RIFC - Business matters.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
18/05/2016 : Widye beat me to it, posting the Club Statement (above).
What it represents is the recovery of Club property, step two (step one was repaying the Ashley loan).
 
08/07/2017 : That HMRC finally won the legal battle over EBTs is not surprising. The Supreme Court ruling gives HMRC the go-ahead to pursue all the other businesses (including football clubs) that used EBTs.
Now I wonder, if (for example) it transpires that Man United used EBTs, will there be calls for 'title stripping' and if not, why not ?

Rangers FC - Dave King Message ('Big Tax' Case)
 
Further to my post above.

The 'title stripping' argument is that Rangers gained an advantage by using EBTs at the time they were used.
This applies equally to all other Clubs ... that they gained an advantage at the time EBTs were used.

Whether Clubs eventually paid the tax individually (like Celtic) or though a joint agreement is irrelevant, as the 'title stripping' argument claims that an unfair advantage was gained at the time the EBTs were up and running.

My question remains ... if Clubs other than Rangers gained an advantage through the use of EBTs, where are the demands for 'title stripping' for any of them that won titles when their EBTs were up and running ???

The silence is telling !!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moses
Larry-AV said:
Further to my post above.

The 'title stripping' argument is that Rangers gained an advantage by using EBTs at the time they were used.
This applies equally to all other Clubs ... that they gained an advantage at the time EBTs were used.

Whether Clubs eventually paid the tax individually (like Celtic) or though a joint agreement is irrelevant, as the 'title stripping' argument claims that an unfair advantage was gained at the time the EBTs were up and running.

My question remains ... if Clubs other than Rangers gained an advantage through the use of EBTs, where are the demands for 'title stripping' for any of them that won titles when their EBTs were up and running ???

The silence is telling !!!
Click to expand...

Can you actually tell us which other SPL clubs were running an EBT scheme? Honest question because it's the 1st time I've actually heard anyone make such a claim.
 
My question regarding other Clubs using EBTs and any benefit gained at the time their EBTs were up and running covers all Clubs in the UK, not just Scottish ones.
 
Larry-AV said:
My question regarding other Clubs using EBTs and any benefit gained at the time their EBTs were up and running covers all Clubs in the UK, not just Scottish ones.
Click to expand...

You mentioned a "Celtic EBT" though and as I have no interest in how English, Irish or Welsh clubs punish offenders let's focus on that.

Celtic did not operate or pay into any EBT scheme, Junhino when he pitched up at Parkhead had an EBT, which had been set up by his previous club. Celtic realised it was iffy and declared Juninho’s EBT to the Inland Revenue. Celtic even paid back tax on money paid to the EBT.

That's Celtic total involvement in EBTs, they did not hide it nor did they wait for punishment, they paid what was due on it, even though they did not set it up.

I'm happy to clear that up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoopster67
11/10/2019 : Statement on Takeover Panel cold-shouldering of David Cunningham King

Links regarding the Takeover Panel's 'cold-shouldering' of Dave King, FCA resume and its Statement, below.

The Panel's sanction is that Dave King is to be 'cold shouldered' for 4 years, meaning DK cannot be involved in any company takeover dealings during that time. This sanction applies to Dave King personally and not to any of Rangers' companies.
It would only affect Rangers if DK acquired enough shares (in RIFC plc, I assume) to own the company personally. Also, this finally closes that 'Laird' business which I queried back in April 2018. We move on.

FCA : https://www.fca.org.uk/publications...-panel-cold-shouldering-david-cunningham-king

Statement : http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Panel-Statement-2019.16.pdf

Dave King's response : https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/statement-by-dave-king-2
 
  • Like
Reactions: EDGE. and monacoger
Larry-AV said:
11/10/2019 : Statement on Takeover Panel cold-shouldering of David Cunningham King

Links regarding the Takeover Panel's 'cold-shouldering' of Dave King, FCA resume and its Statement, below.

The Panel's sanction is that Dave King is to be 'cold shouldered' for 4 years, meaning DK cannot be involved in any company takeover dealings during that time. This sanction applies to Dave King personally and not to any of Rangers' companies.
It would only affect Rangers if DK acquired enough shares (in RIFC plc, I assume) to own the company personally. Also, this finally closes that 'Laird' business which I queried back in April 2018. We move on.

FCA : https://www.fca.org.uk/publications...-panel-cold-shouldering-david-cunningham-king

Statement : http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Panel-Statement-2019.16.pdf

Dave King's response : https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/statement-by-dave-king-2
Click to expand...
Slap on the wrist <ok>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back