The Way it Works

Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

The Way it Works

 

Many years ago, I read an article in some legal magazine or other which, to my mind, pointed out something that I had always presumed was obvious.

Namely, that unlike his English Counterpart, the Scottish solicitor is not just a drafter and processor of legal documents, he ( or she ) is a man of business who furnishes advice, and as often as not, will recommend a course of action – possibly involving many different steps or procedures- in any given situation.

Without going into an academic analysis of what this means, may I suggest that a simple definition is that the Scottish solicitor does not always simply do what they are told but will furnish the client with advice for, or against, a certain course of action.

The same applies to accountants and other professionals in my experience. When discussing any business situation, the client should always be aware of the pros and the cons. From there he or she makes a decision based on the advice given – which advice may be taken or rejected.
That is how things work.

If you think about what I have said above, then it follows that one of the principal things an adviser should do for any client, is to suggest a course of action that keeps the client out of court.

Court is a place of last resort. Litigation of any kind is expensive, brings uncertainty, is time consuming and acts as a barrier to unfettered and uninterrupted business planning, strategy and progress because no one can ever be sure of the outcome or the consequences of a court case.
In olden days, court meant choosing your champion to fight against your adversary’s champion. If your guy knocked the other guy of the horse and killed him outright with the lance then you won. It didn’t matter if your guy was also hit with your opponents lance and died a week later as a result – you were still the winner because the other guy died first.

Eventually, society did away with such courts and replaced them with courts of law and the men and women with wigs and gowns as opposed to the lance.

However, you can still win a court battle and suffer a fatal defeat as a consequence.
That is why a court of law should always be regarded as a place of last resort. No one should ever set out on a course of action which runs a high risk of ending up being disputed in court.

Sometimes, of course, a court action is inevitable. On other occasions, people adopt a course of action where the risk of things ending up in court is seen an as an acceptable risk.

This morning’s Daily Record ( and indeed yesterday’s edition ) is spouting David Murray’s mantra that HMRC knifed Rangers but adds there are no winners here. How very MSM. How very lacking in business understanding or searching for the truth.

So, let me explain something.

When you sit down with a firm of accountants who specialise in aggressive tax avoidance schemes such as an EBT scheme or a DOS scheme, one of the things that are spelt out to you is that the scheme you are about to embark upon may well be, indeed is likely to be, challenged in a court of law. Especially if you do not administer it to the letter.

Often as not, the client will be asked to sign up to a contract which specifies that the client will pay hefty fees to lawyers and accountants for setting up the scheme and that fee will include a contribution towards legal fees arising in the event of a legal challenge to the scheme.

That is stipulated at the very outset. You pay £x in advance because you know you are likely to be sued. You also get the benefit of advice which is designed to ensure that your scheme is absolutely watertight in terms of the law, but crucially, there is a rider which states that in the event that the court rules against you then the accountants or lawyers will not be held accountable as you are entering into the whole process knowing that there is a big risk of litigation – and you are told in writing that while you shouldn’t lose, you might lose.

This too is the way it works.

The business advisers will not want litigation, but from the outset they will cover their backs and make it plain to the client that if you sign on the dotted line for an aggressive tax avoidance scheme then you can expect HMRC to take you to court.

Accordingly, the protestations screaming out from the Daily Record this morning about how HMRC killed Rangers are balderdash and bunkum of the highest order.

HMRC did not knife Rangers, they did exactly what was expected of them in the circumstances and the people at MIH knew that the day they started off on any one of their tax avoidance schemes.
Taking the risk in the first place killed Rangers or Rangers PLC if you prefer.

However, the events of yesterday and the day before throw up some other matters worth considering and remembering.

The first is the woeful state of the Rangers accounts by 2005 when there had been yet another share issue underwritten by David Murray. Those accounts showed Rangers PLC to be in a shocking financial state, despite all the rhetoric and dressing from the Directors and the Accountants.

More or less immediately Murray chose to put the club up for sale as it was obvious that the financial traincrash could simply not continue.

However, despite years of searching no buyer could be found.

Further, it should also be remembered that Rangers PLC knew all about the small tax case long before Craig Whyte came along. Those liabilities stemmed from around 2001 but at no time during the Murray era at Ibrox did Sir David put aside the money to pay a bill which no one at Rangers disputed as being due at any time.

Whyte stressed the need for this to be paid long before he ever got the keys to the Marble Staircase, but it wasn’t and there can be only one of two reasons for that.

Either Sir David just didn’t pay the bill concerned ….. or he couldn’t!

The fact is that long before Craig Whyte appeared David Murray could have paid that bill or reached an agreement to pay that bill. However he didn’t and for a period of several years he simply decided he wanted out …. Needed out ….. at any cost!

There is no doubt that he gambled hard and fast with Rangers Football Club, and their finances and their supporters loyalties. He knew , or ought to have known, well in advance that a prolonged and regularly used aggressive tax avoidance scheme, legal or not, was bound to attract the adverse interest and attention of HMRC.

Sir David Murray has been lauded up and down the country for his so called business acumen and business knowledge. He was knighted for the same and received all sorts of unprecedented backing from banks and other institutions.

Does anyone reading this really believe that such a man did not have the foresight, or the advisers around him who had the foresight, to see and know that a large and prolonged dispute with the revenue authorities may well have an adverse effect on the viability and sellability of his business?
Such a suggestion is simply not credible.

Further when the HMRC interest came, Murray’s men, if not Murray himself, did their very best to try and hide the existence of the scheme, the documents surrounding the scheme, the details of the scheme and the intention of the scheme.

They hid all this away from HMRC, The SFA, The SPL and anyone else in authority, with the result that those authorities and bodies had no option but to run to the courts, set up tribunals and convene formal hearings.

When someone does not tell you the truth, starts hiding documents and obfuscating that is the way it works.

However, that is not all that yesterday brought.

The news that Collier Bristow have apparently agreed ( through their insurers no doubt ) to pay the liquidator of Rangers some £20M shows that taking into account the litigation risk, someone somewhere thought it worth making a payment to make a bad situation go away.
Imagine that? What bad situation could that be?

Would it be that somehow or other, creditors, officials and all sorts of other people were misled by a leading firm of solicitors in relation to the affairs of Rangers PLC? Could it really be the case that things were so bad financially at Ibrox, that the only way for even Whyte to be able to get the sale to go through at the princely sum of £1 plus the official bank debt was to have his people mislead funders and eventual creditors?

What does that say about David Murray’s stewardship and the absolute urgent need to get Lloyds TSB out of the picture? Was there really no one else or no other way to take on the debts of Rangers PLC? Apparently not — and that can only be because someone chose to gamble with the finances of the club and leave it in a precarious state.

I am told that when Lloyds took over that account they expressed amazement at how MIH and Rangers PLC were allowed to run up the debts they had with HBOS. Apparently there was incredulity at some of the figures and covenants.

So , when we read in the Record this morning that the HMRC Big Tax case inadvertently brought down Rangers it is very easy to overlook the debt due to the bank, how it arose, the sums due to the same bank through MIH, the extent of the sums due, the banks attitude and the possible attitude and course of action had Whyte not taken them away.

Remember that the same bank stepped straight into MIH and began selling off its assets, and that low and behold the same management team who engineered the EBT scheme have openly admitted that there is an unexplained shortfall in the employees’ pension scheme of over £20 Million.

Do you think the employees who have lost out on pension provision are the slightest concerned about whether the tax avoidance scheme funds and their use are legal or not ? – or do you think they might argue that the money used for these so called “discretionary payments” should have been used to fund a proper legally constituted pension scheme which the company and its directors undertook to pay into under contract?

There is still substantial debt due to Lloyds by MIH and part of that debt is the amount by which David Murray and MIH underwrote and guaranteed that last share issue of Rangers PLC in 2004/2005. The principal sum due under that guarantee ( excluding interest and charges ) was greater than the principal sum claimed by HMRC in the big tax case.

Go figure.

However, this saga is far from over especially with regard to “contractually due” severance payments which look as if they will come back to the FTT in the event of the parties concerned not reaching agreement on the tax allegedly due.

Now, this is interesting because apparently there are a number of documents in existence which show that certain players received a payment of £x at the end of their contract as part of a severance deal.

At the time these were made, my recollection is that under normal severance agreement legislation the first £30,000 would be tax free but after that any sums were taxable.

The FTT has never been asked to rule on these payments, and has never heard any evidence about the legality or otherwise of paying these sums gross of tax into an offshore trust. All of that may yet be to come.

However, the most interesting part of this for me is that further court action may be taken in relation to these matters failing agreement between HMRC… and whom?

Rangers PLC ( the employer ) is in Liquidation so perhaps HMRC might claim some of the money from the Liquidator who has just received the £20M from Collier Bristow – then again it could well be that Ticketus have something to say about that.

In his last statement about MIH, David Murray openly proclaimed that the company was all but finished and revealed the pension shortfall and so on – so I doubt if any agreement of any meaning will be reached there.

That then leaves those who supposedly benefited from the contractually due severance payments – namely the players.

Maybe, in the absence of a now defunct employer, they will be asked to cough up the tax.

No doubt they will all go and consult their lawyers and accountants – the men and woman of business – who will give them their best advice – but you can bet your bottom dollar that any such advice will include a paragraph or ten which starts something along the lines of “ However, here is the potential risk in the event of you deciding to …………. “

That is the way it works……. And always has done.

About the author

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

Boot wearing football, sport & total nonsense fan-- Gourmet, Bon Viveur and eedgit! - Oh and I write a bit occasionally!

1,546 Comments so far

essexbeancounterPosted on7:51 am - Jul 11, 2014


Having allowed myself the luxury of a 24 hour “cooing off” thinking period, I have come to the conclusion that the best way forward for me, personally and professionally is as follows:

1) I will re-brand my firm as “Essex Beancounters Taxation”
2) I will specialise in setting up Employee Benefit Trusts for all taxpayers on PAYE and other fair methods of UK taxation
3) I will charge a fee of a mere £1,000 to all my grateful new clients (that is dirt cheap, believe me!)
4) After the first thousand or two of these new clients, I will decamp to some sunny tax haven, complete with loot and having paid no tax on my new found wealth
5) I will start an internet blog on “How to thumb your nose a fellow taxpayers”
6) I will live happily ever after amen!

PS I will waive my fee to John Clark(e) on account of his services to the blog

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:15 am - Jul 11, 2014


Back to school this morning with @Barca, @Auldheid & BRTH. Impressive stuff. Easier to digest before breakfast.

@Auldheid your first link seems to be restricted and sends me to a Google login page? Second one worked. Some amazing figures there. I notice RFC debt peaked £73m at one point but was (remarkably) reduced to about £6m within a few years — only for it to rise again. Was surprised to see Celtic’s debt in 2001. Players, or outstanding stadium debts?

Time for the media to stand up in the face of the witch-hunt stuff. If they don’t rise to their calling now they’ll be complicit once again in the spread of lies and falsehoods, and not least in allowing the merciless hounding of Mark Daly and others who’ve attempted to uncover the truth.

View Comment

peterjungPosted on8:42 am - Jul 11, 2014


HIRSUTEPURSUIT says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:10 am
RyanGosling says:
July 10, 2014 at 11:30 pm
1 1 Rate This
There is rightly huge rage on here at Murray’s tax shenanigans. Where is the anger at the fact that Craig Whyte just decided not to pay tax?! Thing is, when someone owns or runs a club as is widely recognised here the actions of that persons are legally the actions of the club. The indisputable fact is we were screwed by Craig Whyte, as well as David Murray, and that has to be recognised as well.
==============================================================
Start with the idea that the question of Rangers’ administration/liquidation was simply a matter of timing. Follow on with the notion that he was hand-picked to take the brand through this “transition”.
Had Mr Whyte paid debts as they became due, the club would have just run out of money and been unable to see out the season he had in charge. Not paying tax & NI allowed the transfer of full SFA membership to the new club. They also envisaged the SPL membership to go the same way; but failing that, the entry into the SFL could not have happened mid-season.
For those who have taken solace in the same club spin, how would failure to fulfil their fixtures have affected that idea?
Keeping the lights on till the season’s end allowed the current incarnation to be born and the believers to keep the faith.
To be honest, if you support the current version of Rangers, I don’t understand why Mr Whyte is not lauded as the man who made it all possible.

__________________________________________________________________________________

HP, and Ryan – this is one key area that I am surprised that there has not been more focus on. HP you are absolutely correct that without the withholding of Tax and NI then Rangers would have went out of business mid-season and would have undeniably been finished. No same club charade would have been possible.

Like you said, I have said before that Craig White should be a hero to the Rangers fans!

I am also convinced that the SFA & SPL were fully aware of the details of this position. At the fabled dinner that Craig White attended around this time I am sure that he was told that he must keep the club going by any means possible until the end of the season. I am also convinced that he was given carte blanche assurances to ride rough shod over any rules required to make this happen.

At the very best I believe that the football authorities gave tacit acceptance of the plan to withhold PAYE and N.I. by not asking difficult questions and looking the other way…

…at worst they are completely up to their necks in a criminal conspiracy to commit large scale fraud and millions of pound worth of tax evasion.

This is the tape we all really want to hear Craig…I suspect that you have this tucked away somewhere. I suspect that the real reason for the Charlotte revelations was to make sure all those involved were left in no doubt that you had this tape from this dinner.

So just what will it take for you to release this one Craig…er…. I mean Charlotte?

I also suspect that others are aware of this fact too, most notably Charles Green and possibly even Mr McCoist…..how else can one explain all the shenanigans that this pair have got away with completely scot free that would have found anyone else with a lengthy, if not life time ban from football.

Remember that both of these guys have never even been as much a censured for their outrageous behaviour over the piece of this debacle.

I believe that the hopelessly compromised football authorities are left terrified of the new entity in Ibrox knowing the threat of this blackmail hangs over them – just look at how the new club continue to get away with anything and everything with absolutely no sanction or even a hint of criticism from the football authorities…..Iain Black and the betting nonsense…come on…..the continued sectarian bile that has been regularly audible on TV broadcast…note – even causing one English commentator to apologise live on air to the viewers because of it….the complete burying of the fact that Rangers were paying a Mr Graham Souness, an employee at another football club, hundreds of thousands of pounds by way of an EBT years after he apparently left their employment….

I mean…really…come on….

I could on go …when you actually list out some of the things that they have got away with without even the tiniest murmur of criticism, I mean nothing, absolutely nothing it is starkly revealing in my opinion.

Consider that in this time the authorities could find the time to give Neil Lennon a lengthy touch-line ban for calling someone a “fanny”, and Peter Lawell being publically censured by someone no less than the President of the SFA himself – spurred on by the indignantly outraged SMSM – for some off the cuff jokes made at the clubs AGM. Remember that this is the President who has been almost invisible throughout this whole time…but manages to find his way out of his cave to comment on this of all things…..like there was nothing else happening over all this time worthy of his words of wisdom….

The whole thing stinks and I really believe that one day the whole stinking mess is going to come tumbling down around all of our ears…and when that happens it will make Mr Stuart Regan’s/ talk of Armageddon look like a Teddy Bear’s picnic….

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:04 am - Jul 11, 2014


peterjung says:
July 11, 2014 at 8:42 am
1 1 Rate This
————

If ever Whyte needed to put audio in the public domain it’s the SFA one, plus any discussions with Mr I-Was-Duped, if they actually exist.

He did indeed make that memorable statement at the time about being seen by the fans, one day, as the man who saved the club. Prophetic in one sense.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on9:25 am - Jul 11, 2014


Danish pastry I’d pay a good chunk of my post tax income to hear a recording of conversations between Mr Whyte and Sir Murray. Surely one must exist given Mr Whyte’s tendency to record and release things.

Enjoy your breakfast.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:53 am - Jul 11, 2014


Auldheid says:
July 11, 2014 at 8:58 am
1 0 Rate This

Danish Pastry

Cheers. A Danish I take it? Aye I was surprised at its length myself when I came across it.
———–

Haha, if only. No Danish for me as my love affair with all things gluten is over. A wee coffee and (gluten-free) toast under a cloudless Scandinavian sky (Southern European summer in the north this year).

A quick first skim through the 8 pages, plus the material in the other link, make them seem like a good read for any journos who are looking to build a factual article rather than take their cue from the ramblings of the Union of Fans spokesmen, or verbatim quotes from Murray. Haven’t been on twitter much yesterday so have missed your posts there. I thought Spiers attempted to speak sense on the issue yesterday. DR on the other hand has a photo of an ‘ashen-faced Murray’ signing away his beloved Rangers to that nasty Craig Whyte all because HMRC were so mean to him. Potential Private Eye cover that image.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on10:15 am - Jul 11, 2014


Club Statement:

“RANGERS Football Club Limited (the “Club”) notes the findings of Lord Doherty in the HMRC case against Rangers Football Club plc (Oldco) and shares the views of many fans that so much of what later ensued at our Club following the start of that investigation was avoidable.

“We are pleased to see the end of this sorry chapter in the history of Rangers FC, yet our greatest sympathy is with those who felt the pain of the last four years the most – our supporters.

“In spite of almost unrelenting attacks and setbacks they have never flinched from supporting their football club with all their energy and resolve.

“It is a matter for the authorities to explain their actions during this entire period that has seen the good name of Rangers severely damaged.

“Our focus is on rebuilding the football club and getting Rangers back to where we belong. That, in itself, will help right some of the wrongs our Club and supporters have suffered over the last four years.”

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on10:16 am - Jul 11, 2014


Well what a morning I have had so far,off work today as I have a few things to catch up on ,logged into the blog to read while having breakfast and am now well behind ,but well worth it,from last evenings scribbles through to this mornings has been one of the best reads of this site and I will have to go back over some of them before I go for the usual Friday night refreshmments ,I hope the bar has extended hours tonight as the guys will enjoy all of the chat I will bring to them from the blog,a big big round of applause to all of you that have contributed over the past 24hrs,well done.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on10:36 am - Jul 11, 2014


I suppose it was too much to expect TRFC to use their full title in their statement.they do say though that the actions were not against them but RFCplc(IL).
They may also be wrong in thinking that “this sorry chapter in the history of RFC is over”.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on10:50 am - Jul 11, 2014


Anyone outside the UK, I saw this link to last night’s BBC Scotland report on another forum. I think the presenter mentions the/a club being stripped of its trophies.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on11:05 am - Jul 11, 2014


Torrejohnbhoy
“This sorry chapter in the history of RFC is over”
Good God for a moment I thought there was an apology in there for all the shennanigans ,I really need to be more carefull in how I read things

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on11:07 am - Jul 11, 2014


RYANGOSLING says:
July 10, 2014 at 11:30 pm

There is rightly huge rage on here at Murray’s tax shenanigans. Where is the anger at the fact that Craig Whyte just decided not to pay tax?!
—————–
Ryan, I think CW has been given a fair amount of abuse and apart from the entertainment value, I have not actually heard of anyone that does not think this person is a complete shyster. The reason we are concentrating our efforts on DM is simply due to the aim of the blog:

“Asking the questions the media won’t ask”

The media have slaughtered CW, we need not add to that. We do however have to correct this sometimes and bring balance where it is necessary. That is why there is so much anger towards DM (A.K.A. The Pied Piper), because it appears that the media are still dancing to his tune.

View Comment

Galling fiverPosted on11:07 am - Jul 11, 2014


So bbc say “stripped of trophies”. :mrgreen: I think she meant the trophies died tae. And I’ll count that as a fact, like they do.

Lord with suspicious sounding name, all but adds more cases to those already conceded as guilty on the cheating front.

And

£20M just appears in the pot of deid club.

Like a new signing or winning the league cup?

Essex put me down as a client, by the time I need to pay anything back I’ll be deid like rangers.

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on11:12 am - Jul 11, 2014


broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
July 11, 2014 at 7:30 am
71 0 Rate This

Good Morning.

THE WAY IT WORKS

When you sit down with a firm of accountants who specialise in aggressive tax avoidance schemes such as an EBT scheme or a DOS scheme, one of the things that are spelt out to you is that the scheme you are about to embark upon may well be, indeed is likely to be, challenged in a court of law. Especially if you do not administer it to the letter.
=====================================================================
BRTH…superbly succinct post and a model of clarity for all.

Whilst totally opposed to the “aggressive” tax avoidance schemes, my firm does promote some lower level/lower risk schemes, all of them “non-DOTAS” versions (Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes – a box which taxpayers must tick on their tax returns if using such a scheme)

As BRTH mentions, great time and effort is expended by accountants to ensure that the client is fully aware of the potential outcome(s) should HMRC challenge the scheme, and that part of the related scheme fees include an element of insurance against legal fees. It would beggar belief that Murray (David) had not been made fully aware of the risks…and he managed those risks appallingly badly, hence the demise of RFC.

As in the case of all so called “professionals”, the accounts and lawyers associated with these schemes have their backsides well and truly covered.

Finally, I can assure readers of this glorious blog that EBTs are still a common tool in the armoury of the “Tax Mitigation Industry” (“TMI” for Paulsatim!) and that no matter how morally repugnant, they are, sadly, not illegal, if administered to the letter of the law.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on11:13 am - Jul 11, 2014


Ryan

The destruction of rangers stemmed from a single statement:

“For every fiver they spend, we”ll spend a tenner”

The hubris, arrogance and supremacist greed that led to the destruction of Rangers is neatly contained in that short phrase.

Unfortunately for all concerned on Planet Fitba, the experience of the last few years has, if anything, strengthened those attitudes within the bulk of the rangers support.

No lessons have been learned, by the club, the SFA and its members, the league and its members, or the supporters. As a result there is little hope for Rangers, and even less for the supporters.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on11:39 am - Jul 11, 2014


Peterjung says

“HP, and Ryan – this is one key area that I am surprised that there has not been more focus on. HP you are absolutely correct that without the withholding of Tax and NI then Rangers would have went out of business mid-season and would have undeniably been finished. No same club charade would have been possible.”

I am not sure that I agree with this. Going into some form of insolvency regime mid-season would have been messier (and may have been more unpredictable in outcome) but I would not underestimate the willingness of the relevant authorities to accomodate.

What for example would have been the position if an administrator had simply sold the business on day one of an administration (say a Tuesday) to newco and newco had turned up at the SPL and the SFA that day saying “here we are ready to play on the Saturday and to fulfil fixtures” (IN THE TOP LEAGUE). Can you be certain (given the subsequent willingness to offer TRFC a top-flight spot) that such a proposal would not have been accepted and justified on grounds of minimum disruption to the league season/ financial scare stories for all the other teams etc etc etc.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on11:47 am - Jul 11, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
July 11, 2014 at 11:39 am

Gosh an accountant manages to hit the nail on the head, without sending me a bill :mrgreen:

With hindsight, a mid-season switcheroo would have been the best strategy, however, I suspect the blind panic behind the scenes, precluded clear thinking, coupled with the fact that Mr Whyte was clearly not the genius he thought he was!

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on12:07 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Good post brth.
It is pathetic that the MSM is still blindly regurgitating the [S]DM propaganda nonsense.

In the last day aside from TV/radio segments we have had;

– from the fans, the lengthy UoF statement blaming the HMRC witchhunt & others for RFC’s demise
– from a potential saviour, Freddy Shepherd insisting he was desperate to buy RFC – except for the HMRC trouble
– from [S]DM – a few soundbites to the DR claiming again he was duped, and it was all Whyte’s / HMRC fault
– from [S]DM (?) – the timely release of a valuable/useful photo purportedly showing the exact moment when the ‘ashen faced and sombre’ Murray signed the SPA to sell to the ‘smirking and anxious’ hovering
Whyte.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/picture-exclusive-moment-killed-rangers-3841615

It looks like a carefully planned and executed PR campaign is well under way, via the usual MSM poodles.

Is Irvine back on the [S]DM payroll then ?

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on12:12 pm - Jul 11, 2014


BRTH – lovely stuff.

If I were to take issue with what you say it would be only to suggest that the role of the Scottish solicitor as a man of business rather than a mere legal hand to prepare documents for clients has, I think, diminished markedly over the twenty odd years that I have been in the profession. Lots of reasons for that – increased specialisation in the profession, increased fee pressures, increased wariness of losing valuable clients. Too many lawyers now will simply implement, without question, their clients instructions.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on12:14 pm - Jul 11, 2014


essexbeancounter says:
July 11, 2014 at 7:51 am

A better paying strategy would be to get yourself employed, at contractor rates, by the Treasury to advise on taxation legislation, and then hire out your services to the well heeled giving advice on how to beat the legislation you helped to write.

Not only would you make a mint from the mint, but, the Institute would consider you a great role model.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on12:19 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Sorry been composing this between work the past hour or more and the post moved on..

@Danish Pastry Well done Angela Haggerty, fact beats one sided speculation… The SoS man obviously a big Rangers fan has the side visors on like most rangers fans.. If you look at newsnow for rangers today you will see also the media and ignorant half daft ex players write some real nonsense that really irks me in one sense.. These guys are probably parents, what message does their tunnel vision give to their siblings…? And so the circle continues.

Check out the official rangers statement… My question is why is this interim verdict getting the bears frothing at the mouth. It is related to an old business surely and nothing to do with rangers the football club as they continue unbroken etc. The old business as Angela put so eloquently owed much more than just the HMRC coin… The SOS guy suggested the £18-21 mill was sustainable and was coming down each year, more sustainable IF CL money was coming in but when the team at the time paid put to that then the bills and vat etc could not be met… Question is if SDM still had the club at that point would there have been a different outcome, I don’t think so, he had ploughed enough of his companies cash into rangers, well turned out to be actually tax payers and employees pensions monies…

SDM’s ego killed the rangers and his lamb carving skills.

Well done to Aberdeen fantastic result for my nephew’s old team.

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on12:20 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Campbell’s Money @12:12pm

I don’t disagree with you at all my friend.

Much more fun in the old days when Lawyers could Lawyer and a processor was something you used in the kitchen!

View Comment

mungoboyPosted on12:36 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Looks like HMRC is already trying to recoup their losses straight away after the UTT result.
This morning’s post brought me a letter from those nice guys in Cumbernauld.
A demand for £71 which they claim to be underpaid tax on my CS and state pension.
Referee!!
Could I not claim it was a loan from HMG?
If only I lived in Essex maybe I could get some top notch advice.
Mind you, I suspect I might not be able to afford his fees…… even if he did give a pensioner’s discount!
Bother!
Just as I type this, Mrs MB who is of an accounts/book-keeper background has just checked the figures and smugly tells me Hector is right.
No need for a day return to Essex then!

View Comment

ShooperbPosted on12:53 pm - Jul 11, 2014


I think the bit that’s been overlooked in this morning’s Record is the story that Freddie Shepherd was about to buy Rangers (that’s Newco, by the way) for 8.5 million, but the Tax Case put him off……. except the story says itself that it’s completely unconnected, but that it somehow put some doubt in his mind. They then have a source saying ‘Actually, it was dealing with someone as dodgy as Charles Green that put it off’…. so no connection to the Tax Case, but it’s another morsel to throw to the fans about what could have been, if it hadn’t have been for that pesky tax case. Millionaire’s a plenty!

Interesting that they are refering to it as the Big Tax Case, though. That’s almost an implied acknowledgement that there’s another tax case out there somewhere that hasn’t really had the limelight that it deserved.

Also, it’s to be expected, but no acknowledgement of the fact that it was Murray who was in charge when Lloyd’s effectively took over the club due to the state it was in, as confirmed by Sir Walter of Cardigan in his interview with Chic Young about that time (remember? The one where Chic’s response to such an unexpected revelation was to go ‘Thanks very much Walter. Back to you in the Studio.’?). I’d say that was the point that the club was dead, given that it was trading whilst insolvent.

One more thing (as Wee Columbo used to say), from memory, Rangers went into admin with supposed debts of around £140 million, about half of which was admittedly made up by the demands of HMRC. By my reckoning, that would still leave Rangers with 70 million+ of debt without the tax case. Even if we remove the ticketus amount from that, it’s still around 50 million, and of course, we would have to add the debt to Lloyd’s back on again.

To be blunt, that doesn’t sound like the sort of club whose fortunes only changed when a well warned club owner signed it over to a well recognised charlatan.

As BRTH points out, the club was up for sale for at least 5 years with no takers before the BTC became common knowledge, and yet it was HMRC that put the kybosh on any sale.

Of course it was.

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on12:55 pm - Jul 11, 2014


scapaflow says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:14 pm
3 0 Rate This

essexbeancounter says:
July 11, 2014 at 7:51 am

A better paying strategy would be to get yourself employed, at contractor rates, by the Treasury to advise on taxation legislation, and then hire out your services to the well heeled giving advice on how to beat the legislation you helped to write.

Not only would you make a mint from the mint, but, the Institute would consider you a great role model.
====================================================================
Scapa…many thanks for your warm words and (belated!) career advice…a pity this avenue of “minting” it has come so late to my feeble earning capacity.

My beloved Institute regards me as many things, but a role model is furthest from their outlook!

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on12:57 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Not much I can add that has not been said by more Eloquent posters than myself over the last 24 hrs but it looked to me that, as was the case when the original decision was made public, that certain media outlets were primed and ready to go with the party line within minutes of the decision being made public. David Murray would obviously have been aware of the outcome before most by dint of his invelvement in the case and it seems he gathered all his little lackies from the MSM and decided what his loving fans would be told. Not the truth but what he needs them to believe. This unholy alliance between Mr Murray, his cohorts and the MSM is what is preventing the honest truth being printed and discussed and is totally detrimental to Scottish Football. Even now, after all these years Mr Murray still seems hell bent on ensuring that the fans of the team he drove into the ground never ever get to know the truth. Having said that I dont know how many of said fans could handle the truth.

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on1:01 pm - Jul 11, 2014


mungoboy says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:36 pm
0 0 Rate This

Looks like HMRC is already trying to recoup their losses straight away after the UTT result.
This morning’s post brought me a letter from those nice guys in Cumbernauld.
A demand for £71 which they claim to be underpaid tax on my CS and state pension.
Referee!!
Could I not claim it was a loan from HMG?
If only I lived in Essex maybe I could get some top notch advice.
Mind you, I suspect I might not be able to afford his fees…… even if he did give a pensioner’s discount!
Bother!
Just as I type this, Mrs MB who is of an accounts/book-keeper background has just checked the figures and smugly tells me Hector is right.
No need for a day return to Essex then!
====================================================================
MB….I will have you know that Mr Ryan does a superbly discounted fare to Stansted…however, my fees are already discounted (even to fellow pensioners and old Mungo boys!)
I do recommend the Essex countryside though, it is grossly underrated!

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on1:10 pm - Jul 11, 2014


essexbeancounter says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:55 pm

Given the current state of the “Profession”, wear your professional unpopularity as a badge of pride!

View Comment

mungoboyPosted on1:11 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Essex,
Good to know the fees are discounted for the good guys.
Happily,living on Merseyside keeps me out of Mr Ryan’s clutches but having lived darn sarff for several years in the early days, I’m well aware of the beauties of Essex and I do NOT mean the tangoed lovelies tottering on the highest of heels!
Ta for the offer.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on1:18 pm - Jul 11, 2014


They Think It’s All Over – Well It Isn’t Yet

I don’t know about you, but I’m really enjoying the victim-fest going on at the moment. The rapid re-alignment behind the “HMRC killed my club but it’s still alive and well and heading back to where it belongs” party line is something to behold and savour. Derek Johnstone’s rant(s) in the GET are particularly amusing as he rattles out questions about guilt and demands apologies – priceless.

Can someone please point out to him that HMRC won a partial victory – sending stuff back to FTT – and will probably appeal the rest as a matter of course. Oh and Rangers admitted guilt on several counts. Oh and Rangers’ finances were down the swanny long before they picked a fight with Hector that they could never win.

It’s a good job DJ could make a living kicking a ball because he certainly could not think his way out of a wet paper bag for a living.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on1:23 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Shooperb says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:53 pm
2 0 Rate This

I think the bit that’s been overlooked in this morning’s Record is the story that Freddie Shepherd was about to buy Rangers (that’s Newco, by the way) for 8.5 million, but the Tax Case put him off……. except the story says itself that it’s completely unconnected, but that it somehow put some doubt in his mind. They then have a source saying ‘Actually, it was dealing with someone as dodgy as Charles Green that put it off’…
——-

Yes, a headline for the gullible masses. Probably for those who read no further.

True enough, article seems to completely contradict the headline. Wishful thinking from the headline writer, or a favour to his minted friend?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on1:36 pm - Jul 11, 2014


MSM Accountability

A mark of the BBC’s neutrality in political matters is that it is equally criticised by left and right. I see that the MSM hare taking some flak for their presumption of RFC’s guilt in the BTC. I missed that personally, but it could be the start of something big if the bears begin demanding the truth – or are they just demanding a different shade of cowardice and acquiescence to support the latest SDM / RIFC orthodoxy.

View Comment

fara1968Posted on1:39 pm - Jul 11, 2014


From BRTH
“That then leaves those who supposedly benefited from the contractually due severance payments – namely the players.”
//////////////////:::////////////////
I seem to recall Billy Dodds saying on radio that he first heard of EBTs when he was leaving rangers and his severance being paid by the way of one.

View Comment

AquinasPosted on1:47 pm - Jul 11, 2014


brt&h

Thank you, that’s a very good piece, worth keeping a copy in my back pocket in defence against the BS’s in the boozer.

I don’t think SDM would have paid heehaw £x up front however, he doesn’t come across as that type, I think after been given the advise of something like ‘HMRC are going to be all over you one day’, can almost see him shrugging and saying ‘I’ll deal with that if and when it happens’ however he didn’t have a bean to deal with it at the if and when.
And supporters are still buying into the poor us nonsense, what exactly will have to happen to make them see the truth, or a version of the truth.

Perhaps BDO, Whytey, HMRC, Ticketus etc. will provide this.

I remember thinking at the time, ‘they done what? shafted Ticketus/Octopus? and they don’t think that’s a bad thing!!’
Being shafted in public at you core business is bad for business, others may get the impression that they should try it, so! my money is on Sevco never getting out the mire, ever!
brt&h top marks.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on1:59 pm - Jul 11, 2014


essexbeancounter says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:55 pm

Essex, meant to add that I did not devise this particular strategy. It was devised and implemented very successfully by a senior member of the ICAEW, to the approbation of his peers.

Personally, I would have struck the git off

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:10 pm - Jul 11, 2014


DJ says… “A lot of people in the game should hang their heads in shame. Rangers are owed a huge apology.” Let’s start with CO the orchestrator of the EBTs…. CO over to you…? Tumbleweed..!!! OK Over to AM? Sir Walter? Wee dick? SDM? All who benefitted from tax free non repayable loans? I am sure those are the people DJ meant.

DJ you should offer an apology to anyone who has ever read the crap that is written in your name or heard you.. Ignorance is bliss should be the new motto of ra peepul..!!!

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:24 pm - Jul 11, 2014


So was the nonsense about BDO’s success with Collyer Bristow just a trail of squirrel sh!t? Much like Cowie to the rangers nonsense, I hope one day (soon) rangers do get to the place where they rightfully belong and give us all peace…

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:27 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Freddie buying rangers, actually the day before whyte bought them I was offered a chance to do the purchase but only had 99p in change so I bought a pokey hat instead.. Much better deal.

View Comment

woodsteinPosted on2:31 pm - Jul 11, 2014


For anyone rejoicing at the UTT decision suggest a read at this.
Here is a link from The national Archives
Feb 06 2014
It provides an insight to the views of HMRC, in particular page 2.

“It is important that our customers know that if they choose to engage in tax avoidance *we will be relentless in pursuing them* Many promoters of tax avoidance schemes promise large tax savings, and will often say their scheme is completely legal and unlikely to be challenged by us. But we will challenge tax avoidance and will take legal action against schemes whenever possible. Instead of the tax savings they hoped to achieve, people who use tax avoidance schemes run the risk of wasting money on fees for a scheme that does not work, and will have to spend time dealing with an in-depth investigation by us into their tax affairs.”

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140206164515/http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/about/briefings/briefing-avoidance.pdf

View Comment

neepheidPosted on2:33 pm - Jul 11, 2014


JimBhoy says:
July 11, 2014 at 2:24 pm
0 0 Rate This

So was the nonsense about BDO’s success with Collyer Bristow just a trail of squirrel sh!t? Much like Cowie to the rangers nonsense, I hope one day (soon) rangers do get to the place where they rightfully belong and give us all peace…
===========================
Agreed, and that “rightful place” is Glasgow Green, Cardonald 50 pitches, or Bellahouston Park. I am absolutely sick of their pathetic blame game (everybody except themselves, of course), their infantile whining, and their thinly veiled threats of violence against anyone who dares to express a view they don’t agree with. I would say shameful, but these “peepil” are shameless, arrogant, and with a breathtaking sense of entitlement. There was a once and for all chance to lance this boil two years ago. Chance missed, so now everyone has to dance to their tune again. Nauseating.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on2:39 pm - Jul 11, 2014


When exactly in 2012 did Mr Shepherd discuss a purchase with Mr Green I wonder? Any idiot would understand that newco had no liability for any EBT liability so to suggest he was scared off by that is just not correct. If it was before newco purchased, why was he having a discussion with Mr Green?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on2:52 pm - Jul 11, 2014


neepheid says:
July 11, 2014 at 2:33 pm
There was a once and for all chance to lance this boil two years ago. Chance missed, so now everyone has to dance to their tune again. Nauseating.
============================================
neepheid – don’t worry mate – there’ll be another chance along soon 🙂

View Comment

neepheidPosted on2:54 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
July 11, 2014 at 2:39 pm
2 0 Rate This

When exactly in 2012 did Mr Shepherd discuss a purchase with Mr Green I wonder?
======================

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/rangers-in-crisis-freddy-shepherd-ready-1128202

Before the rejection of the CVA, it seems. Green was touting the chance to join his consortium very widely at that point.

View Comment

Billy BoycePosted on3:19 pm - Jul 11, 2014


As well as SDM priming his pet hacks to jump into action the minute the UTT decision was released on Wednesday, RIFC (or was it TRFC?) was also quick off the mark with its condemnation of Hector. Its statement appeared to say to the fans, “We are victims too, now buy your seasons tickets, as we are all in this together”. I thought the RIFC board were playing a dangerous game by encouraging the already irate fans, who are now hell-bent on ‘justice’.

It looks as if “the Club” has now lit the blue-touch paper. A Facebook campaign entitled “Justice For the Rangers Support” & “We Demand Answers” is now gathering momentum and is asking all Sevco fans to march (peacefully, of course) on Celtic Park as the Queen performs the opening sermony of the Commonwealth Games. I am told that Her Majesty’s forces will be providing security for the occasion. Could we be set to witness yet another ‘jamboree’ with Our Boys and the Loyal Support, only this time I doubt if there will be the same level of fraternisation between the two factions as before?

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on3:36 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Dear club statement person,

I think you made a boob.

Surely it’s – “We are pleased to see the end of this sorry chapter in the history of Rangers FC, yet our greatest sympathy is with those who felt the pain of the last four years the most – our CREDITORS”

View Comment

Gee69Posted on3:54 pm - Jul 11, 2014


MCFC earlier…

” and Rangers admitted guilt on several counts.”

Two ways to read that.
1. Dracula zombies
2. A misspelling.

View Comment

andyPosted on4:19 pm - Jul 11, 2014


RST statement:

The Rangers Supporters Trust (RST) is deeply concerned with last nights BBC programme, Scotland 2014. It is yet another example of the ongoing perceived anti Rangers bias from our national broadcaster.

Firstly, reading from a prewritten script, it was stated that Rangers had been stripped of titles. This is clearly not the case. The Rangers support have fought hard to ensure our titles remained. It is incomprehensible that the BBC can get such a simple fact wrong, especially from a prewritten script.

Secondly, the selection of Angela Haggerty as a guest is perplexing. Her association with Phil MacGiollaBhain, a man regarded as being tarred with a sickening sectarian brush, was mentioned on the show. Surely this should have ruled her out of appearing on the show? Furthermore, why was a Celtic supporter with no qualifications in complex tax matters appearing to discuss the first-tier tribunal.

Whilst the need for balance is required, that does not warrant a Rangers side and a Celtic side. This issue surrounds Rangers, therefore for balance to be achieved it should have been a Rangers representative, as there was, and perhaps a tax expert. Not a Celtic supporting blogger.

Can the BBC justify the involvement of Ms Haggerty on this issue?

It was also of concern that Angela Haggerty stated “HMRC will continue to fight this”. Is this a case of leaked information from HMRC, or is it just wishful thinking?

The BBC should clarify this immediately.

The RST will follow this statement up with a direct complaint about this substandard reporting on Rangers FC. This unfortunately appears to be a consistent theme from an organisation which was once highly regarded for its journalistic impartiality.

Journalistic impartiality and basic professionalism appear to be sadly lacking at BBC Scotland where Rangers FC is concerned.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on4:38 pm - Jul 11, 2014


andy says:
July 11, 2014 at 4:19 pm
1 0 Rate This

RST statement:
———-

Another statement, more demands.

Murray and his pals appear to have started this nastiness with their incendiary and self-serving comments, post ruling.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on4:50 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Since the role of debt is mentioned in BRTH’s blog here is a link to an article from previous blog that provides some details.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/10Gn-PSSzueSyzcFbOzTypbNXxdTQHSeleFdiS8zBdWk/edit?usp=sharing

and another on the switch from EBTs to debt in 2007/08 to get at CL money

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B62m3ggkEX2RMDlHLUlmTU1uWG8/edit?usp=sharing

The underlying theme here is that it was the high rewards that CL money gives the title winner that makes the punt worth taking.(and why I have suggested a levelling out of that reward to make the risk less worth taking)

However that punt is just not a financial risk. In the manner in which it was taken by SDM’s Rangers ,whether ebts are legal or not, it flew in the face of the integrity of the game that the rules LNS demoted to administrative error, are supposed to prevent/deter.

The integrity of Scottish football has all but been murdered by a gambler who not only used other peoples money to place the bet but put the integrity of the game that was never his either on the line as well.

The real failure of the SFA and SPFL has been to recognise this and start taking integrity restoring steps, like publishing the financial figures club supply the SFA with to give an indication of how responsibly a club is being run financially – and if its not pull its licence.

it is not just RIFC supporters who should be given sight of RIFC’s business plan, but every club who will be competing against them for going by their club statement they have learned nothing and THAT is the really scary bit.

As I said before if I were a Jambo I’d be asking Anne Budge to find out from the SFA what the ratio of wage to turnover is for all their rivals and if it is way out of line for the norm for the division lobby for change before the season starts.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on4:57 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Neepheid – thanks.

Still doesn’t make any sense to me.

If a CVA was approved, Oldco continues but the liability to HMRC (and other creditors) would be compromised per the CVA and if it wasn’t then its newco and no liability whatsoever.

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on5:23 pm - Jul 11, 2014


scapaflow says:

July 11, 2014 at 1:10 pm

3

0

Rate This

essexbeancounter says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:55 pm

Given the current state of the “Profession”, wear your professional unpopularity as a badge of pride!
======================================================================
Scapa…I do…please believe me!…and with the greatest of pride, I can assure you!

View Comment

EKBhoyPosted on5:34 pm - Jul 11, 2014


The deafening sound of whinging from Ibrox way , if only they can keep it up for another day ……… Perhaps it may drown out some of their traditional chants at this time of year.

Still, a few pumpings on the pitch will soon have their gas at a low peep.

Is there a more despicable club in the history of British football?

Murinho’s Chelsea when they accused the Swiss ref of chatting to the Barca team at half time, resulting in death threats , and the ludicrous complaint about Mark Clattenberg last year – start to edge you towards a club with no moral fibre.

Still, I’m sure if Rangers step over the line , the SFA will come down on them like a ton of bricks , after all , we would not want a league member talking down the game, talking drivel and driving away sponsorship ?

Absolute shower

The Rangers supporters would be best advised to keep their counsel , as the reality is their admin department (the SFA) kept them on life support , nudge and a wink , no handshake required …………

View Comment

mungoboyPosted on5:46 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Andy
Re the RST statement.
Where do you begin with that?
Are these guys incapable of thinking for themselves as all they can ever describe Phil MacG as is being “tarred with a sickening sectarian brush”
Does someone own the copyright on that? If so they must be ‘minted’.
I’m confused anyway. If you are tarred in this fashion then surely you are the victim of someone wielding a brush of tar in a sectarian fashion just as the brush is not feeling too well.
Long time since I did Higher English but, hey ho.

View Comment

pau1mart1nPosted on6:08 pm - Jul 11, 2014


“Journalistic impartiality and basic professionalism appear to be sadly lacking at BBC Scotland where Rangers FC is concerned.”

terrible way to talk about chic.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on6:20 pm - Jul 11, 2014


andy says:
July 11, 2014 at 4:19 pm
6 1 Rate This
————

Interesting use of the phrase. Got me going there with my dictionary of modern phrase. I’m not sure they are using the phrase (correctly) to actually carry the meaning that they imagine. Seems to me too, that both Phil and Angela are wrongly regarded as having sectarian attitudes.

tar somebody with the same brush:
to believe wrongly that someone or something has the same bad qualities as someone or something that is similar

View Comment

wottpiPosted on6:38 pm - Jul 11, 2014


fara1968 says:
July 11, 2014 at 1:39 pm
4 0 Rate This

From BRTH
“That then leaves those who supposedly benefited from the contractually due severance payments – namely the players.”
//////////////////:::////////////////
I seem to recall Billy Dodds saying on radio that he first heard of EBTs when he was leaving rangers and his severance being paid by the way of one.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As discussed yesterday I trust those affected will be squirreling away some money away in case Hector comes looking for tax on the full amounts or at the very least the benefit in kind for the loans.

However, its not just Doddsie that needs to worry. In relation to severance payments and contract terminations are we not forgetting that £80k of the £95k EBT was given to the worlds’ greatest football administrator as a termination payment in 2005 – the very thing referred back to the FTT.

I am sure Dave King can shimmy along to make enough room for another one in that cave!!

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-administration-campbell-ogilvie-full-of-regrets-and-wonders-if-he-could-have-done-more-1-2181094

Ogilvie, as he has stated, had an EBT. On Friday, he revealed its details. He was paid £15,000 in three lumps of £5,000 between 2001 and 2003. He didn’t believe that there was anything iffy about them. “In my own case, it was an offer of a discretionary bonus or a contribution into the trust. I chose to pay into the trust and I can then apply for a loan from the trust. I got three payments between 2001 and 2003. It was a £5,000 each payment and then on the termination of my employment [at Rangers in 2005], as part of my settlement, I got a figure of £80,000. The whole thing is centered around loans. It’s a very technical issue but you have to repay the loans, yes. It’s over a period of time.”

View Comment

twopandaPosted on6:41 pm - Jul 11, 2014


andy says:
July 11, 2014 at 4:19 pm
RST statement:
Thanks for posting this andy

Rather than go into auto-slag mode – I think this statement merits some attention.

We should acknowledge the Bears have been subject to abominable rip-offs and deceit. Feelings are running very high as a result – so some balance is required. The Statement represents a snap shot of perceived oppression by the media. Goodness knows we`ve all commented on the media – on how the Bears have been ripped off – and the deceit – again supported by the media – and thus IMO they have a right to comment on what they see as perceived media bias – same as many on here.

Firstly the titles have not been stripped [LNS crap true] but the fact remains that the BBC comment was incorrect. It was sloppy of the BBC to even raise that point – not helpful.

It blinded anything following.

The selection of Angela Haggerty I have no problem with at all – a balanced perspective was needed. Her association with Phil I would consider a positive as Phil has consistently shone a light as to what’s going on – and must be trusted by some inside Ibrox – in stark comparison to the MSM PR – who can`t be trusted at all.

AHs commentary was objective IMO and added to the BBC programme as timely informative. It is a pity the RST responded in such invective – which doesn’t help – but people react with an aggressive opening.

The response of the RST IMO represents an emotional but genuinely felt belief they have been let down by the MSM – very badly – and that I agree with.

I remember the BBC Headlines `Green Cleared` and such.
If the Bears want a square do with the BBC there is treasure to be mined on Traynor, Chic and others just waiting to be picked up – that contributed to the exploitation and deceit – and if they do – and do it properly and objectively – they`ll get no complaint from me.

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on7:11 pm - Jul 11, 2014


scapaflow says:
July 11, 2014 at 11:47 am
6 0 Rate This

Gosh an accountant manages to hit the nail on the head, without sending me a bill
==========================================================
Scapa…bill(s) are on their way…!
See what I did there…I will make a high billing accountant….one day…LOL!

View Comment

wottpiPosted on8:24 pm - Jul 11, 2014


More than happy if the ‘sectarian bunch’ from all sides jumped off the end of a pier somewhere.
However a bit rich of the RST calling out Angela Haggerty for her association with Phil Mac when Craig Houston on his Sons of Struth page mentions being ‘out enjoying some curtural (sic) celebrations’ on 5th July.
Whatever could he mean? 🙂

View Comment

wottpiPosted on8:34 pm - Jul 11, 2014


I see that Zaliukus has been confirmed on a two years deal at Govan.
30 years old with little sell on value.
Steve Simonsen also given another one year deal. (do they really need three keepers?)
So come the end of next season that means Simonsen, Boyd, Miller, Black, Daly Shiels, McCulloch and Zaliukus will all be in the plus 30 bracket and possibly needing replaced if they get to the SPFL.

View Comment

sickofitallPosted on8:57 pm - Jul 11, 2014


This from an accountancy firm about EBT’s

EBT – Employee Benefits Trusts

Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print Share on linkedin More Sharing Services 71

For sure, offshore Employee benefit schemes are complicated and finding useful unbiased information is a challenge. Find below information we hope will clear the mist and give you the information you need to make a decision.
What do HM Revenue and Customs say?
HM Revenue and Customs state that the purpose of an EBT is…
“To provide employees and directors with specific kinds of benefits such as loans, shares in their employing company, pensions and other retirement benefits, accident benefits or healthcare benefits.”
They also go on to say. . .
“EBT’s have increasingly been used for avoidance purposes, with the aim of providing employees and directors with benefits in ways that aim to minimise or avoid liability to income tax (and PAYE) and employers’ National Insurance Contributions (NICs).”
Well that’s pretty clear.
How do they work?
A number of companies make some ambitious claims about the level of take home pay that can be achieved by using an EBT, some quote rates as high as 85% of your contract.
Typically if you use an EBT provider you will receive a small basic salary (something around the minimum wage level) with the remainder of your income coming to you via a loan. Now even to us, this sounds a little strange, imagine what HM revenue and customs will think about it, if you are ever investigated – ‘so you receive a small salary and the rest of you money via a loan?’ but it doesn’t stop there, what happens if / when the loan is written off? Once written off, the loans become taxable and you immediately become liable for the back taxes. Now the provider may say ‘don’t worry the loan is never written off’, well that’s ok providing it’s always the same provider, however this doesn’t detract from the fact that you do and always will owe the money which will mean you may or may not be asked to pay back (it’s probably not something you’d like hanging over your head for eternity).
Additionally, as the loan is a benefit in kind (BIK) you’ll have to declare it on your tax return as income, which means you’ll have to pay the tax and potentially at some stage also have to repay the loan.
Like we said EBT’s are complicated and as with all complicated things there are specialists out there who will be able to answer all your questions and provide what may seem to be valid and compelling answers to help you make your mind up that they are the best thing since sliced bread.
HM Revenue and Customs have a little check list that may help to ensure you don’t get caught out, they state that when forming an EBT scheme, you must AVOID the following:
Payment of bonuses via an offshore trust.
Payment of remuneration by way of loans, which may be written off before they become repayable.
Create an offshore ‘moneybox’ for director / shareholders of close companies.
Allowing employees to use assets (such as cars) owned by the EBT, the costs of acquiring which would be capital expenditure if they were owned by the employing company.
Providing benefits in the form of shares (not in the employing company) whose values can be most easily manipulated before or after they are transferred from the EBT to employees or directors.
Any of the above offers sound familiar? I am sure website’s have reassured you that EBT’s are 100% legal, which they are, however I bet they forget to mention that any of the above so called ‘benefits’ being offered to you can be called in and collected at any point.
You are liable NOT the scheme provider
So if you work in the UK and use an EBT each month you will receive your small salary and the remainder of your ‘wages’ in the form of a loan or some other form of benefit. Now with your EBT headquarters offshore, who do you think is potentially at risk? You or them? You of course! Any form of payment that is not included into your monthly wages or recorded for HM Revenue and Customs places YOU at risk of avoiding tax payments, not the offshore holders.
There are a great many legitimate schemes out there, however they have mostly been developed for a very specific purposes, however this doesn’t stop some companies from re-thinking their structure and promoting them to others. Contractors have been caught out in the past, and are quite vocal about the effect it’s had on their lives, one contractor recently wrote “Please add one more frustrated, sick and naive con to the list. I had a letter arrive Thursday and it knocked me sick. Stressed about it all day Friday only to find another when I go home. Not the most settled of weekends”.

View Comment

crawfordPosted on10:10 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Auldheid, Ally Jambo, inter alia

Here’s an interesting one…….I think,

Do you think independence would affect any future HMRC appeal?

If things aren’t complicated enough.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on10:57 pm - Jul 11, 2014


crawford says:

July 11, 2014 at 10:10 pm

0

0

Rate This

Auldheid, Ally Jambo, inter alia

Here’s an interesting one…….I think,

Do you think independence would affect any future HMRC appeal?

If things aren’t complicated enough.
======================================
Simple really no it wont. They have rights across the UK and the Scots branch will have the same via Euro legislation. That’s another question.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on11:09 pm - Jul 11, 2014


JimBhoy says:

So was the nonsense about BDO’s success with Collyer Bristow just a trail of squirrel sh!t? Much like Cowie to the rangers nonsense, I hope one day (soon) rangers do get to the place where they rightfully belong and give us all peace…
—————————————————————————————

I believe so, nothing on any legal site. As I said earlier CB put their reputation on the line in this case. If they pay out they admit they employed a crook. I think they will spend the money on a defence. However earlier last year they tossed a litigant 50m (but only after they sued their insurers for discontinuing their cover and having it restored). So not their money 😉
As the main man says.
its the Way it Works.

View Comment

crawfordPosted on11:25 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Rate This

Auldheid, Ally Jambo, inter alia

Here’s an interesting one…….I think,

Do you think independence would affect any future HMRC appeal?

Simple really no it wont. They have rights across the UK and the Scots branch will have the same via Euro legislation. That’s another question.

mmm….

considering how wee eck has already backed them, Im not so sure he wont interfere again…..

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on11:48 pm - Jul 11, 2014


Re the inde
It will be 4 years before the effects of a” for decision” would be implemented and any amount of years for existing issues to be settled ,Charlie will not go away,he will have his extended familily to help,keep the powder dry.

View Comment

iamacantPosted on11:51 pm - Jul 11, 2014


JimBhoy says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:19 pm
“Well done to Aberdeen fantastic result for my nephew’s old team.”
———————————————————————————————–

Are we (TSFM) as bad as SMSM in not recognizing our teams victories?

Aberdeen successfully passed the 1st qualifying round by means of an 8-0 aggregate score.

Next Wednesday/Thursday we have 3 teams contesting Europa league competition.

Aberdeen v Groningen
Motherwell v Stjarnan
Lucerne v St Johnstone

How much copy will be given to this is anybody’s guess but I’m sure the Sevco opera will continue to over ride our “diddy” teams involvement.

I actually believe our 3 teams will progress to the 3rd qualifying round but from them on in, its gonna be extremely difficult. There are some “meaty” teams to be had here but I believe with the luck of the draw, one of our teams can reach the group stages.

Good luck Aberdeen, Motherwell and St Johnstone

View Comment

ianagainPosted on12:19 am - Jul 12, 2014


iamacant says:

July 11, 2014 at 11:51 pm

JimBhoy says:
July 11, 2014 at 12:19 pm
“Well done to Aberdeen fantastic result for my nephew’s old team.”
———————————————————————————————–

Are we (TSFM) as bad as SMSM in not recognizing our teams victories?

Aberdeen successfully passed the 1st qualifying round by means of an 8-0 aggregate score.

Next Wednesday/Thursday we have 3 teams contesting Europa league competition.

Aberdeen v Groningen
Motherwell v Stjarnan
Lucerne v St Johnstone

How much copy will be given to this is anybody’s guess but I’m sure the Sevco opera will continue to over ride our “diddy” teams involvement.

I actually believe our 3 teams will progress to the 3rd qualifying round but from them on in, its gonna be extremely difficult. There are some “meaty” teams to be had here but I believe with the luck of the draw, one of our teams can reach the group stages.

Good luck Aberdeen, Motherwell and St Johnstone
==========================================================
Thank you very much for your good wishes.
I’m doing a wee experiment this year by taking a mix of 5 OF folks to the ‘Well game and see how our wee version of European “semi glory” goes down with the Euro starved.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on5:57 am - Jul 12, 2014


Re the RST’s monotonous parrotting of the ‘sickening sectarian brush’ slur on Phil Mac, this I find highly ironic as it was coined by Alex Thomson in connection with providing the foreword for Downfall, another enemy who was ad hominemed onto the approaching infinite ‘rangers haters’ list. As such every utterance from Thomson is to be dismissed as anti rangers propaganda, except of course cherrypicking any bits they happen to like the sound of to smear other ‘enemies’ obviously

going back to LNS, the justification offered for oldclub’s behaviour was that with the FTT result the same course of action was open to other clubs.

Does this mean that the course of action of withholding and hiding details of player’s contractual arrangements was open to other clubs or is that just overlooked as with so much else to do with this rotten club and rotten and corrupt sham of a football authority and competitive structure we have in this country

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on8:48 am - Jul 12, 2014


Tax avoidance is the legal ripping off of the state. I wonder when the media last got uptight about the misfortune of someone, or some company, ‘winning’ a tax case, but going out of business as a result of the inevitable HMRC action against them. I wonder how long it will be until someone asks, actually asks the man himself, or even just rhetorically asks, the question:

‘Mr Murray, if you were so certain that your EBT scheme was ‘legal’, why did you take the coward’s way out and sell Rangers to a man so obviously a charlatan?’

A good follow up question might be: ‘You seem very sympathetic to the people who supported, and lost, Rangers. How sympathetic are you to all those employees you let down, who not only lost their jobs, but also a large proportion of the pensions they earned (while not avoiding income tax) that you were responsible for ensuring the proper administration of?’

Another question they should definitely ask is:

‘do you think your decision to withhold the details of your EBT scheme from the SFA (mis-register player contracts) has in any way led to the demise of Rangers? Oh, and while we’re asking, why did you deliberately withhold this information? Was it because your scheme wouldn’t have worked otherwise? Perhaps, Mr Murray, it wasn’t the tax authorities actions, which were inevitable in the circumstances you created, that caused the downfall of Rangers, but, in fact, your need to be seen as ‘Billy Bigbaws’ and outspend all your rivals, that broke this part of the ‘fabric of Scottish Society’? But before we finish, Mr Murray, do you have any words of sympathy for those ex-employees of yours that you have let down so badly? No? I thought not!’

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on10:40 am - Jul 12, 2014


@Ianagain Good luck Aberdeen, Motherwell and St Johnstone I concur fella and to the Celik.. Armageddon my @rse..!!

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on11:06 am - Jul 12, 2014


eveningtimes.co.uk/news/rangers-fans-plan-demo-at-games-opening-event-170789n.24723884 Dont know where to start with this. Short piece but full to the brim with inaccuracies. Stain on Scotlands big day as well. Dearie me.

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on11:11 am - Jul 12, 2014


Someone somewhere is going to have to stand up and tell the gullible in this fiasco the absolute truth. Maybe HMRC maybe David Murray maybe BDO maybe The SFA or SMSM. I dont know who but it needs to be addressed now or there will be even more serious problems for Scotland.

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on12:02 pm - Jul 12, 2014


And so another couple of lying statements from the RST are published without critical comment or any sort of rebuttal in the MSM, which is an integral part of the problem rather than any part of the solution. This “we are victims” nonsense is gaining traction.

Maybe the offended section of the Scottish football community — that is, the fans of every other club in the country — should embark on the same tactic, issuing a statement every time a newspaper or radio pundit tells the same-club/they-were-relegated lie. A start might be to point out that a man accused of 100 murders does not cease to be a murderer because he pleads guilty to only killing seven!

I believe TSFM would have the necessary stature.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on12:12 pm - Jul 12, 2014


http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/singing-the-blues/

James Forrest’s latest.

View Comment

Comments are closed.