Blue92 Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, Blue92 said: Good post. Doink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 19 minutes ago, Ken Fitlike said: But you struggle with the very simple concept that the side letters effectively made the EBTs sneakily disguised employment contracts.... Get it now.... William Nimmo Smith has already dealt with that, the spfl QC has looked into it and confirmed that rules were followed to the letter. What is it that you actually want done here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, Insaintee said: Nuns just think if they keep saying it that makes it true. A bit like they kept saying Rangers would never go bust, be liquidated, Not shoe horned into the SPL the list is endless and in every case they've been wrong. I wonder why they think their going to be right this time eery single credible source including every legal expert says we are the same club and it wasnt tax evasion, why do you think you know batter than the supreme court? you are a lunatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, nacho said: eery single credible source including every legal expert says we are the same club and it wasnt tax evasion, why do you think you know batter than the supreme court? you are a lunatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, Insaintee said: why do you think its tax evasion when the supreme court said it wasnt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 1 minute ago, nacho said: eery single credible source including every legal expert says we are the same club and it wasnt tax evasion, why do you think you know batter than the supreme court? you are a lunatic You done with your multiple orgasm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 1 minute ago, nacho said: why do you think its tax evasion when the supreme court said it wasnt? Because they didn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 9 minutes ago, nacho said: not according to the supreme court it didnt, thats the facts of the matter Basic facts seem to have been thrown out the window recently by people who should know better. Tom English' meltdown on Twitter being a good example. Rangers have been punished within the rules, they cannot be repunished outside the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, nacho said: why do you think its tax evasion when the supreme court said it wasnt? The night is young... HMRC seems to play the long game. Let's get together in 2022 and see how things are going. Supporters of The The The Rangers are welcome to contribute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 The night is young... HMRC seems to play the long game. Let's get together in 2022 and see how things are going. Supporters of The The The Rangers are welcome to contribute. I'll bring the sandwiches... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, Insaintee said: Because they didn't heres the supreme court ruling stating it was tax avoidance, stop talking pish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, The DA said: The night is young... HMRC seems to play the long game. Let's get together in 2022 and see how things are going. Supporters of The The The Rangers are welcome to contribute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, nacho said: heres the supreme court ruling stating it was tax avoidance, stop talking pish FFS EBTs are a tax avoidance sceme. Operating them the way Rangers did is tax evasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Insaintee said: FFS EBTs are a tax avoidance sceme. Operating them the way Rangers did is tax evasion. After 2004, I'd have to agree. FFS the tax man asked 'you doing this by the book?', and Rangers said, 'we write the book, dude'. I suspect that's when it started to get a bit naughty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 49 minutes ago, nacho said: it was a legal attempt to avoid taxes, it remains a legal attempt as ebts were legal at the time, its you that seems to struggle with this very simple concept, the supreme court was clear its tax avoidance which is always legal - get it now 48 minutes ago, nacho said: exactly, an obvious conclusion to make which some people on the board struggle to understand 45 minutes ago, nacho said: it was obvious thats what i meant, nothing shoots that down as the supreme court was clear that there was nothing wrong with what rangers did, it would have been much more suspicious if we had put money aside as that would have been an inidciation we didnt think the scheme was above board 38 minutes ago, nacho said: the supreme court stated it was tax avoidance and legal - comedy gold from you 36 minutes ago, nacho said: they are doing that to pacify you clowns who cant handle the fact that our minor infraction was sufficiently punished 4 years ago 36 minutes ago, nacho said: it didnt take place ever 32 minutes ago, nacho said: not according to the supreme court it didnt, thats the facts of the matter 22 minutes ago, nacho said: eery single credible source including every legal expert says we are the same club and it wasnt tax evasion, why do you think you know batter than the supreme court? you are a lunatic 21 minutes ago, nacho said: why do you think its tax evasion when the supreme court said it wasnt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue92 Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Oh well what do the Supreme Court know anyway. Must be evasion because P&B knows better. Funny how the SC decision was good enough when stripping titles was the talk, then when it was realised it wouldn't effect titles it's now a lot of shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 7 hours ago, Tartantony said: Yeah that's right, HMRC had the side letters and emails from Rangers denying the side letters existed. On top of that they knew it would be unlikely to recoup any material monies due to Rangers liquidation. Armed with all this undeniable evidence of tax evasion they just decided, ah f**k it we cannae be bothered with a criminal conviction here we'll just waste a shit load of the tax payers money and spend 5 years to take them down the civil route for the few million quid that we might be able to recoup. Even if your mental story was true and HMRC decided to avoid the evasion route for whatever reason, Rangers are still not guilty of tax evasion and still done nothing illegal because there was no criminal case to be found guilty of. Have you never signed a declaration to HMRC? I would guess not. BTW, the problem with gaining a criminal conviction is that the ability to penalise an individual or company for the same offence was expressly prohibited by the tax legislation at the time. Therefore it wasn't in HMRC's interest to take it forward as a criminal Al case when quite clearly there was sufficient evidence to show that the money paid into EBTs were earnings and therefore they could claim both the tax and penalties without the need to prove intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 31 minutes ago, Blue92 said: Oh well what do the Supreme Court know anyway. Must be evasion because P&B knows better. Funny how the SC decision was good enough when stripping titles was the talk, then when it was realised it wouldn't effect titles it's now a lot of shite. The opinions of the SC, UEFA , FIFA ,ASA matter not a jot to the obessives . Phil , john James , monkey tennis and the qc obviously know more than these authorities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.