Wee Willie Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 I want every car dealer in Europe investigated by the ASA they're all selling new cars cheaper than the list price and trying to pass it off as a saving!! b*****ds Good point 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doink Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Tedi 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 That's better put than my post, but the real killer could be if the HMRC win their appeal, they could be free to pursue the club. They have spent 5 years chasing Rangers and using up tax payers money doing so. They believe they have a case and with the get tough on tax dodgers approach from the government they are unlikely to stop until they have tasted raw heart and liver. Rangers and their fans have spent a lot of time and effort convincing us that this is the same club. If your company goes bust and you start a new one under the same or similar name do not, I say do not say that its the same one as before. Stupidity, there are no limits. :lol: I think HMRC continue to appeal the Rangers case because there are a number of other EBT cases which are awaiting the outcome. I don't think it proves they can go after the new company for the debts of the old one. HMRC will get their money from the other cases if the Rangers one is finally decided in their favour. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambos Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 QoS are goosed I'm afraid, ref done his job well in the first game..No Chance QoS will be given anything in the second leg... stitch up mate This current Shitco team could f**k things up even with the refs help. Anything could happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) I think HMRC continue to appeal the Rangers case because there are a number of other EBT cases which are awaiting the outcome. I don't think it proves they can go after the new company for the debts of the old one. HMRC will get their money from the other cases if the Rangers one is finally decided in their favour. Almost certainly you won't be able to explain how winning a tax case against Rangers will help HMRC in other cases. In framing an answer explain which other Scottish clubs they are investigating and say how a judgement in The Court of Session sets a precedent in England's Court of Appeal. Edited May 14, 2015 by The_Kincardine -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 I think HMRC continue to appeal the Rangers case because there are a number of other EBT cases which are awaiting the outcome. I don't think it proves they can go after the new company for the debts of the old one. HMRC will get their money from the other cases if the Rangers one is finally decided in their favour. You'd be absolutely correct by thinking that the new club/company is not liable for the old club/companies debts, they are two legally recognised separate entities by law. One is being wound up and liquidated and the other wants to join it before it is wound up. Apparently the HMRC are going to pursue the recipients of the EBT scam to recoup their money due from unpaid taxes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beermonkey Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 C'mon mike.....do the world a favour, kill this disease for once and for all !! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Almost certainly you won't be able to explain how winning a tax case against Rangers will help HMRC in other cases. In framing an answer explain which other Scottish clubs they are investigating and say how a judgement in The Court of Session sets a precedent in England's Court of Appeal. Because Rangers FC were by far the worst offenders in abusing the scheme by avoiding the full amount paid to players for services rendered in the loans. All the other EBT scams by others never even came close to the amount of tax your dead club avoided paying. At least the other companies abusing the system paid actual TAX through the scheme to keep the HMRC of their backs. Most other companies syphoned of a couple of million or two but your dead club went way out of it's way to rip the pish right out of a legal pension scheme to pay out countless tens of millions of money the HMRC were due to players the dead club could never have signed without conning the HMRC. This isn't about Scottish football clubs, this is about companies trying to rip off the Government by avoiding the full amount of tax they should be paying into the public coffers. In your dead clubs case ?, they were by far the worst offenders and even laughed about it that the HMRC couldn't or wouldn't catch them and even increased the amount they paid players whilst under investigation ffs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Because Rangers FC were by far the worst offenders in abusing the scheme by avoiding the full amount paid to players for services rendered in the loans. blah blah blah blah Answer the fucking question rather than regurgitating shite we have all heard before. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Almost certainly you won't be able to explain how winning a tax case against Rangers will help HMRC in other cases. In framing an answer explain which other Scottish clubs they are investigating and say how a judgement in The Court of Session sets a precedent in England's Court of Appeal.I'm not aware of any other Scottish clubs that they are investigating. There will probably be other companies, though.Is it not the case that where UK tax law is involved, it is conventional for decisions in Scotland to be used as precedents in England and vice versa, unless there is a specific legal difference that decided the case? I thought decisions in Scottish cases involving UK tax were routinely quoted in English cases of the same nature, but I could be wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Almost certainly you won't be able to explain how winning a tax case against Rangers will help HMRC in other cases. You never heard of making an example of someone? Similar to how we point and laugh at you for your outdated British nationalism, misplaced sense of superiority and dreadful "all about the rangers" patter. You find it helps put others off following the same dangerous path. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Does not protect him from claiming a non existing saving I am afraid, which is why the adverting agency are investigating him, do not worry though the ASA just like the SFA will not dare find against a billionaire. LOLZER...what a fanny. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 I'm not aware of any other Scottish clubs that they are investigating. ...I thought decisions in Scottish cases involving UK tax were routinely quoted in English cases of the same nature, but I could be wrong. This, chap, is why you should not make blithe statements such as, "I think HMRC continue to appeal the Rangers case because there are a number of other EBT cases which are awaiting the outcome." The First and Upper Tax Tribunals are UK-wide courts. HMRC have lost in both rounds. Thereafter, cases are heard in The Court of Session (Scotland) and Court of Appeal (England). Those courts operate under the different legal bases of Scotland and England. Neither you nor I nor anyone else (polling The QC) has any clue if a Court of Session judgement sets a precedent for The Court of Appeal. Ergo, even if HMRC win on their third try against Rangers it may make f**k all difference to other organisations they are pursuing who, as you suggested, are largely based in England. Until I hear/see/read that judgments in Scotland's Court of Session are regularly used as precedent in England's legal system then I maintain that HMRC taking this case beyond the UTT is nothing but malign. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 You never heard of making an example of someone? Similar to how we point and laugh at you for your outdated British nationalism, misplaced sense of superiority and dreadful "all about the rangers" patter. You find it helps put others off following the same dangerous path. Some cyclist forgot to shave his legs this morning. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 This, chap, is why you should not make blithe statements such as, "I think HMRC continue to appeal the Rangers case because there are a number of other EBT cases which are awaiting the outcome." The First and Upper Tax Tribunals are UK-wide courts. HMRC have lost in both rounds. Thereafter, cases are heard in The Court of Session (Scotland) and Court of Appeal (England). Those courts operate under the different legal bases of Scotland and England. Neither you nor I nor anyone else (polling The QC) has any clue if a Court of Session judgement sets a precedent for The Court of Appeal. Ergo, even if HMRC win on their third try against Rangers it may make f**k all difference to other organisations they are pursuing who, as you suggested, are largely based in England. Until I hear/see/read that judgments in Scotland's Court of Session are regularly used as precedent in England's legal system then I maintain that HMRC taking this case beyond the UTT is nothing but malign. A decision in the Court of Session regarding UK tax will be followed in English cases in the FTT and UTT. It would be unusual, although not unheard of, for the Court of Appeal not to follow a tax case decision from the Court of Session. If a tax case has been decided in the Supreme Court in either country the lower courts in the other country will be bound by it.Anyway, I did say that I "thought" there were other cases, I don't know if there are. I do think it is more likely that HMRC are appealing it because they will use it as a precedent to settle other cases, though. I don't think they're doing it for the shits. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 From the sun RANGERS have received a cash boost after winning their long-running legal fight with Neil Alexander. An independent SPFL tribunal awarded the former Ibrox goalkeeper £84,000 in December after ruling that the club had breached his contract 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Answer the fucking question rather than regurgitating shite we have all heard before. Even if I gave you the "fucking" answer there is no way on God's green Earth there is even the slightest whiff of a chance you'd notice it. The fact that you have now adopted a new truth that Joseph Goebbels would be jealous of, the club is now some sort of mythical entity that can't be legally put to death. So to answer your question how can a club now have legal representation when it can't and won't be recognised by the judicial system ?, it's the company that operates the club that has all the legal shit to deal with seeing as the club is merely a tool that the company uses/operates as a trading device/mechanism. Yer mask slipped again didn't it Kinky ?, you can't even keep the Gestapo party line the club is separate from the legal pish and it's the company that runs the club that has to deal with legal shenanigans because it has abused the club in some manner and that the club will be the victim of someone else's mismanagement. So it will be someone else facing any legal shite for using the company that owns the club and has used the club for any illegal activities. So if you think what I have posted is a lot of pish then we'll all know you are a bare faced liar that it is the very same club you still support. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 It would be unusual, although not unheard of, for the Court of Appeal not to follow a tax case decision from the Court of Session. This is why I said, "you should not make blithe statements such as, "I think HMRC continue to appeal the Rangers case because there are a number of other EBT cases which are awaiting the outcome." I am actually surprised that people aren't angry as f**k at HMRC over this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Even if I gave you the "fucking" answer there is no way on God's green Earth there is even the slightest whiff of a chance you'd notice it. The fact that you have now adopted a new truth that Joseph Goebbels would be jealous of, Jesus f**k QC. The 'fact' is that Flash and I had a decent exchange over this. I asked: Explain how a judgement in The Court of Session sets a precedent in England's Court of Appeal. He answered: It would be unusual, although not unheard of, for the Court of Appeal not to follow a tax case decision from the Court of Session. That was all. A sensible question responded to by a sensible poster No mention of Goebbels or The War and not one set of knickers fankled. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Aye, those horrid fuckers at HMRC pursuing potential tax evasion from upstanding knights of the realm, whit they like? 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.