Can't believe that suddenly every Hun supporter wants apologies from everyone , where we're their apologies when they nearly brought down Scottish football with their lies and cheating and not paying their debts
I expect many employees will be expecting/hoping their bosses will give them a considerable sum of money, possibly annually without saying what is for. If it is a loan the employer will not make any arrangements for repayment. Foreign Nationals will think this is particularly benefical as they could well be soon living in a state that has no extradition agreement with the Uk. This could be the greatest ever tax free bonanza ever in the UK and all workers should stand up and salute Sir David Murray. The greatest living Scot for the ordinary working man.
Quick look at SEVCO media and they seem to seriously think that the SPL will be liable for £50million because rfc were put out of the league. It is hard to believe how stupid these people can be. 1. SPL only acted on rfc being forced into admin and followed their own rule book. Reasons for ad,in we're outwith their control and not their responsibility. 2. The Craig Whyte tax bill was large enough to exceed the required 25% by value of the total debt and so rfc would have been forced into admin anyway. 3. Administration came about regardless of the BTC, as that could not have been deemed to be part of the debt anyway. 4. The bank would not have allowed rfc to operate with a £10million operating loss annually. They wer going to call the debt in regardless. They simply wanted their cash and that is why Murray sold them. 5. Bottom line is that those who ran rfc decided to embark on a very risky EBT tax avoidance scheme, which oth clubs such as Celtic had elected to avoid. It is the those who ran the cub who are to blame for putting the club in such a precarious position with the tax man. Worthwhile remembering that HMRC could still appeal and win, so all the rabble rousing should be quite need down for 54 days. Dual contacts decision could still fully or partially go against rfc, if para 161 of the findings of the judges who supported rangers case is correct. Even those who thought the EBT was legal, do think that there were dual contracts and partial payments were not disclosed. Quite remarkable how silly people can be.
Mark Hateley thinks the transfer embargo should be lifted !!!! Stupid thick Hun cnt , remember everybody agreed that part of punishment would be no Sevco in the Scottish cup this season , next week will be their third game in that competion
There are currently a few villages looking frantically for their missing Hateleys I don't actually think he is as stupid as he's making out - nor Chuckles nor any of the Murrays actually believe any of this. It's opportunism and I'm surprised the press (outwith Jabba etc) are even going along with it.
When is chuckles going to have his say on this week happenings , I go for Rangers should be put into the last 16 of the champions league , with all the empty seats seen throughout Europe this week it's obvious the big cup is missing them !!!!
What happens if HMRC pursue ex players and employees for tax, only for them to produce the missing side letters, or they state that they were told that this was an alternative payment method? Don't know if HMRC will appeal or not, but if they don't then they stand to lose over two billion pounds from within and outwith football. The case will either rumble on or on or put an end to hector pursuing the use of EBTs, unless someone has been stupid enough to retain documentation that shows them to actually be payments.
First of all, at no point did I suggest that I had inside info. Secondly, keep your powder dry till after the 56 day period to appeal against the decision is over. All this rejoicing and jingoism and sabre rattling by SEVCONIAN may have to be reeled in if HMRC decide that the two judges decision to put greater emphasis on the testimonials than the documentation and that their interpretation of the definition of a payment v loan is adjudged to be incorrect, in that another court could decide that the fact none of the loans have been paid back or that the trusts may cease to exist is sufficient to reverse the judgement. Lets wait and see if HMRC appeal.
I'd ignore him if I were you, he's accused me of the same thing and probably half the Tims on these boards too. He's been storing his wrath up in the hope of some good news, it may not be all he had hoped for, but him and others are clinging to it like a liferaft. You know and I know that Oldco still screwed people out of their money when they liquidated, but some people have their blinkers on and deflector shields at Max.
I still haven't had the chance to read it(and I would like to. Not just because it was Rangers but because I am interested in **** like that). It doesn't appear to be the outright victory Being reported. Certainly a kick in the baws for Hector. Of the bits I have read, I still think the "dissenting voice" makes the strongest case. From the start I said that whatever the FTT comes back with wouldn't trouble me one way or the other. I was confident of what a "guilty verdict" would mean and of what a unanimous exoneration would mean. I did not think there would be a middle ground and I think that has caught a lot of people on the hop. The resultant jubilation from the former Rangers fans reminds me a little bit of when Barry McGuigan beat Eusabio Pedrosa. At the weigh in Pedrosa jumped on the scales surrounded by his entourage. The scales kinda wobbled around the featherweight limit. Pedrosa jumped off and claimed he had made the weight and started to drink water. The entire Pedrosa camp claiming everything was in order whilst everyone else looked on saying that something wasn't quite right. This story still has some way to run when we find out what the revised tax bill is and what Hector intends to do with it or whether he will appeal. The 2-1 verdict makes me think he will.
Seems HMRC may have self inflicted by accepting the definition if a loan instead of putting greater emphasis on INTENT, which is what Dr. Poon did in her dissenting report and what most people would have considered fair. Having said that this opens the door for HMRC to pursue individuals and that may set e precedent for future cases which actually suits their purpose. On this basis alone I am not convinced that HMRC will appeal. As to title stripping etc, I anticipate more fudging and more middle ground decision making, having said that if the Nimmo Smith panel do decide on titles stripping we still have at the head of the SFA an individual who was a former share holder in rfc and actually has an EBT for £95,000. Hardly independent or not involved in a conflict of interest. Only hope here is that UEFA unlike the BTC are overseeing all of this and may well be pulling the strings, having said that, why do they permit CO to remain in place. Chuckie must be rubbing his hands in glee, because it has distracted from the share issue and the conflict of who all the SEVCOs are and why they were necessary, also, what will fans be buying shares in, the alleged holding company or the club. Green has played them brilliantly. He has told them that it was the holding company, despite its classification of 93120 by companies house as a sports club, which was liquidated. Exactly what they wanted to hear, but it also allows him to sell them what may be no mire than a timeshare in the holding company. All the rejoicing may yet come to a sad end, as they could have to realise that they are in fact owners of little other than a name and have to rent Ibrokes and Murray Park. Not sure that Craig Whyte is entirely out of the picture yet.
Like I say Albert Ross, I have not read it yet but my understanding is that this doesn't set a precedent wrt going after individuals. It just makes it possible in this instance. That is not a positive for Hector at all. Dr Poontang put forward the decision I would have expected. I understand the decision of the other two, i just don't agree (based on what I have seen so far). It is abundantly clear Rangers owe tax and equally clear they did not disclose payments to the SFA, SPL. Accepting the FTT and SPL investigations are interlinked but not interdependent it would seem the whole thing rests on the word "payments". The FTT decision would have tangibly mattered if Rangers had avoided dying. As it is, it matters to several other clubs. In respect of the SPL investigation I was always confident that titles would be stripped. That confidence is shaken a little now. Not by the result of the FTT as it would appear to confirm the cheating but by the fact that people are so desparate to tie the two together and the apparent willingness to accept the facade. I find it funny that so many people are proclaiming a victory for "Rangers". The very same people who were telling us that the club and company were not the same thing. I will make a prediction that should Hector appeal the decision it will be overturned and the same people who proclaimed the transfer umbungo illegal will moan like **** that the first decision should have been accepted.
Trevor, please tell me how the hell you come to the conclusion that Rangers never cheated. By early December we will know exactly how much Rangers have definitely cheated HMRC. If HMRC think that they can have a fair an impartial appeal, they will ask for appeal and then we could find the true position of Rangers Financial cheating of HMRC. If curse we all know of Rangers close links with the people who hold the top positions in Scottish Football and how decisions have unfairly gone there way over the years and decades. Is the top man in Scottish football, not a man with a Rangers EBT in his back pocket. We also know of referees and officials attending Rangers supporters function and been given presentations. Trevor, there is no truth what so ever in your stupid claim Rangers never cheated.
