Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin


GoosygoosyOctober 11, 2016 at 08:51  HOMUNCULUSOCTOBER 10, 2016 at 22:44  With …

Comment on Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin by The Cat NR1.

goosygoosyOctober 11, 2016 at 08:51 
HOMUNCULUSOCTOBER 10, 2016 at 22:44  With regards the VAT on the supplies made, bearing in mind these are only rumours. It really depends who is making the taxable supply. The output tax is due from the person making that supply.  Rangers selling season tickets will be them making the taxable supply, the VAT will be due in the quarter in which the tickets is sold (not when the payment is received as they will be too big to be cash accounting). ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Mmm…………. I forgot about that This means CW either Had access to a big chunk of the 2011 2012 ST money on the date of the sale for a £1 in May 2011 Or Minty withdrew this money from RFC before the sale If CW did get the money and kept it then HMRC were after him for a much bigger sum than the WTC overdue tax when they sent in the Bailiffs in Aug 2011 which could make it a large enough sum to warrant a WU order
Or HMRC ignored unpaid VAT on STs and sent in the Bailiffs for the WTC money Now why would they do that?
Don’t forget the involvement of Ticketus in the financing of CW’s purchase of RFC PLC.
Didn’t Charlotte publish some amateurish looking invoices relating to that?

The Cat NR1 Also Commented

Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
The Cat NR1October 10, 2016 at 15:51
NET ASSETS £31,394M should of course have read
I was heading off into warchest territory with that typo.

Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
bfbpuzzledOctober 10, 2016 at 12:32
I might be wrong here but this  time there is a real, not conjured out of the ether, holding company and a Club.  The club owes huge amounts to the holding company as well as to others. Might the Club die and the holding company live? I find that paradoxical prospect to be potentially perfect.
I would say that the holding company would be hopelessly insolvent, as the main asset on its balance sheet is the debt from the subsidiary.
We’ve not seen the latest RIFC PLC accounts to 30 June 2016, and since it cesaed to be listed we’ve had no meaning ful management accounts or interims (I’m ignoring that rather pathetic schoolboy item purporting to be interims that appeared on their website). I expect the 2016 accounts will be filed on the deadline day 31 December.
The latest published RIFC PLC accounts (to 30 June 2015) show the following
Investment in subsidiaries £13,295K
Amounts due from subsidiary £18,099K

Share Capital £815K (81,478,201 ordinary 1p shares)
Share premium £19,048K
Merger reserve £12,960K
Retained earnings/(loss) (£1,429K)

It would be a reasonable assumption that the retained loss has increased, or at best remained static in the 15 months since.
If TRFC Ltd suffers an insolvency event, non currect assets, current assets and merger reserve would have to be restated, so what would that leave on the balance sheet?
How much is TRFC Ltd worth, and how much of that on a sale would revert to the holding company in the event of either an asset sale or sale of the business as a going concern?
The share premium is looking somewhat of a poor investment for those investors that paid full price in the IPO!

Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
goosygoosyOctober 9, 2016 at 16:48    2 Votes 
HOMUNCULUS OCTOBER 9, 2016 at 15:33  It appears that Rangers have extended Joey Barton’s period of suspension. I can only assume that they are trying to either sack him, or to come to some sort of arrangement by which the two parties part company. It seems unlikely that he will play for them again, it might even be a “it’s him or me” situation. Can Rangers really afford something like £1.5m to pay off his contract though. Or can they afford to sack him then deal with being sued. With the adverse publicity which would go with that. If you sack him there is no “gagging” clause. It would be the height of irony if the thing which pushed them over the edge was a PR exercise designed to sell season tickets. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, IMO I suspect the top priority  for a club living hand to mouth is to avoid paying him any wages for the next two weeks. By that time it would be close enough to the LC semis for TRFC to ask for an advance on their gate money to help make the October payroll run in the week following the semis In all probability TRFC have advised (or will advise) JB in writing they are mindful to sack him if found guilty by the SFA of the betting charge and that meanwhile it is in the clubs interest that he continue his suspension without pay. Since Octobers payroll run won`t take place until w/c 23 Oct anyway all JB can do (or be advised to do ) is threaten legal action if he gets no pay in October. This presents JB with a dilemma He can launch a series of appeals against any SFA punishment and risk being suspended until his appeal(s) is exhausted. If he does so he will not get paid and be effectively gagged until the end of the process.  If he accepts the SFA punishment, doesn’t appeal and gets sacked by TRFC he can sue TRFC for unfair dismissal His chances of successfully suing TRFC may depend on how professional his “fracas” disciplinary process was handled. If it was commenced with the aim of sacking him he will have got a final warning stating that any infringement in the next 2 yrs. carries the sanction of dismissal Someone as undisciplined as JB has no reputation to lose so he may choose both to sue TRFC for unfair dismissal and concurrently go public with his side of the story. He might even sell his story to some English rag and recoup some living expenses while awaiting the result of an action against TRFC. It would only be  a tempting offer of another job that could compel him to settle Meanwhile, TRFC with the SMSM in their pocket will no doubt ride out any adverse publicity on social media and the English MSM The most interesting aspect of this comedy is that if TRFC are intent on not paying JB any more wages full stop then their cash crisis must be dire Since They would be giving up the opportunity of getting him off the payroll and possibly even  some money for him in the Jan transfer window
7.4    suspension of playera professional player who is registered for a club in full membership of the scottish FAby means of a registration Form shall, during the period of any suspension imposed upon him for any reason other than breach of contract, be paid the basic minimum wage to which he is entitled under the terms of his written agreement with the club.
From SFA Handbook 2016-17 page 165.

Recent Comments by The Cat NR1

Les Says It is Time to Ask The Audience?
Hoopy 7 9th May 2020 at 22:36

Good Evening,

It is many months since I have posted.


I’ve not posted for ages (much longer than a few months!) and I was trying to work out something to say to reintroduce myself but your post hit the nail on the head and saved me a lot of typing.

Thanks for that Hoopy 7.

Hopefully I’ll be able to join in the as-ever excellent discussions, although I was a bit concerned the other day when an old pain in the proverbial resurfaced and threatened to upset the decorum of the site.

The Cat NR1

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
It’s nice to see that the BBC is carolling from the SkySports songsheet in the above article.
“OF” mentioned twice and some top level liquidation denial thrown in for good measure.

Peace – Not War
Any chance of this happening in Scotland?

Peace – Not War
bfbpuzzledDecember 6, 2016 at 20:31
What do the various Rangers have to show for their loans fundamentally hee haw I believe. Nothing has been done to build potential long term income streams via improved facilities or some other projects. It seems that the assets have declined in value and future fixed costs are likely to rise in the form of deferred maintenance. There may be a baldrickian plan and opportunity available for some rich tax pauchler but I do not know what it is -perhaps some advice should be sought.
I suspect that rather than one of Baldrick’s cunning plans, they will go with the tried and tested Earl Haig’s underpants over the head and pencils up the nostrils. And we all know how that ended up.
It wasn’t the admininistration and liquidation to end all administrations and liquidations though. Deja vu?

Peace – Not War
HomunculusNovember 24, 2016 at 21:2328 Votes 
Using EBTs incorrectly in order to reduce your tax was never a “loophole” it was classic tax avoidance.
Tax avoidance is not and never has been perfectly acceptable as some people would have you believe. That is tax management.
Tax avoidance is using a legitimate scheme, incorrectly, for a purpose which was never intended.
Investing in an ISA is tax management.
Using an EBT to receive contractual payments is tax avoidance.
That’s heading into tax evasion territory.

About the author