 100 million it's Hector's probem 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherrif John Bunnell Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I would like to think HMRC will stand their ground and not accept a CVA with Rangers. They need to remember that the Vodafone disgrace is still fresh in the minds of a lot of people and an even more high profile failure to collect tax would cause outrage far beyond Scottish football. The HMRC are also spineless c***s, so I won't be surprised if they accept a pathetic amount of pence per pound from Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) That's just plain wrong, and sets a precedent for HMRC's conduct from now on. They cannot realisticly go to any other club now and say we will not accept a CVA, as that club will be able to point to this decision and say "hang on, you can't have it both ways". Woudl you like a tin opener for that can of worms? I think we all need to accept by now that what we perceive to be fair play and 'doing the right thing' does not really come into this sorry affair any more. Not from shysters like Whyte and King, not from previous owners who racked up the debt using possibly illegal payment methods, not from Haudit and Daudit being the most toothless administrators ever, not from the lawyers transferring millions to and fro, not from the Scottish football authorities who have turned a blind eye in the past and are acting like they knew nothing, not from the lumbering HMRC, not from gobshite soundbite-spouting MSPs, and certainly not from the press Old Firm arse-lickers. The entire thing stinks from top to bottom. Fortunately, through channels like this forum - there is one group of people who appear willing to look and say 'hold on a wee minute....' - the supporters on this forum, including some of the more level-headed Rangers supporters too. Doncaster told us without a ten team SPL we would die. He was wrong. The shit-storm of protest and a backlash against him and his cronies only just started, we only saw the seeds of a campaign of sorts against what was patently nothing more than greed and even more self-interest than usual from the old boy's club that is the Scottish Premier League.... That was nothing. Keep objective, and keep our eyes on the ball folks... Edited March 8, 2012 by pozbaird 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stingraypoindexter Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 However, that will only be possible if there is what has been described within HMRC as 'regime change'. In other words, Whyte must have no connection with Rangers at the end of the process." http://www.telegraph...heir-hands.html Senator McCain has also added his voice to the call for regime change: "Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Monday knocked the Duff & Phelps administration for being too passive in its response to Rangers' cheating and called for U.S.-led airstrikes on Craig Whyte's forces. "The time has come for a new policy," McCain said during remarks on the Senate floor. "The United States should lead an international effort to protect key population centers in Scotland, especially at away games, through airstrikes on Orc forces. To be clear: This will require the United States to suppress enemy air flute playing in at least part of the country." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/john-mccain-syria-airstrike_n_1321700.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) On a larger scale though, have they not already shown with Vodaphone that certain companies can get away with misdemeanours that others will not? I'm a hundred percent certain that Dave Hartnett doesn't give a flying fark about Rangers, but he is mates with Vodaphone's Head of Tax. Edited March 8, 2012 by Baxter Parp 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 The season Falkirk were on the verge of promotion they asked Jim Ballantyne about a ground share at NB. No problem, says Jim. The agreement failed as the leader of NLC decided it would be detrimental to "the team from North Lanarkshire" to allow FFC to have first call on dates. Personally I reckon he was protecting Motherwell, not Airdrie, as they were at risk of relegation that season. Falkirk fans may be better placed to give dates, quotes etc of course they were, we are the best thing about north lanarkshire! why would north lanarkshire council take a decision that would relegate motherwell? falkirk council spent millions building a stadium for the yogi all stars but falkirk fans seem to think our council would have kicked us when we were at out lowest point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jambo-rocker Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Here's a bit of a daft question, but I'm looking for opinions on people, who have a decent memory of what the excitement of football was like in the latter years of the top league before the SPL. I ask only because I was too young to know what it was like You know, when Rangers were dominating cheating and Celtic were struggling to keep second. Compared to those days, was there that much of a contrast in excitement to the league in the present? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 The HMRC are also spineless c***s, so I won't be surprised if they accept a pathetic amount of pence per pound from Rangers. The money that they're after includes a pile of VAT which generally has a more robust attitude than the income tax regime, so you never know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betting competition Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Craig Whyte really does have a brass neck. He's basically claiming £3.6 million quid for putting Rangers into administration. I'm guessing we want anyone but the admins to win? I reckon they are his management fee's that he has taken out of the club. I wonder if the Administration lads will put Rangers into liquidation on a friday afternoon at 3pm so no-one can contest the it at court on that day. Not sure which friday but i wonder if they will do it that way. Edited March 8, 2012 by betting competition 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killieshire Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Due to all the shenanigans with Vodafone, Barclays, etc.. the HMRC have appointed a new commissioner to oversee major tax disputes to (supposedly) stop these types of doggy dealings ahead. Whether the roles ultimately succeeds in doing this remains to be seen. Given the size of the bill I'd hope this falls under the new jurisdiction. Link 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 When Gretna were in trouble did the league not advance them money from the prize fund / TV revenue so they could fulfill their fixtures for the season? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 When Gretna were in trouble did the league not advance them money from the prize fund / TV revenue so they could fulfill their fixtures for the season? Yes, but at that time we all knew they were going under and finishing bottom on the league, but keeping in mind the debts were peanuts compared to Rangers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest_Fifer Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Due to all the shenanigans with Vodafone, Barclays, etc.. the HMRC have appointed a new commissioner to oversee major tax disputes to (supposedly) stop these types of doggy dealings ahead. Whether the roles ultimately succeeds in doing this remains to be seen. Given the size of the bill I'd hope this falls under the new jurisdiction. Link Is that where they bend over and let Rangers have them from behind? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 When Gretna were in trouble did the league not advance them money from the prize fund / TV revenue so they could fulfill their fixtures for the season? It was already obvious that Gretna were going to finish bottom. It's anyone's guess where Rangers will end up in the league. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest_Fifer Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Is that not the £3m thats getting contested in court ? I thought it was the Ticketus money left over after Whyte paid off the bank debt? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AND180Y Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) I would like to think HMRC will stand their ground and not accept a CVA with Rangers. They need to remember that the Vodafone disgrace is still fresh in the minds of a lot of people and an even more high profile failure to collect tax would cause outrage far beyond Scottish football. The HMRC are also spineless c***s, so I won't be surprised if they accept a pathetic amount of pence per pound from Rangers. HMRC will now have moved, even if they do win the tribunal, from a stance of tax collection to loss minimisation. They know they don't have a flying f*&ks chance of getting all the money. If the club goes into liquidation the value of assets plummets and a big chunk of the realisations would be taken up with legal fees. (ala Gretna, Portsmouth, Dundee and Livingston). Owe them 100k, you have a prob. owe them 100mil and they have a big problem! They will vote through the cva. Edited March 8, 2012 by AND180Y 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Here's a bit of a daft question, but I'm looking for opinions on people, who have a decent memory of what the excitement of football was like in the latter years of the top league before the SPL. I ask only because I was too young to know what it was like You know, when Rangers were dominating cheating and Celtic were struggling to keep second. Compared to those days, was there that much of a contrast in excitement to the league in the present? For excitement - I guess that will depend on which team's fans you ask. It was exciting for 'Well fans as when Celtic were in the grubber - we had one of our best teams, played in Europe and finished second and third - we also had a couple of relegation battles neatly illustrating that diddy teams are nothing if not utterly inconsistent year by year. Raith Rovers fans probably look on it as a golden age I don't see a huge difference between late SPD and now - I think a lot is made of the decline in quality, but I don't see it. My memory of mid-90's football is far too many foreign haddies in the league, one half of the OF Weak, the other strong. There were still shite games in front of small crowds then - some clubs were skint, others weren't. I know a lot of people like to use "SPL" to cite stats, etc - but I just view the "Premier" as a constant since I started going in the 80's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Yes, but at that time we all knew they were going under and finishing bottom on the league, but keeping in mind the debts were peanuts compared to Rangers It was already obvious that Gretna were going to finish bottom. It's anyone's guess where Rangers will end up in the league. Was just a thought to see the league finished..I was taking for granted that it would entail at the very least a further point reduction if not automatic relegation 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 HMRC will now have moved, even if they do win the tribunal, from a stance of tax collection to loss minimisation. They know they don't have a flying f*&ks chance of getting all the money. If the club goes into liquidation the value of assets plummets and a big chunk of the realisations would be taken up with legal fees. (ala Gretna, Portsmouth, Dundee and Livingston). Owe them 100k, you have a prob. owe them 100mil and they have a big problem! They will vote through the cva. Not sure that's true. £14-£15m is achievable, the possible £50m judgement hasn't happened yet. 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.