Smugas After the original decision which supports the view that …

Comment on HMRC vs MGH by Auldheid.


After the original decision which supports the view that RFC properly arranged its tax affairs under the tax laws at the time but laws that have changed so that subsequently such an arrangement would be illegal, then anything can happen.

It’s like using Time Shift to validate a wrongdoing or closing the stable door.

Brysonesque in approach.

Auldheid Also Commented

Castofthousands says:
Member: (238 comments)

July 8, 2015 at 10:46 pm

The best you could do would be to strip the facts back to the bare bones and expose the inconsistencies on SFM and elsewhere and hope that some memory of the reality settled in the collective consciousness. Scant reward for much effort perhaps but I’d certainly take it onboard.
Thanks for your thoughts. Pretty near mine, I don’t fancy putting the LNS skulduggery per se to that legal confubulation and I’m not sure who would benefit anyway.

I think the LNS Decision is discredited already in the minds of most football fans by the interpretational gymnastics which ruled on player eligibility and so no title stripping.

However if it can be further discredited by the footballing public knowing that the Commission’s Decision was only made possible because of deception by RFC I think I’ll settle for that, although I would expect questions to be asked by the SFA and SPL as to why key documents were not supplied as required and requested, given it has happened more than once and possibly at the hands of the same individual/s.

I mean should whoever is responsible, if still in the game in any position of authority, lose their place in Scottish football?

Thumbs Up for Yes. Thumbs Down for No

Smugas says:
Member: (870 comments)

July 8, 2015 at 7:44 pm

Sorry auld heid you’ve lost me with that one! I was merely reminding the blog that the decision could still go against HMRC in which case prepare for an onslaught of how we all had it ‘infamy’ and how the old company should never have gone down, reducing debt etc etc ya de blumin ya. of course one interesting twist from such an outcome is that it would make Kings CVA stance very questionable. But then it was only the holding company wasn’t it?
Oh that! Well to save us from the “we did nothing wrong” claims

1. Why hide full player registrations details for 10 years?

2. Why lie in 2005 about the side letters that were part of the registrations when specifically asked by HMRC if side letters existed for two players paid by DOS ebts?

3 Why conceal the evidence of the wrongdoing at 2 from the SPL lawyers contained in one HMRC letter charging negligence or fraud by RFC in order for HMRC to justify pursuit of payment of the £2.8M (wee) tax bill?

4. Why lie to UEFA in 2011 about the status of the wee tax bill?

5. Why not provide the actual wee tax bill to the SFA in 2011 to meet UEFA FFP requirements for retaining the 2011 UEFA licence along with another revealing HMRC letter accompanying the bill

6. Why keep the same documents at 5 from the SPL lawyers in 2012?

7. Why walk away from the millions of non tax debt using insolvency law and try to carry on as before as an SPL club?

If they protest innocence I think it can be shown they protest too much although I would not expect the above to be pointed out by mainstream media even if they had the evidence.

If HMRC do win however much of the foregoing dwindles in comparison to robbing the UK taxpayer of the £50M plus (?) tax evaded.

The shame of admitting that however might play its part in the judicial proceedings, if it hasn’t already.

Looking ahead has anyone given any thought to what a decision in favour of HMRC would mean for the LNS Decision based on the premise that at that time the ebts used were not themselves irregular if it turns out they were?

Additionally does evidence that LNS only reached his decision because the true nature of some ebts used, ie the early DOS ones, were irregular also impact on the validity of the Decision he reached?

The fact that the SPFL, SFA and Harper MacLeod have not responded to the impact of the witheld evidence when it was presented to them suggests that they recognise that it does undermine the findings of the LNS Commission but are refusing to comment.

If HMRC win their appeal is a no comment by them which is already questionable become untenable.

In short could the LNS Commission be allowed to stand if HMRC win, especially if evidence exists that the Commission was misdirected and so misconstituted in the first place?

Recent Comments by Auldheid

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
The allegations on CQN that Bobby Madden has a gambling problem surely require his  removal from the the firing line until the allegators are proved wrong.
No snap decisions, just a leisurely swim until there is no question as to his motivations. 

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Dons/Hibees/Jambos and any other club wanting a UEFA spot.
Flogging players who have put TRFC near top of league is an admission those players unaffordable.
The solution is to make a licence for TRFC conditional on a realistic sustainable business plan. SFA are not doing their licencing job. Never have in fact.
So what questions are your club Directors asking the SFA?
Why not get them to ask UEFA if they are happy with the way SFA process licence applications from Ibrox. Seems UEFA not happy.
Proper club licencing can level the playing field a bit but it also protects all clubs from charlatans selling jam tomorrow.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Allyjambo 21.41

Matthew Lindsay: Time for Dave King to depart Rangers – but who could take over at the Ibrox club?

Rangers need to be run by individuals whose integrity is beyond doubt.
Do such individuals steeped in blue exist?

As rare as a dodo nesting on an iceberg in Carlisle Bay, Barbados.
” No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” Albert Einstein

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
I got my electronic copy of Not The View delivered yesterday.
Browsing through I thought I recognised The Christmas Tale offering and was pleased to read it as I had forgotten it was a tale I told at Christmas in 2012 (on CQN I think).
I think it worth repeating as a reminder of why SFM exists – because we love football and we love Scottish football and we aren’t done yet.
See me?
See me?
Ah jist luv fitbaw.
Its funny cos I was never that interested until about age eleven when a good pal, who was destined never to see his 21st birthday after a car crash in Rome encouraged me to try it. John was there to become a priest but got fast tracked by the Big Man who knows a good guy when he sees wan.
John encouraged me to give it a go in Suffolk St.  We played “croassies in” with the metal pull down blinds that formed the gates to the interior of the Barras as goals. Plastic baws, Fridos then Wembleys, arrived about then and many a red hot poker made the game a bogey in a failed attempt at repairing a burst baw.
(I blame the whelk shells; they were aw ower the place from the Oyster Bar in the Gallowgate (where I was entrapped in the cellar two weekends in a row cleaning whelks and mussels) and the ravenous appetite of the Glasgow punter for shellfish.
I played fitbaw morning, noon and night and saw Glasgow Green pitches UPGRADED from black ash/clinker to red blaze. We thought we were Wullie Fernie playing on that stuff and there was a case for playing with 10 baws as teams were filled with tanner baw players (goalies were just last man standing) for whom the object of the game was to beat everybody else in the opposition before scoring or it wisnae a goal.
I remember wan night  at the Glasgow Green waiting to play for St Alphonsus v Our Lady of Fatima  when I saw Tony Green, who was a Mungo boy and went on to play for Newcastle and Scotland before injury ended his career too early, waiting, sannies under his arm, to get a game with any team who were a man short. I think the OLOF manager mugged wan of his boys as Tony appeared for them and turned a virtuoso performance against us to give OLOF a 3-2 victory.
I started work and went to London for a year to work in the old Post Office Savings Bank. In my first week Jock (a Jock) approached and asked if I played. He never mentioned the sport, he didnae hiv tae, we wur already communicating at the spiritual level only fitbaw lovers can reach (the kind of thing that electrifies CP on CL nights.)
I get directions fur a game oan the Saturday at Acton Town and turn up, new Puma boots, paid by my transfer grant, under my arm (nae sannies fur me) On entering the park ahm puzzled, there wiz GRASS everywhere, nae clinker or red blaze in sight.  “Must be roon the back of the dressing rooms “ I remember thinking.
Anyhoo I gets changed runs roon the back to see — MAIR grass as far as the eye can see. So I troop back tae the dressing rooms to get directions to the ash pitches. When I explain what ah wiz used to playin oan they aw jist looked at me like my village wiz searching fur their idiot.
Well I get sorted out and line up. The baw, I remember, wiz a size 5 orange wan, but no wan o they bricks wi laces. The first pass to me wiz high and ah chests the ball doon and whirls roon afore I get studded from the back as wiz the custom oan the narrow pitches of Glasgow Green. To ma amazement the nearest opponent to me is about 4 yards away. As I look into his eyes I smile and turn to Jock at the sidelines and shout.
“Yer gonnae need anither baw” as I meander off in pursuit of the only goal that counted for a tanner baw man. I think I managed 7 before netting and I’ll take that. It wiz oan unfamiliar grass after all.
 Postscript “Aye very guid Auldheid” yer thinking (if you have stayed with me so far.)
“Nice reminiscing and it is Christmas Eve, so thanks fur the memories. “
But there’s mer tae this tale fur
See me?
See me?
I jist luv fitbaw.
Its ma game, its  OOR game and when I see the mess those responsible for looking after its welfare have made of it ah want to do something.
I hope ahm not alone.
Dec 2012

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
That Dave King is allowed any influence in Scottiish football is a dereliction of the duty of the SFA to protect our game from criminality.

Dave King should be called to account by the other clubs via the SFA to provide evidence he can do what he has promised, which is bank roll TRFC.

At the very least the clubs should be preparing for another insolvency event at Ibrox and deciding the conditions they will set for TRFC to continue taking part in Scottish football on the same basis as every other club, who act with the utmost good faith to fellow members.

The clubs via the SFA have the powers under Club Licensing to do so, powers that the SFA Comp Off can only conclude the SFA have failed to utilise. Powers that UEFA must have recognised by now as a result of Res12 letter of May 2016 and UEFA Licence submission this year, are not being used fully by the SFA.  

It was self preservation that underpinned the 5 Way Agreement . The dangers of that agreement – destroying integrity, undermining trust, ignoring deceit – become more and more manifest and should alert other clubs to the necessity to exercise their collective responsibility to each other and so to our game that they govern via the SFA on our behalf, using Club Licensing powers.

When a particular course of action designed to preserve self is not working it is human nature to try another course.

Not renewing STs come April/May unless positive trust restoring actions are taken by our clubs collectively, is one way of changing minds about what is self preserving.

About the author