Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

I'm going to go against the diddy grain here and say I am not fussed about them having titles stripped. Unfortunately it happened and I don't see what good it really does anyone. The subsequent seethe from the **** would simply be an old firm tit for tat about number of titles won which would frankly be very boring.

What the whole sorry mess did show up was the absolute sham that was the two horse race during that period, where two clubs outspent each other (we now know one did through unlawful means) to the detriment of the whole sport, not that we didn't know that already.

The saddest thing for me is that this was an opportunity to fix it, to really shake up the game seeing as it was of course Armageddon anyway and come away from the Old firm centric sport we watch. They will always be the two biggest in the league but we could have levelled the playing field a bit more.

It seems now we're coming to the end of that window of opportunity and it honestly seems that no lessons have been learned at the sfa, spl, celtic or rangers and we are heading straight back to where we were.

All to satisfy some tv companies really.

The people running scottish football really do need to be ashamed.

Sadly it is still a long way to go as long as there are idiots like DM5 and also RedRob72 - a grown man who can't even bring himself to type the word 'celtic' on a forum!

Absolutely pathetic. I hope they're not breeding because we need to ween this type of thing out of the population......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Tedi

I tried but I stopped reading at this bit.

To acquire a liability to pay income tax two things need to happen: the first is that you need to “get” a sum of money and the second is that that sum of money needs to be “income”.

If you do “get” “income” you’ll have to pay income tax on it. And that income tax will reduce the amount of money you have available in your hand to spend.

Either he is over-simplifying the issue or is being mis-leading. A quick example would be a company car (or any other BIK) that make you liabel to income tax without you needing to '"get" a sum of money'

Of course you could look into the motives of the person writing the article as I believe that he has previously represented others who have been found to have used other, similar, tax evasion schemes that have been found to be illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Tedi

I tried but I stopped reading at this bit.

Either he is over-simplifying the issue or is being mis-leading. A quick example would be a company car (or any other BIK) that make you liabel to income tax without you needing to '"get" a sum of money'

Of course you could look into the motives of the person writing the article as I believe that he has previously represented others who have been found to have used other, similar, tax evasion schemes that have been found to be illegal.

He is using obfuscation and paradigms to try to muddy the waters. Effectively he's trying to say that it's the way you choose to take the money which is important, he's trying to establish ownership of the monies to be with the trustees. Luckily, I'm also a 'tax expert' and I work with several other 'tax experts' and he's talking nonsense.

Regardless of where the money went afterwards, those players were employed by Rangers and tax was due at source. The law is pretty simple on this. The only real surprise is that HMRC didn't argue this way around the first time. If they had then they would have won the case then.

Edit: fat fingers.

Edited by killienick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangers won ALL their trophies fair and square and if there's any justice in the world they will keep hold of each and every one of them despite the outcry from wee diddy clubs and rival clubs to have them taken away.

They huvnae got any trophies.

They died.

A new Club has them and are kidding on they belong to them.

What a hoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scottish Football Association (SFA) is not subject to the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 which is a shame as would love to see the email trail between the SFA and Lord Nimmo's Commission.

I'm beginning to think that the football authorties' behaviour during the debacle is even more reprehensible than that of the old and new rangers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangers won ALL their trophies fair and square and if there's any justice in the world they will keep hold of each and every one of them despite the outcry from wee diddy clubs and rival clubs to have them taken away.

You're wrong of course. But I think you know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave no happy aboot a couple of posts laughing at Celtic, whit a shocker!

Anyway not being an expert like our new killie chum, let's see if I've got this right.

Rangers win TWO appeals with some dedicated taxation experts sitting on the tribunals.

HMRC launch a third appeal and three judges who do not specialise in taxation decided to ignore legal precedents and claim they were taking a common sense route and binning the law books.

Several taxation experts have since claimed that this ruling has left them bewildered.

Again not bring a Celtic or killie fan I'm no expert, just looking at it in layman's terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave no happy aboot a couple of posts laughing at Celtic, whit a shocker!

Anyway not being an expert like our new killie chum, let's see if I've got this right.

Rangers win TWO appeals with some dedicated taxation experts sitting on the tribunals.

HMRC launch a third appeal and three judges who do not specialise in taxation decided to ignore legal precedents and claim they were taking a common sense route and binning the law books.

Several taxation experts have since claimed that this ruling has left them bewildered.

Again not bring a Celtic or killie fan I'm no expert, just looking at it in layman's terms.

Odd then that you fail to mention the dissenting opinion at the FTTT was the "dedicated taxation expert". Make your argument look a bit silly though. Maybe that's why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...