Baxter Parp Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 As you said semantics don't win arguments Neither does stupidity. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Tax penalties are ten a penny and people often get penalties when they've done nothing wrong. That's why they have appeals. Yes, they've been found guilty and then appealled successfully, now what's your fucking point? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Yes, they've been found guilty and then appealled successfully, now what's your fucking point? Getting a tax penalty isn't being "found guilty" in any remotely meaningful sense. Penalties get churned out automatically. Plus the matter is under appeal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 For you? Naw. Do it for yourself 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Getting a tax penalty isn't being "found guilty" in any remotely meaningful sense. Penalties get churned out automatically. Plus the matter is under appeal. Ugh. You don't get penalties unless you have done something wrong, whether it's trivial, like late payment, or near-criminal, like paying your employees through an offshore EBT for years on end. You have been found guilty of something, the end. There is nothing you can say that will change that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 (edited) Ugh. You don't get penalties unless you have done something wrong, whether it's trivial, like late payment, or near-criminal, like paying your employees through an offshore EBT for years on end. You have been found guilty of something, the end. There is nothing you can say that will change that. I'm not sure exactly what penalties are involved. The taxman tends to slap these on all over the place. And it's under appeal. Edited November 16, 2012 by Bearwithme 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I'm not sure exactly what penalties are involved. The taxman tends to slap these on all over the place. And it's under appeal. So your point is that you don't know anything and it's under appeal? Tell me something I don't know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 So your point is that you don't know anything and it's under appeal? Tell me something I don't know. I suspect there's an awful lot to choose from there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Do it for yourself Are you in the habit of writing lists in public to confirm your thoughts - lest your mind plays tricks on you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Bennett,we ripped the pish out of Celtic in the early nineties about them having no money. I particulary remember two weeks on the bounce in season 1991/92 when they beat us in the Scottish Cup and then the league they sang"always look on the bright side of life" after which at the partiton between the Rangers end and the jungle we were showing them what money looked like so it's fair to say that we would be giving them plenty if roles were reversed. I know i would,especially to that cunto,Henrik. I'm going to disagree with you, theres "piss taking" and there's obsessive behaviour. I was in my teens then and it wasn't that big a deal, Rangers as always came first. Are you being paid through an offshore Employee Benefit Trust and been investigated by HMRC? No? Shut the f**k up then. Ooooh get her 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Just read back through the todays/last nights posts and you have to give young Dhensboy credit for not needing sleep, give him a keyboard and he'll hammer away at it non stop while sorting out the Rangers problems. Kudos. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 For an EBT to be legal they must be genuine loans. The question I would have to ask is why anyone whose earning 5 figure sums a week need them? More importantly we've had various slips of the tongue from former players that they've never paid any of it back. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Are you in the habit of writing lists in public to confirm your thoughts - lest your mind plays tricks on you? I don't believe you even know what the list of punishments is. So, share it with us. list them, i'm not asking you to do something difficult. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I don't believe you even know what the list of punishments is. So, share it with us. list them, i'm not asking you to do something difficult. Ball gag, wrist and leg restraints, whipping, c*ck cages, anal, pet play, pvc/rubber, blindfold, pins, furniture etc, take yer pick Rico baby you kinky bugger . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I don't believe you even know what the list of punishments is. So, share it with us. list them, i'm not asking you to do something difficult. We've already done the rounds with regards to your ridiculous questions. They aren't getting any better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 We've already done the rounds with regards to your ridiculous questions. They aren't getting any better. You feel your club has had enough unfair punishments. Nothing ridiculous in asking you to list these punishements So, list them 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I'm going to disagree with you, theres "piss taking" and there's obsessive behaviour. I was in my teens then and it wasn't that big a deal, Rangers as always came first And this is no different, except for the fact you canny take it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 You have proved your own point....often Proven 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 And this is no different, except for the fact you canny take it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 (edited) You are simply incorrect Tax avoidance is to avoid paying tax, paying money into an ISA is tax avoidance Have a look at this article, it even covers EBT`s and Rangers who have appealed the bill There are many ways of avoiding tax but some are perceived in a dimmer light than others; paying money into an ISA is tax avoidance, as is paying money into a pension scheme these two examples are never questioned by those hunting down the tax avoiders and yet those two examples are as legally legitimate as a well run "tax avoidance" scheme http://www.castlemai...oidance-schemes Still your not paying tax over a number of weeks and that is tax evasion. No matter what you keep trying to tell us HMRC will always view it as ILLEGAL! Be Careful Posting Forms To Companies House – They Might Get Lost in the Mail I posted about the recent Rangers announcement on the official website regarding the addition of two new non-executive Directors to the Board of the Rangers Football Club Limited. The name of Mr Imran Ahmad was missing from the list and this initially seemed odd, bearing in mind how highly Mr Green had spoken of him on 17th October when announcing that Mr Ahmad had left Zeus Capital to become Commercial Director at Ibrox. Subsequent inquiries by Ecojon, reported here, suggested that we had been concerned regarding Mr Ahmad for no reason. He remains involved with Zeus Capital. In addition, his appointment as Commercial Director would render his position as a non-executive director redundant. He could have stayed as an executive director, but the suggestion is that he will take up a place on the football board (although there has been no announcement yet to my knowledge of any separate company to run the football business). As I have said before, it is a common structure to have a PLC which owns the limited company which in turn owns the football operation. All will become clear of course when the Prospectus is issued, at which stage all interested parties can consult their financial advisers and stockbrokers to determine whether or not to purchase shares. Why in the heading do I mention sending forms to Companies House? Under Section 167 of the Companies Act 2006 there is a duty on a company to notify directorial changes to the Register of Companies. The relevant part of the section states:- A company must, within the period of 14 days from— (a) a person becoming or ceasing to be a director… give notice to the registrar of the change and of the date on which it occurred. If Mr Ahmad stepped down on 17th October, when his appointment as Commercial Director was announced, as seems to be implied, then Companies House ought to have known by 1st November. As at this morning, there is no record of Mr Ahmad having resigned as a director. As the organisation now running Rangers is a far more efficient outfit than its predecessor turned out to be, then the likely explanations are:- That the paperwork has gone astray en route to Companies House; That Companies House has not processed the information timeously (which is highly unlikely in my experience); or That the resignation was only made effective when the new directors, Messrs Smith and Hart, were appointed, and it was felt appropriate not to make any announcement of Mr Ahmad’s change in status. In the latter case, as a private limited company, there is no obligation to make a public announcement. That is why the notification to Companies House is required. In that event the time window is still open. In theory, it is a criminal offence by the company and its officers to miss the 14-day time window. For that reason I have no doubt that the issue is simply one of paperwork being diverted in the post or the ether, and that the official records will be up to date imminently. There is no possibility that, unlike Mr Whyte’s time in charge, the need to notify Companies House has simply been forgotten. After all, at the end of June when Messrs Murray, Stockbridge and Ahmad were appointed, the Companies House records were updated that very day. Posted by Paul McConville Edited November 16, 2012 by Bairnforever1992 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.