Republic Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Because it was a hypocrisy that even Stevie Wonder could see. And because it was a self-defeating hypocrisy at that. Their abdication of responsibility for decision making to their fans (because that was an easy out) was disgraceful and cowardly in equal measure. I don't believe they will listen again as the SPL and SFL square up to one another over the plans for change to league structures as they roll out over the coming months. They wont listen because integrity has left a very bad taste in their collective mouth. O.K , but Rangers were a leading force in the setup of the SPL , your club helped create the monster and up until it turned on you , there were no voices of concern about it's motives. Some of the tatics and spin used by minty during his tenure would make some of the SPL chairmen blush . Rangers fans complaining about the hypocrisy of other clubs chairmen just doesn't make sense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I do disagree with you - but without rancour. For me, Scotland is our midden and we should be looking to flourish here rather than move elsewhere. I don't think the club will move from Ibrox - just in case you misunderstood me. I do think our club will be playing in a different league set-up sooner rather than later. If we stay, of course we will flourish again - this current hiccup wont last too much longer. But, the reality of that means we'll just see two giant clubs hoovering up all the silverware and revenue as far into the future as you care to imagine. As we've had now for decades. Did you watch any of the plastics v benfica match? I seen the plastics support in numbers voting with their wallets, because they (rightly) have chosen to spend their money on games of interest. Dwindling crowds at darkhead for the one-horse race championship are inevitable in the face of competition for their money when offered alternatives like Barca to watch instead. Better for all that we move on. IMHO. And fast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 O.K , but Rangers were a leading force in the setup of the SPL , your club helped create the monster and up until it turned on you , there were no voices of concern about it's motives. Some of the tatics and spin used by minty during his tenure would make some of the SPL chairmen blush . Rangers fans complaining about the hypocrisy of other clubs chairmen just doesn't make sense. You shouldn't assume that Rangers supporters don't recognise our own clubs involvement in the brutal state of the Scottish game. And neither should you think that Murray didn't have dissenting voices criticising him from within. Not that it mattered much in the final analysis. He simply ignored any and all when it did not suit his ego. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Quick q, as I stopped trying to catch up about 10 pages ago. Has it been pointed out that the BTC was included in the CVA as at that point HMRC had charged rangers that amount and they had appealed. Ie the charge stood until decision and therefore had to be included? Lot of people over looking the fact that this was brought about by the hmrc. Secondly, did any money for the trusts come from rangers and if so how much? Can BDO reclaim this as part of the liquidation process for the remaining creditors? If the money has come from MIH and with their level of debt, is any rangers legend bricking it in case they go under? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 The Sun :lol: RANGERS may have gone bust for no reason — after they won their £75million tax fight. A tribunal sided with the former regime of ex-owner Sir David Murray in the long-running war with HMRC over employee benefit trust payments to top stars. And last night furious fans’ groups insisted the Ibrox giants could have been SAVED if the ruling was issued earlier. Gers Supporters’ Association secretary John Macmillan said: “I’m angry it took so long. Who knows where we could have been if this decision was made before the club was sold.” The hearing, dubbed the ‘Big Tax Case’, ended in January — but the findings had not yet been reached when Rangers plunged into administration in February. It came after HMRC argued the EBT scheme offering loans to staff from 2001-10 was a tax-dodge scam. The old Rangers was doomed to liquidation when HMRC snubbed a company voluntary arrangement deal to pay off creditors. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 (edited) God, this is hilarious. I guess nothing says "totally exonerated" quite like two-thirds of the judges allowing that, in principle, Rangers mostly didn't intentionally cheat the Treasury because, like, if you squint really hard at the word "loan", it could possibly mean "a massive cash gift that doesn't ever need to be repaid", except for the instances in which "loan" means "a massive cash gift that does need to be repaid, but won't ever be". Slapstick stuff. Well, if you've ever wondered why you have to pay more than a third of your income to the government but Starbucks gets to trouser almost 100% of their bajillion-pound profits, wonder no longer. It's because paying tax is pretty much optional for them, but compulsory for you. Edited November 21, 2012 by flyingrodent 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 My initial reaction to this news was surprise and mild amusement that Rangers had actually won this case which was the major reason behind all the financial problems (if not the actual debt which killed them). Now I feel pretty pissed off. Not because of the fact Rangers won, I couldn't really give a monkeys and the ruling doesn't affect the new Rangers one iota. No, I'm pissed off that we have a tax system in this country where if you are a lazy b*****d that can't be arsed working you benefit from it, big businesses have enough loopholes to get around paying it and the regular Joe Schmuch who gets out his bed and works a regular job foots the bill for it all. Anyway, I cheer up again when I realise that Rangers may have went bust for thinking they were guilty rather than actually being guilty. The porn star was right!! No wonder this country is f*cked. It would be funny now if they still lost the SPL titles when they never had to hide the second contracts anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
)typically Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Got to say some of the The rangers fans deserve their moment in the sun with this one. You know who you are. You have been a mix of WUM, moron, debater, deflector and c**t! Do have your moment. All you rangers fans coming on, when you didn't have the balls of your fellow bears to see this out and continue posting? You are glory hunters! Should this thread be closed? Of course not.Is it a sweeping generalisation to suggest that this thread was all and only bout the EBTs? Of course it is.Should rangers fans maybe remember recent cases in the last year and sit tight til the appeal? Probably, Am I surprised by today's verdict? Holy f**k I am, I didn't see this coming. Its good to see The Rangers supporters back in force despite not actively posting for weeks on end. I'm sure we'll have a good chuckle next time they scuttle off when the next bombshell hits This is nonsense. Most of us did keep posting, its just that we got bored sick of this thread. The thread which has now been proven to be drivel from start to finish (this post excepted). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AES Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Have to say, that, given the glee which some posters (and I include myself) viewed the potential outcome of the FTT, I have to allow the RFC fans their day in the sun. It does raise some serious questions about the performance of HMRC in all of this. Given that, even without the FTT going against them, RFC had a massive debt problem and would have been highly unlikely to have avoided administration and liquidation. However, the absence of an adverse FTT outcome would have made the sale of RFC a very different proposition. HMRC has had 9 months to make its decision known and many fans will feel that the delay in publishing its findings has put the club in a much worse position than it might otherwise have been. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Have to say, that, given the glee which some posters (and I include myself) viewed the potential outcome of the FTT, I have to allow the RFC fans their day in the sun. It does raise some serious questions about the performance of HMRC in all of this. Given that, even without the FTT going against them, RFC had a massive debt problem and would have been highly unlikely to have avoided administration and liquidation. However, the absence of an adverse FTT outcome would have made the sale of RFC a very different proposition. HMRC has had 9 months to make its decision known and many fans will feel that the delay in publishing its findings has put the club in a much worse position than it might otherwise have been. Given that this case has dragged on for years, rather than months, and that Old Rangers spent a significant part of that time dragging its feet and saying "Eh, let me just go have a look for they documents, I'm sure they must be here somewhere" i.e. being deliberately obstructive, anyone related to the OldCo would have to have to be a shameless bullshitter with balls of pure brass to complain that HMRC were.... ...Oh no, wait a minute. As you were. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_j Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Serious questions guys: Does this mean players/staff who received EBT payments must pay back these loans? If so do any of Rangers fans know whan payments will be getting made - has it been documented anywhere? Can liquidators go after these employees for money owed so they can give creditors more money? When the EBTs were set up one assumes there was a payment schedule to get money back if it was a loan? I apologise if it has been covered somewhere else on here - haven't been on for a few days and it has all obviously kicked off with HMRC case announcement. Cheers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Can't wait till the loans have to be re paid. C'mon souness and billy dodds. Cough up 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
)typically Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Statement from MIH: While MIH has at all times respected the privacy of the tax tribunal proceedings, a substantial quantity of confidential information relating to the case has become available for public consumption, stimulating considerable discussion and often ill informed debate. We therefore formally request that the relevant authorities investigate how these sensitive details have been released so widely. We have instructed our lawyers to retrospectively review online and printed publications relating to the case to identify whether legal redress is either appropriate or necessary. Let me help you with that: Rangers Tax Case Blog 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Now how about the wee tax case the 1 with the paye that started the ball rolling. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
)typically Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Serious questions guys: Does this mean players/staff who received EBT payments must pay back these loans? If so do any of Rangers fans know whan payments will be getting made - has it been documented anywhere? Can liquidators go after these employees for money owed so they can give creditors more money? When the EBTs were set up one assumes there was a payment schedule to get money back if it was a loan? I apologise if it has been covered somewhere else on here - haven't been on for a few days and it has all obviously kicked off with HMRC case announcement. Cheers They dont have to repay them as payback seems to have been voluntary in the agreements. Even if they did pay back the money it seems to be the case that Rangers wont see it as the trust was independent of Rangers (oldco and newco) the money is owed to an independent offshore trust, presumably under the control of SDM in some way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_j Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 They dont have to repay them as payback seems to have been voluntary in the agreements. Even if they did pay back the money it seems to be the case that Rangers wont see it as the trust was independent of Rangers (oldco and newco) the money is owed to an independent offshore trust, presumably under the control of SDM in some way. Wow - very complicated no wonder it took them feckin ages to sort out. Can't understand how it can be a loan though if payback was voluntary - surely there would have to be proof that there was some repayment plan in place even if it was only a penny a week otherwise how is it a loan? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
)typically Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Wow - very complicated no wonder it took them feckin ages to sort out. Can't understand how it can be a loan though if payback was voluntary - surely there would have to be proof that there was some repayment plan in place even if it was only a penny a week otherwise how is it a loan? The legal term is "discetionary" they were discretionary loans. Discretionary basically means that it was left to the judgement of the person concerned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 They dont have to repay them as payback seems to have been voluntary in the agreements. Even if they did pay back the money it seems to be the case that Rangers wont see it as the trust was independent of Rangers (oldco and newco) the money is owed to an independent offshore trust, presumably under the control of SDM in some way. Payback seems to have been voluntary! My, what an unusual form of loan this is, where repayment is wholly contingent upon whether the debtor can be arsed to return the cash. I keep expecting HMRC to drive through the wall in a little clown car. Sure, you'll know that justice has been done beyond all reasonable doubt when a very expensive legal team is able to convince two out of three judges that the word "Loan" definitely means "Thing which doesn't have to be repaid" but absolutely cannot possibly mean "Salary", "Wage" or "Remuneration". Well, except for the ones where they did get busted, that is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Sensible Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Can't wait till the loans have to be re paid. C'mon souness and billy dodds. Cough up You'll be waiting a very long time then... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 This is nonsense. Most of us did keep posting, its just that we got bored sick of this thread. The thread which has now been proven to be drivel from start to finish (this post excepted). Absolute bollox. Kincardine has weighed in with measured arguments and a degree of dignity - which he is doing well to maintain, now the verdict is in. I would struggle to be so gracious. Youngsy has also tended to reply to questions with answers as well as maintaining a reasonable persona. The Amigos have thrown abuse, lies and defamation as a default setting, although Bennett can have the occasional point which he will happily debate, and Tedi obviously cares for his team and has his lucid moments. Bendarroch, mind, has no redeeming features. No.8 disappeared for weeks before roaring back last night with the flute CD in the background and ticking all the triumphalist boxes. All the other berrz? Nowhere to be seen - and that includes you, sonny - until yesterday that is. Gloryhunters, the lot of you. Anyhoo, the FTTT verdict - what does it change? As far as I can see, it exonerates the club from tax evasion, and proves a lot of us wrong - I was wrong on this point. The thing is, the club is already dead, so materially I struggle to see why the berrz are SO happy. The Tribute Act is still in D3, the share offer doesn't become suddenly more attractive, Charlie is still as trustworthy as a barrel of cabinet ministers. Serious question to the sensible rangers fans - how do you see yesterday's verdict improving the lot of the club? Never mind the "title stripping" - that doesn't affect the new club, neither (I believe) would any financial penalties for ineligible players. If anything, it appears that rangers' procrastination and delaying tactics - their unwillingness to deal with this tax case - is what led to it being on the CVA document. Did they, all that time ago, think that it would just go away? Did the club die for nothing? -1 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.