Mark Connolly Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Anyone see the West 'Am chairman blaming HMRC last night on SSN? Did they really 'let' Rangers run up a £70mil tax bill or was it more a case of they found out they were doing something illegal and then hit them with a bill for back taxes? I got the feeling the guy didn't really know what he was talking about. Sounds like a guy who knows exactly what he is talking about, and has a case of brown trousers! Odds on Mascherano, Tevez et al having had EBTs at West Ham? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Anyone see the West 'Am chairman blaming HMRC last night on SSN? Did they really 'let' Rangers run up a £70mil tax bill or was it more a case of they found out they were doing something illegal and then hit them with a bill for back taxes? I got the feeling the guy didn't really know what he was talking about. Almost like Craig Whyte having a go at "certain sections" of the Scottish Media, You know the ones who have been uncovering what he's been upto since he took over at Ibrox 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimH Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) While we await further news out of Ibrox, I am becoming more worried that Rangers are going to emerge from this with no more of a penalty than the 10 points they have been deducted so far. This was reinforced at the weekend when again someone (in this case Gordon Smith) stated that the important thing was for everyone to do what is best for the club and to try to get accounts finalised by 31st March to allow them to compete in Europe. What I don't understand is the lack of obvious action by the administrators. In April 2002 Motherwell went into administration as they were losing approx £2million per year. The debt was about 11million of which something like 9 million was owed to John Boyle. In less than a week 19 players had been made redundant as well as a number of backroom and office staff. Even although John Boyle was owed more than 75% of the debt, it still took almost exactly 2 years for Motherwell to come out of administration – but Gordon Smith still thinks it can be done before the end of next month! Comparing this to Rangers case – they are losing £10million a year and owe a minimum of £15million to the tax man (before the "big tax case" is dealt with) as well as how much else to other creditors – and what has happened? Two directors have been made redundant – but not immediately – the administrator only needs to give 24 hours notice – they are employed until the end of the month (tomorrow). It is exactly 2 weeks since Rangers went into admin and what have Duff & Phelps done to reduce costs? The monthly costs at Ibrox are something like £3.75million and as far as I can see the only income they will have coming in will be the non-season ticket money from the home games against Hearts and Celtic (maybe £600,000 in total) plus what else? Surely nothing that will take them even half way to what they need. So why the lack of activity? I hope I am wrong and Rangers don't escape debt free with what is merely a slap on the wrist. Edited February 28, 2012 by JimH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Sounds like a guy who knows exactly what he is talking about, and has a case of brown trousers! Odds on Mascherano, Tevez et al having had EBTs at West Ham? I'm sure he knows about tax evasion - i was meaning the specifics of the Rangers case. Also, don't think he was in charge of West Ham at the time - was at Birmingham I think. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Anyone see the West 'Am chairman blaming HMRC last night on SSN? Did they really 'let' Rangers run up a £70mil tax bill or was it more a case of they found out they were doing something illegal and then hit them with a bill for back taxes? I got the feeling the guy didn't really know what he was talking about. That programme was total garbage. Completely unbalanced, and the conclusions from Gold and Storrie seemed to be: 1) The problems down south are all because new owners don't have enough money to cover unsustainable debts run up by previous owners... therefore it's the new owners fault (!) (That was specific to Portsmouth but Storrie's solution seems to be "make sure anyone coming into football proves they have loads of money" rather than "stop running up debts way beyond the means of paying them back") 2) It's all HMRC's fault for not "collecting tax" as they went along To be fair with regards to this thread, they were quite clear that they didn't know anything about EBTs and Rangers situation, it was very specific to England. Still, it was presented that them being in trouble was somehow a sign of the economic times, rather than complete financial mismanagement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I'm sure he knows about tax evasion - i was meaning the specifics of the Rangers case. Also, don't think he was in charge of West Ham at the time - was at Birmingham I think. My point was more that a win for HMRC on this case would open the floodgates, and one would suspect that West Ham (and possibly Birmingham) might be amongst many other teams they would go after, therefore he could find himself liable for a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig tax bill 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Gold was quite specific in that he had never used EBTs. Very quick to suggest that there was nothing wrong with them (true to a degree!). There is a storm brewing online re the implications of the detail of the EBTs and what they meant for player registration. Regardless of the outcome of the FTT there is now suggestion being made that if the "side letters" were not registered with the SFA and SPL, that the players involved were not validly registered. Campbell Ogilvie and Martin Bain were on SFA and SPL boards at the time this was happening. It is being suggested that if they were knowingly ignoring the existence of other payments to players outwith the normal contract, that (regardless of the tax implications) they were complicit in improper and invalid player registration. It will be interesting to see if that grows arms and legs over the coming days and weeks.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 28, 2012 Author Share Posted February 28, 2012 That programme was total garbage. Completely unbalanced, and the conclusions from Gold and Storrie seemed to be: 1) The problems down south are all because new owners don't have enough money to cover unsustainable debts run up by previous owners... therefore it's the new owners fault (!) (That was specific to Portsmouth but Storrie's solution seems to be "make sure anyone coming into football proves they have loads of money" rather than "stop running up debts way beyond the means of paying them back") 2) It's all HMRC's fault for not "collecting tax" as they went along To be fair with regards to this thread, they were quite clear that they didn't know anything about EBTs and Rangers situation, it was very specific to England. Still, it was presented that them being in trouble was somehow a sign of the economic times, rather than complete financial mismanagement. I was about to post the same thing. When Storrie was asked about the massive debts run up by Portsmouth, he waffled about their owner wanting Portsmouth to be a big club, challenging at the top - so everything was fine and under control, they were managing the debt.... when he left, that's when their problems started. Unreal. Is there a bucket of sand big enough for these people to bury their heads in? By his logic, everything at Gretna was perfectly fine and normal... it was only an unfortunate death that caused the problems. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) As opposed to the revenue already lost by United, Dunfermline, etc which they have failed to pay? If it's such a big deal to these clubs, why haven't they complained and asked for the money direct from SPL, as specifically provided for in the rules? Rangers cannot finish below 6th which equates to a payment of around £1.3M. It's entirely uncontroversial IMO that like Gretna they could be forwarded that amount - less whatever monies have fallen due to other clubs but not been paid, and for which those clubs elect to petition SPL regarding (note my emphasis) - in order to boost their chances of reaching May 13th. EDIT: Or even the split. Edited February 28, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 If it's such a big deal to these clubs, why haven't they complained and asked for the money direct from SPL, as specifically provided for in the rules? Rangers cannot finish below 6th which equates to a payment of around £1.3M. It's entirely uncontroversial IMO that like Gretna they could be forwarded that amount - less whatever monies have fallen due to other clubs but not been paid, and for which those clubs elect to petition SPL regarding (note my emphasis) - in order to boost their chances of reaching May 13th. EDIT: Or even the split. Why should a club who've broken the league rules, deliberately not paid HMRC and who still owe other clubs money be given any help? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Why should a club who've broken the league rules, deliberately not paid HMRC and who still owe other clubs money be given any help? ... because of the impact on other clubs and the league of them going bust right away - and because such assistance was given to Gretna previously. I'm advocating nothing more than giving them the minimum payment they're due to receive anyway, less any money due to other clubs which those clubs want to bring to SPL's attention, if it would help avoid chaos. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tio Pepe Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 ... because of the impact on other clubs and the league of them going bust right away - and because such assistance was given to Gretna previously. I'm advocating nothing more than giving them the minimum payment they're due to receive anyway, less any money due to other clubs which those clubs want to bring to SPL's attention, if it would help avoid chaos. It is utter madness to pay money not yet due to a company in administration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 It is utter madness to pay money not yet due to a company in administration. Why was money paid to Gretna then? They also got 2 years worth of parachute and the SPL then claimed the 2nd year back as a creditor!! It might equally be madness not to pay if the consequence is mass-disruption due to expungements etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tio Pepe Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Why was money paid to Gretna then? They also got 2 years worth of parachute and the SPL then claimed the 2nd year back as a creditor!! It might equally be madness not to pay if the consequence is mass-disruption due to expungements etc. Because the SPL were mad. The fact that they had to join the list of creditors of a busted flush shows the consequences of that madness. I don't see the mass disruption. The liquidated team's games to date become null and void, the league table is reset and onward everyone else goes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeus Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Because the SPL were mad. The fact that they had to join the list of creditors of a busted flush shows the consequences of that madness. I don't see the mass disruption. The liquidated team's games to date become null and void, the league table is reset and onward everyone else goes. Has anyone compiled a league table of where we would be if this was the case? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Is it? Would the revenue lost to those clubs be greater or less than a share of Rangers prize money? Absolutely. I didnt say it would see them through to the end of the season, just that that would be the rationale for advancing the money. I would expect, or at least hope, that the SPL would be looking for Duff and Dufferr to guarantee the club could fulfil its fixtures before any prize money was handed over. I have no idea, but the logistical problem - not to mention the need to recompense season ticket holders, etc, would surely give the SPL every reason to attempt to ensure Rangers fulfill their fixtures. In effect I agree with you, but equally, I think it'd be preferable - if not financially beneficial, for Rangers to fulfill their fixtures, even if that involves half a dozen Andy Littles and five reserve keepers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tio Pepe Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I have no idea, but the logistical problem - not to mention the need to recompense season ticket holders, etc, would surely give the SPL every reason to attempt to ensure Rangers fulfill their fixtures. In effect I agree with you, but equally, I think it'd be preferable - if not financially beneficial, for Rangers to fulfill their fixtures, even if that involves half a dozen Andy Littles and five reserve keepers. What recompense would season ticket holders be due? In a liquidated company they are at best creditors. In going concerns they have entitlement to enter, for example, all home league games. That entitlement won't change if one team fails to fulfill their fixtures. I really wish people would stop looking for excuses to help the blue bigots. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) Why was money paid to Gretna then? They also got 2 years worth of parachute and the SPL then claimed the 2nd year back as a creditor!! It might equally be madness not to pay if the consequence is mass-disruption due to expungements etc. Technically speaking, the money wasn't paid to Gretna. The SPL provided funds in order to ensure that the Gretna players received their wages and were therefore in a position to fulfil their fixture commitments. Edited February 28, 2012 by Drooper 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribzanelli Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Has anyone compiled a league table of where we would be if this was the case? I suppose Killie and St Mirren would be the big losers (6 and 4 points respectively). Would kill off their top 6 chances IMO 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 What recompense would season ticket holders be due? In a liquidated company they are at best creditors. In going concerns they have entitlement to enter, for example, all home league games. That entitlement won't change if one team fails to fulfill their fixtures. I really wish people would stop looking for excuses to help the blue bigots. Correct. What was the name of that Christmas hamper mob (Fairpak?) that went to the wall leaving all those who had invested chasing sweeties. I don't see a huge difference between them and the Rangers ST holders to be perfectly honest. 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.