p&b is a disgrace Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 i got the impression that the quotes were from the time watterues and papac joined rangers so their wages were never reduced. they were always low. The query was "why has Papac salary reduced? Is he now being paid via an EBT?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordHawHaw Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 This is a wind-up, right? No him and TSAR want it in capital letters and notarised by the chief constable of Strathclyde police, with the thumbprint of the player and the official wax seal (with ribbons, blue of course) from the office of Rangers chairman Murray 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambopompey Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Within the next day or so, we can anticipate the D&P exit strategy, accompanied with a statement to the effect that the are: "....withdrawing on the basis that the unsubstantiated allegations made against us in a BBC documentary have undermined our ability to continue to effectively discharge the duties associated with the role of adminstrator. The allegations are an unwarranted distraction, and we must prioritise the interest of the creditors, and, as such, the future sustainability of Rangers Football Club. It is with considerable regret, therefore, that we have opted to withdraw our services at this time. Notwithstanding this, we can confirm that we will be seeking legal redress in the most strenuous manner....." *slither, slither....* you missed out quantum deadlines for the departure 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Agreed. Going by the evidence tonight, he doesn't have a leg to stand on. BOOM! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Wutherspoon Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Quote from the article on the BBC website. When Dutch goalkeeper Ronald Waterreus negotiated his contract to join Rangers, in 2005, his agent questioned the tax scheme. Mr Wattereus' agent was told by a club representative in correspondence seen by BBC Scotland that using the trust was "...in the interests of Ronald as it enables him to receive funds tax-free". The representative added: "I can confirm that we will not pay these amounts to [Ronald] unless they are made through the use of the remuneration trust." The use of the word "these" is crucial there if you ask me. Had the scheme been discretionary, it would have said any amounts. By saying "these", it indicates amounts which have already been mentioned/agreed. Also as pointed out, the FD emailed Payroll to query Papac's wage drop, and (paraphrasing) "so the difference is being paid by the EBT?" Reply - "Yes", As mentioned, using EBTs to reduce tax isn't illegal, but doing so via non-discretionary EBTs, is. It certainly looks like the balance of probability test will go in HMRC's favour. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
)typically Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Thing is - such is the society we live in - has he done anything that's illegal? He ran-up huge debts with a bank, then wasn't able to pay them back properly - then sold one of his assets to someone for £1. Even if the EBT thing ever reached the point of criminal prosecution, he's probably far enough insulated from it's implementation - or could plead he thought he was behaving legally. If the double contracts thing is proved, which it seems to have been, then it would be very difficult for him to say that he thought he was acting legally. I say this because the EBT loophole only works if the payments are discretionary. If there were dual contracts how could this be the case? Also there is some suggestion by Alex Thomson that Martin Bain sent emails asking for his "discretionary" loans to be paid to him. More evidence that they were breaking the rules of the loophole they were trying to exploit. On another note If SDM made £6.3million through EBTs why does he not pay the tax back instead of Rangers. At 40% that would be £2.5million in tax. He profited not Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I love how the tone of Rangers fans changes throughout this thread. It's an excellent yardstick for measuring just how deep in the brown stuff Rangers are. No8 is the best, he gets hyper and all friendly when there is a sliver of light at the end of the tunnel but turns more and more Rangersmediaesque the deeper the slurry gets, I can't wait until he posts on here again, maybe a couple of days from now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 They presented a clear link indicating that in two players cases payments to EBTs were in direct replacement of salaries that would be paid in ordinary course. They then went onto list on the program and on their website players who were linked to side letters, naming several prominent players as beneficiaries thereof. they didn't present that at all. they presented part of a discussion between watterues's agent and rangers discussing trusts and rangers confirming to papac's agent that he would have one. if a documentary is going to make claims i want to see the hard evidence. after watching it i suspect the 'evidence' they have seen is confirmation to individuals that trusts were set up rather than a schedule of payments. the techniques used to present the primary evidence were extremely poor and not what would be expected of the bbc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I love the smell of burnt-out shredders in the morning 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Duff & Duffer now "considering legal action against the BBC" according to Jackie Bird (in a fetching little red number tonight ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 (edited) Quote from the article on the BBC website. When Dutch goalkeeper Ronald Waterreus negotiated his contract to join Rangers, in 2005, his agent questioned the tax scheme. Mr Wattereus' agent was told by a club representative in correspondence seen by BBC Scotland that using the trust was "...in the interests of Ronald as it enables him to receive funds tax-free". The representative added: "I can confirm that we will not pay these amounts to [Ronald] unless they are made through the use of the remuneration trust." The use of the word "these" is crucial there if you ask me. Had the scheme been discretionary, it would have said any amounts. By saying "these", it indicates amounts which have already been mentioned/agreed. Also as pointed out, the FD emailed Payroll to query Papac's wage drop, and (paraphrasing) "so the difference is being paid by the EBT?" Reply - "Yes", As mentioned, using EBTs to reduce tax isn't illegal, but doing so via non-discretionary EBTs, is. It certainly looks like the balance of probability test will go in HMRC's favour. it's also possible the prior sentence said "mr watteureus may recieve discrentionary payments through an EBT". without context this is useless. Edited May 23, 2012 by T_S_A_R 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/football-news/article/2786614 Another statement basically trying to refute the allegations from Mark Daly's documentary. I believe no one to date has successfully sued him and succeeded. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I love the smell of burnt-out shredders in the morning Was that a day after Haudit and Daudit came in? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkfish Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 (edited) Brave stuff from the BBC given the last time they tried this kind of stunt Craig Whyte swotted them down with his promised swift and righteous legal action. Now that they've libelled Price Albert as well the reaction will surely be even more forceful... Edited May 23, 2012 by monkfish 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ffcsam Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I made a comment on Sportsounds link on fb and a certain Charles Young liked it coinkidink??? (it refereed to pornstar, lumley and Prince Albert) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Sensible Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 No him and TSAR want it in capital letters and notarised by the chief constable of Strathclyde police, with the thumbprint of the player and the official wax seal (with ribbons, blue of course) from the office of Rangers chairman Murray I wanted to see the actual evidence itself. It wasn't shown. What was shown and disclosed was nothing more than what is already in the public domain. I do believe the evidence is there however and I do believe that the end is nigh for the Old Firm and all the grubby bigots and gloryhunters who live off them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I say this because the EBT loophole only works if the payments are discretionary. If there were dual contracts how could this be the case? no EBT's only work if you kid on they are discrentionary. does anyone honestly believe bankers just suddenly decide one day to give their staff a nice wee suprise tax free loan? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Wutherspoon Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 it's also possible the prior sentence said "mr watteureus may recieve discrentionary payments through an EBT". without context this is useless. And how about the FD receiving confirmation that part of a player's salary was now being paid via the EBT? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I take it D&P will be filing their case with the same alacrity Mr Whyte filed his. These chancers have all very very very badly underestimated the enormity of placing Rangers in admin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Er, there is very little of what you have posted that wasn;t already in the public domain or could found on rangerstaxcase.com I wanted sight of the second contracts. I didn't get it. Remember that what has been said tonight may now result down the not too long line in proceedings for criminal conspiracy - a lot of what could have been said they may well have been advised they cannot say at the risk of being used by Murray, Whyte, etc to argue in a court of law that it being splashed all over the mainstream media prejudices any chance they have of a fair trial - a common get out of jail card played by neer-do-wells in British courts. 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.