onlooker Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 After all the exchanges on posts we've had Tedi !. Nimmo did not sort out Rangers continuity that was done years ago back in 2011 by the SFA & SPL,when they made radical changes to their insolvency laws when your old club was in financial soapy to the tune of over £60 million.On facing the death of Rangers they came up with this stupid club can be separated from the company shite and you know it Do Celtic not have two companies? I know Pacific Shelf is new one and they kept the old one ticking over so it wouldn't go bust 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Plastic likes dishing out insults, plastic canny take it back in return. You asked why Murray used EBT`s He used them to gain an advantage. He did not disclose the side letters detailing these EBT`s but he did declare the payments, he did this to hide his tax affairs, he knew EBT`s were probably legal tax avoidance, but was not 100% sure He was correct, EBT`s were tax avoidance, even if he had declared the side letters this would have changed nothing, the players would still have been properly registered, the tax avoidance scheme would still have been totally legal. Murray was an arrogant dodgy cnut who took too many risks, but in the end the risks he took were legal ones and did not give Rangers any unfair advantage on the pitch. Accept it or not, this is the final position, the SPL have accepted Nimmo`s learned opinion and will not appeal, I have no doubt the plastics will not accept it and will clamour to Celtic to do something, they will continue to howl at the moon and we will continue to laugh at them. Keep up Tedi FFS ! Murray declared that he was implementing an EBT pension fund and he was funding the scheme and only declared how much he was depositing into the fund and that's all he told the SPL & SFA. What Murray did not declare to the SPL & SFA was that the EBT fund was being used to give players tax free non repayable loans that came with a contractual guarantee as long as the player was still a Rangers player.As being loans apparently he did not need to declare them but should have shown the side letters.If he showed the dual contract he would have had to pay the tax due adding another 40% onto the £49 million he paid out pushing the total to a grand total of just under £70 million.This is a ball park figure based on players/board members taking home the actual amount their dual contracts said they would take home after tax being legally paid on their total wages. Tedi if you actually believe that Rangers indeed did not gain an advantage on the park by bribing in far better quality players than Rangers should have fielded as by playing by the rules & regulations of the game.Then I'd have to say your deffo at the wind up dude 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlooker Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 That will explain perfectly why the HMRC slapped the old club with a whopping huge tax bill then eh Tedi The HMRC didn't think it was illegal so they sent Rangers a bill anyway .The HMRC said it was systematic abuse of what basically constituted a pension fund by giving out tax free loans that did not have to be ever repaid,and before anyone says it's not a pension fund then kiss this But they didn't slap any bills on them, they made an estimate of what could be due if they were proved right in the legality of them HMRC didn't know if they were legal that's why they brought the Tax Case. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlooker Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Keep up Tedi FFS ! Murray declared that he was implementing an EBT pension fund and he was funding the scheme and only declared how much he was depositing into the fund and that's all he told the SPL & SFA. What Murray did not declare to the SPL & SFA was that the EBT fund was being used to give players tax free non repayable loans that came with a contractual guarantee as long as the player was still a Rangers player.As being loans apparently he did not need to declare them but should have shown the side letters.If he showed the dual contract he would have had to pay the tax due adding another 40% onto the £49 million he paid out pushing the total to a grand total of just under £70 million.This is a ball park figure based on players/board members taking home the actual amount their dual contracts said they would take home after tax being legally paid on their total wages. Tedi if you actually believe that Rangers indeed did not gain an advantage on the park by bribing in far better quality players than Rangers should have fielded as by playing by the rules & regulations of the game.Then I'd have to say your deffo at the wind up dude Are Celtic not gaining an advatage by being able to bring in players and pay wages that the other SPL clubs can't? Pot calling the kettle black 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Do you ever talk about Celtic? erm what's the title of the thread there and what topic and club is it on ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Do Celtic not have two companies? I know Pacific Shelf is new one and they kept the old one ticking over so it wouldn't go bust But they didn't slap any bills on them, they made an estimate of what could be due if they were proved right in the legality of them HMRC didn't know if they were legal that's why they brought the Tax Case. It would be much easier if you just pick Rangers as your team. Firstly does it matter how many companies own the club ? The SFA & SPL have made adequate changes to their rules back in 2011 so that companies are irrelevant when it comes to clubs facing insolvency. And yes it was a bill marked payable now from the HMRC back in April 2010 to which Rangers later disputed in court. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Mmm 4 in half an hour with thst one ...no bad! Yes and did you notice that we all were trying to get it into your thick skull that the man is a proven bigot that even many of your own fans accept him as such. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Yes and did you notice that we all were trying to get it into your thick skull that the man is a proven bigot that even many of your own fans accept him as such. You tannin that bristol cream the night again? Your right scary on it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 You tannin that bristol cream the night again? Your right scary on it! Is that your reply? I thought you would come up with some defence of the proven bigot that McGillivan is but instead once again you post absolute nonsense. Obviously the truth about the man is starting to hit home in your head. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Is that your reply? I thought you would come up with some defence of the proven bigot that McGillivan is but instead once again you post absolute nonsense. Obviously the truth about the man is starting to hit home in your head. Proven? Was this in court? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Another example of how deluded some folk on here are was when a certain jurno recently refered to Rangers fans as "the Klan" Queue the outrage and accusations of him being a bigot and even racist .....all whilst referng to him as Phil madeupname or phil macwitshecalled all because he has an irish surname , if mocking someone because they have a foriegn sounding name isnt racist and bigoted then what is? "That’s right, Phil MacGiollabhain, the self-proclaimed ‘rebel journalist’ is actually plain old Philip White, originally from Baillieston. Is this a ‘blood feud’? I think we should be told! MacMadman has been living his fantasy life with his fantasy name for some years now, but those who know him by his other name – Phil White – have many stories to tell of his cowardice and sly backstabbing of both friend and foe alike over the years. One thing that all who know of his past agree on is that when the going gets tough MacWhite gets going, leaving others to clean up the mess he has left behind." Well, well, well. Racist you say? Bigoted you say? All because he has an Irish surname you say? See the quote I posted above in response to you, where do you think it came from? Who do you think would dare slaughter him so publicly? Chew on this whilst washing an almighty slice of humble pie down with a pint of bitter. It was his cuddly ex-pals at TAL. Are they likely to be racist towards the Irish? Well? Are they? You just made a complete and utter c**t of yourself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 "That’s right, Phil MacGiollabhain, the self-proclaimed ‘rebel journalist’ is actually plain old Philip White, originally from Baillieston. Is this a ‘blood feud’? I think we should be told! MacMadman has been living his fantasy life with his fantasy name for some years now, but those who know him by his other name – Phil White – have many stories to tell of his cowardice and sly backstabbing of both friend and foe alike over the years. One thing that all who know of his past agree on is that when the going gets tough MacWhite gets going, leaving others to clean up the mess he has left behind." Well, well, well. Racist you say? Bigoted you say? All because he has an Irish surname you say? See the quote I posted above in response to you, where do you think it came from? Who do you think would dare slaughter him so publicly? Chew on this whilst washing an almighty slice of humble pie down with a pint of bitter. It was his cuddly ex-pals at TAL. Are they likely to be racist towards the Irish? Well? Are they? You just made a complete and utter c**t of yourself. translation please? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 translation please? See that fantasy pish you wrote about Mac Goebbels and racism? I quoted a passage from an article on Phil 'White' from his lovely ex pals over at TAL. All those names his ex-pals at TAL called him - a result of anti-Irish racism and bigotry you say? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 See that fantasy pish you wrote about Mac Goebbels and racism? I quoted a passage from an article on Phil 'White' from his lovely ex pals over at TAL. All those names his ex-pals at TAL called him - a result of anti-Irish racism and bigotry you say? Is there a point here? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Is there a point here? There's an additional point - I think you might well be a moron. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain kirk Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Up to now, I've always favoured keeping the BRALT open. Its best days are obviously long, long gone now, but until very recently, I still thought it was the best place to discuss anything that emerged. Even when nothing much was happening, it could still make for a good place to visit on its, increasingly rare, good days. I think it's finished now though. Title stripping - or not - was kinda the last act for me and after the initial arguments surrounding the verdict, it's really degenerated again. There's nothing new on the horizon now really, and I think separate threads could handle anything that does occur. Let's face it - the presence of the BRALT has done nothing to discourage Celtic Rebel from starting new ones anyway. It's been a blast, but now needs sticking in Gold. It can always be exhumed in the light of another insolvency event. Well personaly I disagree ,I for one am looking forward to another year of ......you're dead ....no we're no. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 I think he is confirming yer hero Phil is a Bigot. And that mocking Phil MacManyMadeUpNames is in fact the territory of his fellow IRA lovers. Anti irish racism from TAL? That would be something. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 (edited) The HMRC lost...get over it Thats like saying your guy won the boxing match because he won the first round on a dodgy points decision Edited March 8, 2013 by Fotbawmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookies71 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 The reality is that the issue has yet to be finalised. Beware being complacent yet Tedi. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Bear in mind the taxman will be dying to win this case. Because its upper tier, if they do win it means they can after any club or business that's used EBTs the wrong way 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.