Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[MK Col]

<br />It's been well documented and wee benny knows full well .. <br /><br />a) Celtic never set up the scheme the player already had one in place.<br /><br />b) The payer concerned asked for his leaving payment (not his regular weekly wages) to be paid into  the scheme<br /><br />c) Celtic reported it to the authorities after taking proper legal advice (Celtic lawyers know their job) and paid all taxes due.<br /><br />Rangers .. well it seems they still use the same old legal infirm ..<br />

I stand corrected and lazy!

[Itwiznaeme]

So Celtic have no case to answer despite not declaring their EBT usage, you couldn't make it up.

Bring on the kangaroo court.

Have any other Scottish football clubs been involved with EBT schemes?

BBC Scotland Investigates wrote to all of the Scottish Premier League's member clubs and asked whether they had ever operated an EBT scheme.

Celtic confirmed that it established one EBT scheme in April 2005, which BBC Scotland understands was for the benefit of the Brazilian midfielder Juninho Paulista. The scheme was worth £765,000 but the club did not declare the trust payment to the Scottish Football Association or the Scottish Premier League.

The payments made to the trust were declared in Celtic's annual report for 2004/2005, but in 2008 the club became aware of an event giving rise to a potential tax liability which was subsequently paid after agreement with HMRC.

The remaining 10 SPL clubs replied and confirmed they had never set up an EBT scheme for any of their employees.

"When he was given the chance to start Juninho struggled to find any form but in fairness the sustained run in the side he needed was never given. By January it was clear that the Brazilian would not settle for life on the bench and he eventually was released from his contract on April 5th of 2005 after just 14 starts and only seven months after arriving at Parkhead."

The EBT payment to Junhinho Paulista was a 'settlement payment' payed to him 'after leaving' the club due to Celtic wanting to let him go. The EBT payment to Juninho Paulista was not subject to 'any' part of Juninho's contract while actually playing for Celtic.

[bennett]

Happy now?

"Celtic confirmed that it established one EBT scheme in April 2005, which BBC Scotland understands was for the benefit of the Brazilian midfielder Juninho Paulista. The scheme was worth £765,000 but the club did not declare the trust payment to the Scottish Football Association or the Scottish Premier League."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18169502

So they never declared it to the proper authorities but it's ok because that isn't part of the witch.-hunt. All payments to players must be declared or so we've been told, imagine Celtic making payments outwith a players contract.

[bennett]

http://sport.stv.tv/...ro-2012-payout/

Why would UEFA pay the Rangers this money?

Because the money was due to paid to Rangers, so they paid it to Rangers.

Simples.

[Greenlantern]

"Celtic confirmed that it established one EBT scheme in April 2005, which BBC Scotland understands was for the benefit of the Brazilian midfielder Juninho Paulista. The scheme was worth £765,000 but the club did not declare the trust payment to the Scottish Football Association or the Scottish Premier League."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18169502

So they never declared it to the proper authorities but it's ok because that isn't part of the witch.-hunt. All payments to players must be declared or so we've been told, imagine Celtic making payments outwith a players contract.

It wasn't breaching any SPL rules regarding players contracts.

Anyway, you already know this. :

[Itwiznaeme]

"Celtic confirmed that it established one EBT scheme in April 2005, which BBC Scotland understands was for the benefit of the Brazilian midfielder Juninho Paulista. The scheme was worth £765,000 but the club did not declare the trust payment to the Scottish Football Association or the Scottish Premier League."

http://www.bbc.co.uk...w-west-18169502

So they never declared it to the proper authorities but it's ok because that isn't part of the witch.-hunt. All payments to players must be declared or so we've been told, imagine Celtic making payments outwith a players contract.

Very happy, Yes.

Have any other Scottish football clubs been involved with EBT schemes?

BBC Scotland Investigates wrote to all of the Scottish Premier League's member clubs and asked whether they had ever operated an EBT scheme.

Celtic confirmed that it established one EBT scheme in April 2005, which BBC Scotland understands was for the benefit of the Brazilian midfielder Juninho Paulista. The scheme was worth £765,000 but the club did not declare the trust payment to the Scottish Football Association or the Scottish Premier League.

The payments made to the trust were declared in Celtic's annual report for 2004/2005, but in 2008 the club became aware of an event giving rise to a potential tax liability which was subsequently paid after agreement with HMRC.

The remaining 10 SPL clubs replied and confirmed they had never set up an EBT scheme for any of their employees.

"When he was given the chance to start Juninho struggled to find any form but in fairness the sustained run in the side he needed was never given. By January it was clear that the Brazilian would not settle for life on the bench and he eventually was released from his contract on April 5th of 2005 after just 14 starts and only seven months after arriving at Parkhead."

The EBT payment to Junhinho Paulista was a 'settlement payment' payed to him 'after leaving' the club due to Celtic wanting to let him go. The EBT payment to Juninho Paulista was not subject to 'any' part of Juninho's contract while actually playing for Celtic.

[Umbungo1874]

"Celtic confirmed that it established one EBT scheme in April 2005, which BBC Scotland understands was for the benefit of the Brazilian midfielder Juninho Paulista. The scheme was worth £765,000 but the club did not declare the trust payment to the Scottish Football Association or the Scottish Premier League."

http://www.bbc.co.uk...w-west-18169502

So they never declared it to the proper authorities but it's ok because that isn't part of the witch.-hunt. All payments to players must be declared or so we've been told, imagine Celtic making payments outwith a players contract.

Celtic should be stripped of any titles Juninho won

[bennett]

It wasn't breaching any SPL rules regarding players contracts.

Anyway, you already know this. :

They never declared the payments which is as we've been told against the rules.

[stonedsailor]

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/189727-spl-clubs-and-rangers-receive-slice-of-100m-uefa-euro-2012-payout/

Why would UEFA pay the Rangers this money?

For the avoidance of doubt can you confirm whether this money was paid to RFC 2012 PLC (IA) or the other Rangers? I expect you can provide a link since you are making such a big deal about it?

[hellbhoy]

http://sport.stv.tv/...ro-2012-payout/

Why would UEFA pay the Rangers this money?

Well I'm sure BDO will sort that little dilemma out for you soon

[WhiteRoseKillie]

http://sport.stv.tv/...ro-2012-payout/

Why would UEFA pay the Rangers this money?

They will pay the money to the clubs where the players were registered at the time of the games. Which would be rangers - you know the dead club where McGregor, Davis, Naismith and the rest used to play? Suppose you've still got some Internationals on the books - oh hang on a minute - European Championships. So, not that star-studded, Sevco, are they?

So, another payout for H&D, then. Looks like Charlie's going to have to sort out another premium rate phone scam opportunity for the fans to back his retirement fund the club.

[Itwiznaeme]

Everyone else can follow it ...

However poor wee Bennett doesn't understand it seems .. getting way too complicated for him ... never mind Green will sort it all out for you .. you just keep pumping the money in ..

Bennett must be one of the dumbest members of this forum, there can be no doubts about that. Even Tedi comes across as more intelligent than Bennett...and that is a compliment to neither of them.

[Greenlantern]

They never declared the payments which is as we've been told against the rules.

Let's put it into easier terms.

That was the "old Celtic" when we were sponsored by Umbro.

We are now sponsored by Nike, have 9 hoops on our strip & wear black socks.

You cannot possibly hold the "new Celtic" accountable for this.

WE BOUGHT THOSE STRIPS!!!!

Edited September 12, 2012 by Greenlantern

[Bairnforever1992]

BDO to arrive at Ibrox this monday.

[hellbhoy]

BDO to arrive at Ibrox this monday.

Looking forward to it

I doubt we'll here anything soon from them until they unravel the mess Nuff n Helps have created.

[youngsy]

http://www.uefa.com/...10_DOWNLOAD.pdf

I think we have the answer chaps. UEFA's definition of a football club.

"A legal entity fully responsible for a football team ."

RFC 2012 PLC were the legal entity fully responsible for the football team, RFC 2012 sold their assets to Sevco 5008 but they did NOT sell the football team to Sevco 5088, see Allan McGregor.

RFC 2012 still exist but the football team they were responsible for are now dead, sure some of them transferred to Sevco but that was a player choice and not a team. The legal entity which was responsible for Rangers the team will be dead soon enough but not before body has been mutilated.

Black and white, UEFA's rules, UEFA's definition of a club, I hope that this will satisfy those looking for an official football source for the death certificate.

First of all well done on the abbreviated version on the rules & regulations of the licensing of clubs being eligible to play in European competitions under UEFA,for that is what this articles of association relates to.Nothing to do with transference of membership within a domestic football asociation,or indeed a continuation of a historical timeline,but i would imagine you know exactly what this full article of UEFA relates to,nice flannel though i'll give you that.

Now let's go to your next part,as at this moment in time it's safe to assume that The Rangers Football Club plc aren't formally liquidated,so in that respect the administrators of the club surely then must have sold the club to Sevco before liquidation took place,making Sevco the operating company of the football club,making it in theory a buy out before liquidation.

That then makes it a continuos club as agreed by the SFA,SPL and SFL after agreement to undertake certain conditions imposed after transfer of the SFA Membership,no problem on that from myself i have to say. Now i'll argue the toss on this with you all you like but tbh i'm getting a bit bored with it all now but can you answer me one question,why have other clubs in Europe that have went through a similar procedure been given recognition of continuity by UEFA in a football context,why not Rangers. And please don;t go back down the road of companies law,that's been done,a straight answer under a football context will suffice.

[Henrik's tongue]

First of all well done on the abbreviated version on the rules & regulations of the licensing of clubs being eligible to play in European competitions under UEFA,for that is what this articles of association relates to.Nothing to do with transference of membership within a domestic football asociation,or indeed a continuation of a historical timeline,but i would imagine you know exactly what this full article of UEFA relates to,nice flannel though i'll give you that.

Now let's go to your next part,as at this moment in time it's safe to assume that The Rangers Football Club plc aren't formally liquidated,so in that respect the administrators of the club surely then must have sold the club to Sevco before liquidation took place,making Sevco the operating company of the football club,making it in theory a buy out before liquidation.

That then makes it a continuos club as agreed by the SFA,SPL and SFL after agreement to undertake certain conditions imposed after transfer of the SFA Membership,no problem on that from myself i have to say. Now i'll argue the toss on this with you all you like but tbh i'm getting a bit bored with it all now but can you answer me one question,why have other clubs in Europe that have went through a similar procedure been given recognition of continuity by UEFA in a football context,why not Rangers. And please don;t go back down the road of companies law,that's been done,a straight answer under a football context will suffice.

Nah.

[Itwiznaeme]

Rangers tax case: Verdict in £75m tribunal 'expected next month'

12 September 2012

http://local.stv.tv/...ted-next-month/

Rangers: The club used EBTs to pay players and directors.

The result of the 'big' tax case involving Rangers' use of an offshore tax avoidance scheme is expected to be released next month.

On Wednesday, the First Tier Tax Tribunal confirmed it hoped to conclude the long-running case in October.

Rangers were found by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to have breached tax rules through their use of employee benefit trusts (EBTs) to pay players and directors between 2001 and 2010.

The Ibrox club, then under the ownership of Sir David Murray, contested this, which resulted in the case being heard at the tribunal in Edinburgh.

Hearings in the tax case concluded in January, but its findings were not reached by the time the Ibrox club plunged into administration on February 14 this year.

A spokesman for the tax tribunal said the verdict in the case was expected next month but he "could not be more specific" than that.

Insolvency firm Duff and Phelps was appointed to take over the running of the club after owner Craig Whyte had run up debts of up to £134m, including unpaid PAYE and VAT of £18m, which was deducted from employee's wages but never paid to HMRC.

According to Duff and Phelps, the outcome of the case could land Rangers with a bill of up to £75m should they fail in the appeal. Although virtually none of this would be repaid, it could possibly impact upon the liquidation of Rangers oldco, which will occur when neutral insolvency firm BDO are appointed in the future. It could give practitioners an opportunity to pursue those who received EBTs for repayment, to cover the costs of liquidation and to put some money towards the hundreds of creditors owed money.

Mr Whyte purchased Sir David Murray's 85% stake in Rangers for £1 last May and used a £25.3m deal with Ticketus for future Ibrox season tickets to pay off the club's £18m debt to Lloyds Banking Group.

Sir David has defended the use of EBTs at Rangers, which he also implemented to pay several executives at his own business, Murray International Holdings. The First Tier Tax Tribunal case is against both the Ibrox club and Sir David's company.

During his 22 years at Ibrox, the 60-year-old also oversaw the use of a discounted options scheme to pay players Tore Andre Flo and Ronald de Boer between 2000 and 2003. This became the basis of the 'wee' tax case dispute between Rangers and HMRC. The club agreed to pay the tax authority around £3m for this, but it did not do so before calling in administrators.

Rangers oldco failed to exit administration through a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) funded by the Sevco consortium in June after HMRC said the club had breached its rules on persistent non-payment of tax.

The assets of the club, including Ibrox stadium and the Murray Park training ground, were purchased by the Charles Green-led Sevco group in a deal worth £5.5m, before they were then transferred to a newco.

SPL inquiry into Rangers' use of EBTs to continue in November

12 September 2012

http://local.stv.tv/...ue-in-november/

Rangers: The club used EBTs to pay players.

An inquiry into whether Rangers breached football rules through their use of a tax avoidance scheme to pay players will continue later this year.

Following procedural meetings this week, the Scottish Premier League (SPL) confirmed its independent commission would hear evidence in the case from Tuesday, November 13.

Solicitors from both oldco and newco Rangers had raised points about the process with the panel chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith, which led to it scheduling the hearing dates for November on Wednesday.

In an announcement, the SPL confirmed both oldco and the Charles Green-led newco Rangers would have the opportunity to be represented throughout the process.

The panel is considering whether Rangers fielded ineligible players between 2000 and 2010 by paying part of their wages through offshore employee benefit trusts (EBTs) during Sir David Murray's reign at Ibrox.

The SPL statement read: "Oldco and Rangers FC, who are named in the issues contained in the notice of commission and alleged to have been in breach of SPL rules, will continue to have the right to appear and be represented at all hearings of the commission and to make such submissions as they think fit.

"Newco, as the current owner and operator of Rangers FC, although not alleged by the SPL to have committed any breach of SPL Rules, will also have the right to appear and be represented at all hearings of the commission and to make such submissions as it thinks fit."

The initial hearing dates set aside last until Friday, November 16, although both November 20 and 21 have also been allocated should it require more time.

SPL lawyers have to lodge a list of witnesses for the hearing by October 19 and has any other relevant party who wishes to be represented at the hearing lodge their intimation to do so by November 1.

Earlier this week Rangers chief executive Mr Green the newco owners would not be cooperating with the SPL inquiry, and claimed it would have no legal effect on it. One possible outcome from the investigation would be the stripping of Rangers' titles during the time it used EBTs, although Mr Green claimed Sevco had bought the titles and could not therefore lose them.

This came as the First Tier Tax Tribunal confirmed it expected to return its verdict on Rangers' use of EBTs next month.

It is part of a long-standing separate appeal by the Ibrox club against HM Revenue and Custom's £49m tax bill it hit the club with after deeming their use of the tax avoidance scheme was against the rules.

[zurcher]

So they never declared it to the proper authorities but it's ok because that isn't part of the witch.-hunt. All payments to players must be declared or so we've been told, imagine Celtic making payments outwith a players contract.

I refuse to believe you're this stupid and i know you're having fun trolling but here's the thing:

The SPL have investigated and found no breach of the rules, apparently the amount was paid into his trust AFTER HE FINISHED PLAYING, and it was not part of his normal arrangement. There were no side contracts and so the only trouble they faced was one of tax avoidance which they rectified years ago. Now, the same thing is happening with your old club, AN INVESTIGATION, which will determine if any rules were broken and then if so, decide on a punishment, not so difficult to understand is it?

But Green has wound you all up no much that you now think there's a grand conspiracy against you now, because they know it's not looking good and want to try to discredit it before it even comes out.

The funniest thing in it all is how everything has flipped, before this Celtic fans assumed that if you weren't a Celtic fan then you were automatically a rangers fan, or at least had sympathies and rangers fans probably assumed the same, but still called Celtic fans paranoid. Now Celtic fans have had their eyes opened to the reality that if anything rangers were more hated among the diddies than they were themselves and rangers fans have whipped themselves up into a level of paranoid frenzy far worse than anything Celtic ever had, so much so that rangers fans now see everything in termsofa grand conspirac being orchestrated by some imaginary Celtic supporting dark forces and us diddies are either supporting it or can't see it. I can't decide if it's very, very sad or totally fuckin hilarious.

[kiddy]

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/189727-spl-clubs-and-rangers-receive-slice-of-100m-uefa-euro-2012-payout/

Why would UEFA pay the Rangers this money?

They're not, Rangers are getting paid the money, "the" Rangers are not.

Looks like Oldco's creditors will have a share of that cash. But since Sevco aren't connected, they'll receive hee-haw.