I've already explained the difference between evasion and avoidance. Rangers evaded Tax, they did not avoid it.
It's the usual casual disregard of facts we've come to expect from a Provan investigation. No wonder he never found Maddie.
Well, everyone else really. EBT's are tax avoidance, everyone knows that? We all avoid tax where we can, don't we?
He reaches a biased conclusion more often than not and proceeds to become the laughing stock of the internet.
Tax Avoidance is legal and Rangers EBTs have been found to be illegal, that's why it is Tax Evasion. It's not Rocket Surgery. Print out and keep this handy guide. Avoidance - Legal Evasion - Illegal
"This latest ruling by three judges at the Court of Session upholds HMRC's position and renders the EBT arrangement illegal". http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/ne...x-case-ruled-illegal-as-hmrc-declares-victory
No it doesn't. EBT's are still legal tax avoidance. Your reading a journalists interpretation of an appeal on a verdict which will probably be challenged again. It wasn't illegal, it was legal at the time and no one ruled that it was illegal, only that common sense should permit that tax should have been paid on the 'income'. Nowhere in the ruling is there a mention of illegality. FFS Russ, you spent last week going through the ruling, do you homework!
It became Illegal the moment side letters were issued, they were a guarantee of payments, that's what the Lords decided made these particular EBTs Illegal. As for your nonsensical retort "Nowhere in the ruling is there a mention of illegality". Illegality is implied, or self evident in a guilty verdict, when someone is found guilty of murder the court don't tell us it was illegal, the assumption is we know it's illegal. I'll explain again, some EBT schemes are legal (Tax Avoidance), Rangers' was not, therefore it was illegal (Tax Evasion). Essentially, the difference between avoidance and evasion is legality. Tax avoidance is legally exploiting the tax system to reduce current or future tax liabilities by means not intended by parliament. It often involves artificial transactions that are contrived to produce a tax advantage. http://www.nouse.co.uk/2013/01/22/what-is-the-difference-between-tax-evasion-and-tax-avoidance/
Jesus, Dev you really are a waste of skin. As per, you make up your own mind in spite of all the evidence and opinion to the contrary. Please **** off now.
More fall-out today {12/11/2015} from the latest (pending appeal) decision in the 'Big Tax' Case. Rangers FC - Dave King Statement It is disappointing that a debate has re-emerged around the subject of Rangers’ history in Scottish football. It must be especially frustrating for the Club’s supporters who again find individuals within the structures of Scottish football unfairly targeting the Club. If the history of our Club comes under attack we will deal with it in the strongest manner possible and will hold to account those persons who have acted against their fiduciary responsibilities to their own clubs and to Scottish football.
https://www.accountancylive.com/rangers-football-club-ruling-ebts-ruled-avoidance-based-case-law AHEM!
