wunfellaff Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 It's not just Scottish clubs either and that is why UEFA brought in the financial fair play regulations, now clubs have to prove they are being run without financial doping or they do not get to enter UEFA competitions. It's just a shame your old club overdosed on the financial dope before they could sort themselves out. UEFA are starting to root out this form of cheating, it's hilarious that the self proclaimed "world's most successful club" were one of the first to go down the gurgler after the legislation took effect. Well, the Worlds most successful Club got shut down if I remember, then dodgily reopened witha patsy as the new owner to get the licence............ Oh look, theres Minty out front Even the sign ''The Phoenix Club'' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 I'd forgotten that a few idiots still held firmly to this 'financial doping' rubbish. Laying aside the EBT and registration issues (which I'm happy to dicuss elsewhere) does 'financial doping' only apply to Rangers or to any club which has ever over-extended itself financially? Should every indebted club be regarded as 'financial dopers'? Should clubs that, say, made a rights issue be described as 'financial dopers'? Can you explain what you actually mean by the term? Certainly ! The other clubs that are indebted have on record the full amount of debt the club owes.This is all above board and legal if the debt can be serviced and paid off by the club over time and all tax due is paid on time when the HMRC requires it be paid. In Rangers case it's been hidden off record by using the EBT scheme to deliberately avoid paying the full amount of tax due.You do know that Rangers had a wage budget that was there for all to see on their record books YES ?.This is a confined restricted total amount of money available by the club to pay players full wages YES ?.The amount of money available for wages is the amount the club can spend without accruing more debt to be able service and manage to stay afloat and service the debt the club already had. Using the EBT scheme Rangers managed to acquire better players than they were supposed to field according to the budget Rangers had.If the wage budget was ! say £30 million a year ! by avoiding tax through the EBT scheme say by 10% of the £30 million you end up with £33 million that you can pay for players wages but on record Rangers had in their accounts £30 million.Most times Rangers could afford the transfer fee needed to buy a player but didn't have the wage structure to pay these better quality players the wages they demanded.If you have £3 million extra you can afford to pay the extra wages needed to bribe players to play for Rangers. Bits in bold are the difference ! on record perfectly legal but off record you are manipulating the situation to your advantage behind closed doors where nobody knows what your doing ! DOPING the situation = CHEATING in the sporting world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 No fancy terminology needed, see? Simple criminality. Oh just behave yourself. I was actually trying to have a sensible discussion with sensible people but you just can't help yourself. Either show the criminality and who has been arrested/prosecuted or just f**k off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 In Rangers case it's been hidden off record by using the EBT scheme to deliberately avoid paying the full amount of tax due. What I asked was quite clear. It was, to remind you: "Laying aside the EBT and registration issues (which I'm happy to dicuss elsewhere) does 'financial doping' only apply to Rangers or to any club which has ever over-extended itself financially?" Itwazname made a sensible post to reply to my question. You, however, need to learn to read. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Oh just behave yourself. I was actually trying to have a sensible discussion with sensible people but you just can't help yourself. Either show the criminality and who has been arrested/prosecuted or just f**k off. Tax avoidance leading to tax evasion is illegal ! Taking money out of players' wages in the guise of PAYE and NI then not forwarding that to the tax office is illegal ! All so that they had more money to put towards attracting better players ! ( financial doping ) Criminality !! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Oh just behave yourself. I was actually trying to have a sensible discussion with sensible people but you just can't help yourself. Either show the criminality and who has been arrested/prosecuted or just f**k off. And there's that simple abuse again..... Don't worry, my Sevconian friend, the wheels of justice may grind slowly, but I feel that in this case they will grind exceeding fine, pour encourager les autres. You are aware that none of your "men in the big hoose" have a lot of pull outside of Scotland, aren't you? Sorry for reminding you of the facts of the situation - but you won't get through this without facing them sooner or later. As I've previously posted, it is you and yours who should be asking the questions of your representatives, not making new friends with your jolly folk singing in Div 3. If you'd done so a few years ago, instead of hiding in your conspiracy theories, you might still have a club, not a tacky tribute act. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 And there's that simple abuse again..... No abuse either simple of complex. Maybe you'd care to show where I issued any abuse. You made an accusation of criminality. My request was simple: Either show the criminality and who has been arrested/prosecuted or just f**k off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Tax avoidance leading to tax evasion is illegal ! Taking money out of players' wages in the guise of PAYE and NI then not forwarding that to the tax office is illegal ! All so that they had more money to put towards attracting better players ! ( financial doping ) Criminality !! Do you know what is really worrying here? I asked a very simply couple of questions and, bar 1, no-one can actually give a reasoned reply. Let me remind you. What I asked was: Should every indebted club be regarded as 'financial dopers'? Should clubs that, say, made a rights issue be described as 'financial dopers'? Can you explain what you actually mean by the term? Is it at all possible that you can even try to address my very sensible questions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Tax avoidance leading to tax evasion is illegal ! Taking money out of players' wages in the guise of PAYE and NI then not forwarding that to the tax office is illegal ! All so that they had more money to put towards attracting better players ! ( financial doping ) Criminality !! Call the polis! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 No abuse either simple of complex. Maybe you'd care to show where I issued any abuse. You made an accusation of criminality. My request was simple: Either show the criminality and who has been arrested/prosecuted or just f**k off. Reasonable fans of any team whom had suffered a fate similar to that of your previous team would be shouting and screaming demanding answers. "Why were these people allowed to destroy this magnificent club?" "Why are the police not hammering down doors?" "Why did this happen to the mighty Rangers?" No, not you or yours. We have the head in sand reaction from most of you, except 'McCoist Must Stay', "it never happened, prove it happened, these people would not do it to us, we arra peepul" no looking for justice, no asking for answers, it's a case of "just f**k off" Did you lot actually support your club or did you just yearn for glory, regardless of the price? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Certainly ! The other clubs that are indebted have on record the full amount of debt the club owes.This is all above board and legal if the debt can be serviced and paid off by the club over time and all tax due is paid on time when the HMRC requires it be paid. In Rangers case it's been hidden off record by using the EBT scheme to deliberately avoid paying the full amount of tax due.You do know that Rangers had a wage budget that was there for all to see on their record books YES ?.This is a confined restricted total amount of money available by the club to pay players full wages YES ?.The amount of money available for wages is the amount the club can spend without accruing more debt to be able service and manage to stay afloat and service the debt the club already had. Using the EBT scheme Rangers managed to acquire better players than they were supposed to field according to the budget Rangers had.If the wage budget was ! say £30 million a year ! by avoiding tax through the EBT scheme say by 10% of the £30 million you end up with £33 million that you can pay for players wages but on record Rangers had in their accounts £30 million.Most times Rangers could afford the transfer fee needed to buy a player but didn't have the wage structure to pay these better quality players the wages they demanded.If you have £3 million extra you can afford to pay the extra wages needed to bribe players to play for Rangers. Bits in bold are the difference ! on record perfectly legal but off record you are manipulating the situation to your advantage behind closed doors where nobody knows what your doing ! DOPING the situation = CHEATING in the sporting world. Rangers accounts, you say? The EBT scheme was declared in those every year. -3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Call the polis! But who do we accuse ? The culprit is either deid or scarpered !! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 What I asked was quite clear. It was, to remind you: "Laying aside the EBT and registration issues (which I'm happy to dicuss elsewhere) does 'financial doping' only apply to Rangers or to any club which has ever over-extended itself financially?" Itwazname made a sensible post to reply to my question. You, however, need to learn to read. In Rangers case as it stands ! YES ! only they have manipulated a situation in their favour OFF RECORD so that the clubs accounts show and state otherwise.All the other clubs accounts are there to be scrutinized by public IN FULL.You however need to understand as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Rangers accounts, you say? The EBT scheme was declared in those every year. God almighty, you Cevco Loyal do really have reading & comprehension problems, so I'll repeat the quote which is posted only a half dozen or so above YET AGAIN: "Please do not believe the rubbish that somehow Rangers declared what they were doing to the SFA. You can see a typical “declaration” here. It does not even say that players were using the scheme. It does not say that any payments were made outside of contracts given to the SFA or SPL. It does not provide anything that would have let a tax expert know that something was amiss let alone football administrators- who are simply not qualified to do any kind of forensic accounting analysis. So let us stop with this “it was in the annual accounts” nonsense!" Posts like your one make me cringe at the straw grasping. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 God almighty, you Cevco Loyal do really have reading & comprehension problems, so I'll repeat the quote which is posted only a half dozen or so above YET AGAIN: "Please do not believe the rubbish that somehow Rangers declared what they were doing to the SFA. You can see a typical "declaration" here. It does not even say that players were using the scheme. It does not say that any payments were made outside of contracts given to the SFA or SPL. It does not provide anything that would have let a tax expert know that something was amiss let alone football administrators- who are simply not qualified to do any kind of forensic accounting analysis. So let us stop with this "it was in the annual accounts" nonsense!" Posts like your one make me cringe at the straw grasping. Did you make that yourself? The accounts were declared in full every year, if they weren't the relevant authorities would have acted there and then. ...and yes i know you got your info from an ex lawyers blog, i know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 God almighty, you Cevco Loyal do really have reading & comprehension problems, so I'll repeat the quote which is posted only a half dozen or so above YET AGAIN: "Please do not believe the rubbish that somehow Rangers declared what they were doing to the SFA. You can see a typical "declaration" here. It does not even say that players were using the scheme. It does not say that any payments were made outside of contracts given to the SFA or SPL. It does not provide anything that would have let a tax expert know that something was amiss let alone football administrators- who are simply not qualified to do any kind of forensic accounting analysis. So let us stop with this "it was in the annual accounts" nonsense!" Posts like your one make me cringe at the straw grasping. Do try to follow the conversation concerned rather than posting some knee-jerk response. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 No, not you or yours. We have the head in sand reaction from most of you, except 'McCoist Must Stay', "it never happened, prove it happened, these people would not do it to us, we arra peepul" no looking for justice, no asking for answers, it's a case of "just f**k off" You are, again, using my simple questions to vent about anything regarding Rangers. Let me post, again, what I asked. Should every indebted club be regarded as 'financial dopers'? Should clubs that, say, made a rights issue be described as 'financial dopers'? Can you explain what you actually mean by the term? These are not difficult questions. Why is it impossible to get a sensible reply? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Rangers accounts, you say? The EBT scheme was declared in those every year. Read the earlier post in the previous page I made about your former clubs pension fund post 87,009 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Do try to follow the conversation concerned rather than posting some knee-jerk response. FFS Cevco lads - look at the friggin annual accounts the former Rangers posted and tell me where the fook it tells you that any player received anything through a trust....they don't. Why on earth do yez persist with this pathetic bleat? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 What I asked was quite clear. It was, to remind you: "Laying aside the EBT and registration issues (which I'm happy to dicuss elsewhere) does 'financial doping' only apply to Rangers or to any club which has ever over-extended itself financially?" Itwazname made a sensible post to reply to my question. You, however, need to learn to read. You cannot, the EBT scheme is the crux of everything that came after. If the EBT scheme had been been ratified by HMRC Murray may well have been still in charge or at least someone like Whyte would not have came in. The EBT scheme and the resulting tax claim ensured no serious businessman/ investor would come in. Why wouldn't anyone come in for the club before Whyte , given the insistence of being a global brand. You don't believe Murray was taken in anymore than I do which then begs the question what was the remit and if Murray knew he had implemented the scheme correctly why ?? You and your fellow supporters are all over the place with this , i don't blame you but it has to seep in at some point the world is not a big conspiracy and while your focusing on this nonsense about something in the past , titles . It is a smokescreen to ensure you don't ask questions about the present regime. That has to be your focus. Look at Green couldn't convince the support about buying into the club but then he started drip feeding the stuff about bigotry and the history, he knows it means everything for the supporters and has used that to get you all to buy in to this version of Rangers but he only wants a return of his investment then to feck off but that will not mean your club is ensured of a future without either another bottomless pot of money( even if it was someone else's) or to run the club more frugally. 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.