In light of the recent statement issued by the SPL citing the terms of reference of the Commission appointed to explore the activities of Rangers Football Club, let me, at the outset, emphasize that I am not concerned about the impartiality of the learned gentlemen who will adjudicate on this matter. I am, however, more wary as to the directives that have been provided to them by the SPL which in itself is constituted by competitors of the Club who have a vested interest in the outcome of the proceedings. By convening a Commission composed of eminent members of the legal profession, it is no surprise that formalities are being expounded upon which would make the eyes of the average Rangers stakeholder glaze over. The ponderous tone alternating the focus between âOldcoâ and âNewcoâ are, in my opinion, a distraction from what really matters. âRangersâ are âRangersâ notwithstanding the legal nuances caused by the application of various bankruptcy laws. The heritage and records of the Club rest with the institution that is âRangers,â and no amount of self-serving diatribe to the contrary, no matter how relentlessly pursued, can rewrite history. However, I still remain bothered by the fact that the focus and isolation of Rangers and its adoption of EBTâs conveniently avoids exposing and evaluating a much broader principle embraced by the SPL rules and regulations. If the fundamental issue is a deficiency in furnishing information about overall player compensation, the Commissionâs mandate should allow it to investigate and extract testimony under oath as to the utilization by all clubs of the concept of multi-contracts separating wages for playing football from other services. Compensation in a variety of forms whereby players participate financially in the license of their image rights to the club should especially be investigated as âimage rightsâ come in a variety of guises. For example, a player can be given proceeds from the sale of the club top featuring his name, often under a separate negotiation with the kit supplier, or be provided with a car by a sponsor for appearing in an advertisement. Anyone with any knowledge of the process would testify to the fact that agents representing a foreign player joining a club in the UK will usually introduce the possibility of this segregation which is designed to mitigate the income tax liability of his client. The dilemma in these circumstances replicates that of the adoption of EBTâs. If the club files notification of this arrangement to the SPL, then it strongly suggests that it directly relates to signing with the club in order to play football for its team, thereby nullifying to a greater extent the theory behind an âimage rightsâ contract designed to avoid standard taxes. If it doesnât supply this information to the authorities, it finds itself in the predicament that has befallen Rangers because of its use of EBTâs. The principle is the same. I also remain apprehensive that the guidance with respect to the penalties that could be applied on Rangers will be imposed on the Commission by vested interests in the SPL. Transparency here is fundamental. Justice must be served, but the punishment must fit the crime. Use of EBT schemes were broadly adopted by a variety of businesses during the era prior to them being specifically outlawed by designated legislation introduced only a couple of years ago. Also, as has been widely reported, Rangers made absolutely no attempt to disguise or deny their adoption, and they were fully disclosed in the annual reports and independently certified financial statements. What is galling, however, is the fact that it was not unusual for representatives of Rangers to openly discuss activation of EBTâs with their opposite numbers at other clubs during the era under investigation. I suspect that the Commission will not pursue this avenue of investigation, but it would be interesting whether or not âselective amnesiaâ would be exhibited by those Executives/Directors called to testify under oath about their ongoing familiarity with the Rangers scheme. It is ironic to reflect on the fact that the longer they maintained strategic silence on these conversations, the more extensive the number of titles that could be stripped if and when the opportunity arose subsequently to neutralize the successes that were earned by Rangers on the pitch. At the end of the day, whatever misdemeanor could be validly charged to Rangers, surely it was a breach of procedure, not âcheatingâ or financial doping. The eminent members of the Commission must ask themselves â what were the real, not fabricated, consequences of Rangers not registering the information on EBTâs directly with the SPL. On the contrary, what actions would have been taken by the SPL at the time if all the detail of the EBTS, the total of which was reported annually in public accounts, had been submitted in a timely form. I genuinely suspect that the compliance officer would have reviewed the documents, ticked the important boxes that dealt with the players status and then routinely filed them for posterity. The Commission hearing this case must consider the real impact of any default. A verdict that Rangers essentially did not in fact adhere to stipulated procedures, does not warrant capital punishment. http://t.co/HomJFqoa
What a fud, spouting the same misinformation that has Sevco fans and old Rangers fans thinking there is a conpiricy against them
The only really new thing there is that he strongly suggests the other clubs had secondary payment schemes in place which were not declared.
It's only a problem if they were on a contract and the contract wasn't registered It's very simple yet this fud is trying to muddy the waters
Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase How can the MSM print the words of the people who have lied and misled them for years on this subject without noting previous "inaccuracy" Expand Reply Retweet Favorite 14m Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase The Daily Record we expect nothing better from Traynor, but the rest? After lie after lie from the Ibrox spinmeisters? Expand Reply Retweet Favorite 18m Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase Transparency required? Rich coming from the man who was chairman of a board that went to such lengths to hide the nature of payments. Expand Reply Retweet Favorite 23m Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase This issue is about whether all payments to players were declared in contracts given to SFA/SPL. This did not happen. End of story AJ. Expand Reply Retweet Favorite 26m Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase AJ's accounts did not say that players were using EBTs or provide any hint that legality was in question. Media buying the myth. Expand Reply Retweet Favorite 29m Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase AJ: classic distraction with "it was on our accounts" what was in your accounts AJ. Explain what YOUR accounts declared to anyone? Expand Reply Retweet Favorite 31m Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase AJ? Is that the same AJ who tried to convince RFC fans that tax bill was an MIH thing & not a problem for Rangers?
The commission can do whatever it is tasked to do if there is evidence of a breach of rules. They are not investigators but sit in judgement The only club with evidence against them was Rangers. Until a point where evidence is found to implicate other clubs the commission should do the job it has been asked to do, not what one of the future defendants vs HMRC wishes as means of distraction
The Timothy's are rebeeling this morning, you have to wonder what goes through their heads. They spend all their time on the Rangers forum, or on other Rangers based forums talking about Rangers, perhaps if they followed their own team with the same level of dedication that they display in obsessing about Rangers, then perhaps they wouldn't have a 50% capacity at the Stadio del Alkie?
How can any evidence be found if you don't want the commission to investigate? If you have nothing to hide surely it's better to allow them in to prove that you're squeaky clean? You clearly have no confidence that they'd find no dodgy dealing at Celtic Park.
The commission did not investigate Rangers. They are judging evidence that was so easily found by bloggers, journalists, HMRC and most importantly A FORMER IBROX DIRECTOR there was a Prima Facie case against them from the start The SFA/SPL had evidence handed to them Johnson wants Nimmo Smith to get his deerstalker on and go chapping doors
