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.

1,546 thoughts on “The Way it Works


  1. MercDoc says:
    August 5, 2014 at 8:43 am
    ‘…But what does it matter anyway, Rangers are an ever ongoing, ever all-knowing ethereal entity, which cannot die, never diminish but always surprise..’
    ———
    The new club may have found a perhaps surprising ally in the form of the Archbishop of Glasgow.
    In today’s “Herald”, commenting on the closure of the parish of All Saints in Barmulloch, his Grace is reported as saying ” ‘All Saints’ will not die. The people, the patrimony, the roots, will become part of St Catherine’s”.
    I wonder was he having a silent laugh, with tongue in cheek? 😆


  2. Interesting thought on who first brought Ticketus into the rangers takeover equation.. They had previously worked with SDM on past ticket sales, so it could be suggested that CW was incentivized on that knowledge discretely imparted to him, but by whom?????


  3. But to be serious. It is really good to see that BDO are getting right into things.There may be criminal prosecutions in the fullness of time, involving several sets of initials that have frequently been used as shorthand identifiers on this blog!
    Speed the day when the whole rotten mess created by one particular set of initials is fully exposed to the undying shame and ignominy of the owner of those initials, and to his execration by the many, many people in Scottish Football that his cheating heart foully betrayed.


  4. SouthernExile says:
    August 5, 2014 at 1:03 am
    ‘…Only posted because a) timing is strange and b) RT’s world view is very much at odds with the south govan mindset. ‘
    ——
    As regards a), perhaps the timing is not so strange, given that there will be interest in English political/financial circles in tonight’s referendum debate,
    and as regards b) well, that is interesting…


  5. JimBhoy says:
    August 5, 2014 at 11:13 am

    Thought ol’ Moonbeams confirmed that he introduced Jackson’s Billionaire to Ticketus?


  6. scapaflow says:
    August 5, 2014 at 11:28 am

    Thought ol’ Moonbeams confirmed that he introduced Jackson’s Billionaire to Ticketus?

    There was a document (perhaps from Charlotte) to that effect.


  7. And to think the fans were so angry in 2011 because the BBC wanted to reveal what they knew about Whyte right at the start. Boycottng the truth didn’t help much.

    Anyone remember what the current boycott is about? Or is it still the same mega huff brought about by the Craig Whyte broadcast?

    Rangers boycott BBC for 2nd time

    Posted 10/18/2011 02:14:00 PM | |

    GLASGOW, Scotland (AP) — Scottish champions Rangers say they are boycotting the BBC ahead of the broadcaster’s planned documentary exploring the recent takeover of the club.

    The program, entitled “Rangers — The Inside Story” and due to be aired on Thursday, investigates what the future might hold under the Glasgow team’s new owner Craig Whyte, who completed his takeover in May.
    Rangers say the documentary is “little more than a prejudiced muckraking exercise.”
    The BBC rejected the allegation Tuesday, highlighting its “accuracy and impartiality.”
    It’s the second time this season that Rangers have boycotted the BBC — they first withdrew co-operation following the broadcaster’s report on sectarianism. The BBC apologized to end that impasse.

    Source: USA Today


  8. Danish Pastry says:
    August 5, 2014 at 12:52 pm

    DP,IIRC, Mr Johnston was touting his dossier in the subsequent Mark D documentary. Nice to see that the Record is keeping up with events! :mrgreen:


  9. scapaflow says:
    August 5, 2014 at 1:01 pm
    1 0 Rate This

    DP,IIRC, Mr Johnston was touting his dossier in the subsequent Mark D documentary. Nice to see that the Record is keeping up with events!
    ———–

    It’s surely not this that the fans have now ‘discovered’ as new explosive material — the very material some (VBs?) wanted banned and that they protested about at the BBC, to avoid it seeing the light of day! No, it can’t be.


  10. Just had a look at the Record’s HMRC ‘revelations’ (i.e. the stuff we all knew about even before Jingle-Jangle was giving it ‘Wealth off the radar’), and there’s one bit I find slightly confusing, and it’s this:

    “Alastair Johnston, Rangers chairman at the time, pleaded with Murray not to sell the club to Whyte. He was subsequently axed.

    Presented with the revelations last night, he said: “On the back of this, I would welcome a full-scale, independent investigation into the actions of HMRC around the Rangers issue.” ”

    Er… what? What has HMRC chasing the MBB got to do with David Murray selling the club? Is he implying that HMRC should have warned them? That somehow their warning would have carried more weight than AJ’s ‘ Do not sell to this guy’ dossier?

    I’m confused.


  11. So why do Jackson’s tweets trailing today’s printed story…

    keith jackson ‏@tedermeatballs · 45m
    Here’s a wee question. How much did HMRC know about Craig Whyte’s tax dodging tendencies BEFORE he bought RFC?

    keith jackson ‏@tedermeatballs · 9m
    Full story and reaction from a furious Alastair Johnston in tomorrow’s @Daily_Record

    …give the impression that the story is all about HMRC failing to act re CW when the story is actually all about DM and the RFC board failing to act? Oh, and Alistair Johnson’s ‘furious reaction’ is targeted only at DM, not at HMRC (He probably knows HMRC couldn’t legally tip anyone off about CW even if they knew he was a wrong ‘un….though in Scotland’s close knit wee business community, who knows?)

    Does Jackson know the fans won’t buy if they think it’s a bad piece about DM, but will definitely buy if they think it’s a ‘big, bad Rangers hating HMRC’ piece?

    What a piece of……..!


  12. There is definitely an anti HMRC agenda in play here. Absolutely nothing can be the fault of anyone connected to Rangers, they remain the victims of deceipt from Whyte to Green to HMRC.

    The only reasons oldco was sold to Whyte was desperation and Murray. Murray knew, he just wanted shot of the place…and the debts. And the sooner that becomes accepted fact amongst Rangers fans the better.There are an awful lot of people who should take responsibility for all that has happened, but they would rather blame HMRC. Pathetic really.


  13. easyJambo says:

    August 5, 2014 at 12:37 am

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/the-whyte-files-private-investigation-revealed-1407428

    Well here’s the article.

    It too long to post, so it’s your choice to give a hit to the DR on not.

    Has KJ stolen the VB’s thunder?

    —————————————————

    I am a bit confused, the link above takes me to this article below but the date is odd? Or am I J
    just confused?

    —————————————————–

    Revealed: Rangers bosses knew about Craig Whyte’s shady business dealings BEFORE Ibrox takeover

    Oct 30, 2012 00:01
    By Keith McLeod


  14. Auldheid says:
    August 5, 2014 at 1:45 am

    The real story that Jackson could never tell is that in May 2011 just 13 days after Whyte bought Rangers for a penny the Edinburgh HMRC Debt Collection office served notice on Whyte for unpaid overdue tax of £3,741,835.29!

    ================================================================================

    Wasn’t it Jackson who was in a hurry to tell the faithful that Whyte had “Off-the-radar wealth”. Could this be because it was off the HMRC’s radar as well.

    Flywheel


  15. Regarding the record’s “exclusive”.

    I am glad Danish Pastry and Scapaflow brought me back to reality, as I was beginning to believe in “Groundhog Day”!

    With regard to demands for full investigations, all I can say (and I repeat a comment I previously made)’is, on 25th June 2012, the Crown Prosecution Service instructed the then Strathclyde Police to investigate the sale of Rangers football club to Craig Whyte, and also the conduct of the club’s directors.

    Following that instruction the police searched several properties.

    Is this investigation still on going, or has it been passed to BDO or the Insolvency investigators?


  16. blu says:

    August 5, 2014 at 2:04 pm

    Thanks blu, thought I must have had the wrong end of the stick 😳
    My fault don’t read newspapers as a rule.


  17. Danish Pastry says:

    August 5, 2014 at 1:16 pm

    It’s surely not this that the fans have now ‘discovered’ as new explosive material — the very material some (VBs?) wanted banned and that they protested about at the BBC, to avoid it seeing the light of day! No, it can’t be.

    —————————-

    Different story DP, the VB’s have info on dealings between the SFA and RFC, not HMRC. The info will not be seen as ground breaking on here, more like a rehash of what is already known.

    Much the same as The DR exclusive today…..old news packaged up to look like something new.


  18. The principal remit of HMRC, is the protection and collection of the revenue. HMRC does not exist to give thumbs up or down to any business deal, that is the purpose of due diligence.

    The Titon report was a result of due diligence. The blame for ignoring that report cannot be laid at the door of HMRC.

    What is beginning to annoy me in this whole affair, is the growing tendency to infer that the administration and liquidation of Rangers, was down to HMRC, and the non reference to 275 (two hundred and seventy five) other creditors.

    The sooner BDO finalise their report, the better


  19. Oddjob

    Ditto. Unfortunately, those who should be telling these truths, are instead deliberately mis-leading people. Jackson’s teaser tweet, actually turned the story on its head. Any self-respecting journalist would be furious at this misrepresentation of their story, but, we are dealing with the Record.


  20. Quote of the day in today’s Daily Record ‘hotline’ “I’ve been spoiled this summer with the World Cup, Wimbledon and the Commonwealth Games. But now the Scottish football season is about to start it’s all downhill from here”

    Is there any other industry where those with a direct interest in the success of that industry, actively and relentlessly talk it down and flood potential customers with a message of negativity?


  21. Scapaflow,

    Exactly, and how much “due diligence” did Jackson conduct before he boldly produced his “Motherwell born billionaire, with wealth off the radar” exclusive ?

    Surely he did some checking, companies house etc? Then again…


  22. It has never ceased to amaze me that so many ‘people’ believe that a single individual in any organisation is responsible for the payment of PAYE, NIC and VAT collected from employees,service providers and suppliers to HMRC. It is the company’s responsibility through it’s finance dept.to make that provision, To say that it is CW’s is “scapegoating”.


  23. I am probably very bad for thinking this, but, hopefully the Enforcement boys will investigate the board as least as far back as 2005.

    For the simple reason that seeing the Clubs’ beloved president for life getting disqualified from being a company director, would be a thoroughly well deserved GIRUY to those self same clubs.

    An unlikely scenario I grant you, but the clubs are well overdue a healthy dose of embarrassment.


  24. scapaflow says:
    August 5, 2014 at 4:11 pm
    3 0 Rate This

    I am probably very bad for thinking this, but, hopefully the Enforcement boys will investigate the board as least as far back as 2005 …
    ———–

    The old board members must have been lifting a fair sum, if that court case about the freezing of assets was anything to go by. I was amazed at the time that ‘real Rangers men’ would cripple the club to get their piece of the action from the financial buffet table.

    If their wage must be commensurate with their responsibility, was the board doing what it was paid to do?


  25. ekt1m says:
    August 5, 2014 at 4:11 pm

    It has never ceased to amaze me that so many ‘people’ believe that a single individual in any organisation is responsible for the payment of PAYE, NIC and VAT collected from employees,service providers and suppliers to HMRC. It is the company’s responsibility through it’s finance dept.to make that provision, To say that it is CW’s is “scapegoating”.
    ==============================

    Accountancy is not my profession but I have long argued that Craig Whyte could not have acted alone in the withholding of PAYE / N.I. I would also like to see other directors of the time having their claims to know nothing about it subjected to serious scrutiny, not that it’s going to happen.


  26. upthehoops says:

    August 5, 2014 at 5:28 pm

    2

    0

    Rate This

    ekt1m says:
    August 5, 2014 at 4:11 pm

    It has never ceased to amaze me that so many ‘people’ believe that a single individual in any organisation is responsible for the payment of PAYE, NIC and VAT collected from employees,service providers and suppliers to HMRC. It is the company’s responsibility through it’s finance dept.to make that provision, To say that it is CW’s is “scapegoating”.
    ==============================

    Accountancy is not my profession but I have long argued that Craig Whyte could not have acted alone in the withholding of PAYE / N.I. I would also like to see other directors of the time having their claims to know nothing about it subjected to serious scrutiny, not that it’s going to happen.

    ======================================================================
    What would have happened if Craig Whyte had paid the PAYE and NIC ? They would have run out of money Oct/Nov 2011 – Administration and subsequent Liquidation before the end of the Season would really have meant the end – No new club/old club scenario then. CW did save the Rangers Brand .


  27. Paradisebhoy says:
    August 5, 2014 at 5:52 pm
    6 0 Rate This

    Accountancy is not my profession but I have long argued that
    What would have happened if Craig Whyte had paid the PAYE and NIC ? They would have run out of money Oct/Nov 2011 – Administration and subsequent Liquidation before the end of the Season would really have meant the end – No new club/old club scenario then. CW did save the Rangers Brand .
    ———-

    And he insisted that he would one day remembered for exactly that.

    On the other hand, he could (with the help of the board) have gone into admin sooner and done a Hearts —top earners sold, drastic cost-cutting, appealed for fan engagement, appealed to the SFA. Difficult, of course, when you’ve been welcomed as a billionaire, but possible, you’d think.

    If it all turns out to be DM & CW in cahoots from the off, whose fault will it be then? Dundee United, probably 😀


  28. Paradisebhoy says:
    August 5, 2014 at 5:52 pm

    Edit.

    ======================================================================
    What would have happened if Craig Whyte had paid the PAYE and NIC ? They would have run out of money Oct/Nov 2011 – Administration and subsequent Liquidation before the end of the Season would really have meant the end – No new club/old club scenario then. CW did save the Rangers Brand .

    *******

    Whyte did indeed save the brand……as he said he would.

    Did he not say that a team in blue would be playing out of Ibrox?

    He never said it would be Rangers, though.

    Some people gave no sense of gratitude!


  29. Keith Jackson seems to have stirred up a few Rangers fans with his piece in the Daily Record today.

    Craig Whyte was apparently experiencing certain difficulties with HMRC prior to acquiring the keys to Ibrox Park.

    I’m not really surprised by this ‘revelation’. That’s not to imply any wrong doing, but his business history does look a little complex.

    The Record piece actually tells us little but works hard at ramping up the excitement.

    Mr Whyte had apparently slipped off the HMRC radar while spending time abroad.

    I’m not sure when he went abroad and Keith Jackson doesn’t tell us but according to the Record piece the “flight risk” returned to the UK in 2005, apparently without telling HMRC. Perhaps he arrived at night, under a blanket and slipped into a car with blacked out windows.

    Forgive me for enhancing the drama a bit.

    Craig Whyte’s actual personal tax debt is impossible for me to even guess at, if indeed there is an actual debt. I’m not alone in this; to come to some sort of estimate it would be necessary to have details of the man’s income and wealth. It would be all too easy to stop counting somewhere in the billions of pounds and simply announce that the sums were simply “off the radar”.

    HMRC have to be a little more realistic and measured.

    But let’s not let that get in the way of a good story.

    Craig Whyte, as all arch villains do, eventually made a fatal mistake. Having kept his head down for so long he decided to buy himself a football team, in doing so he had shown his hand and HMRC renewed their interest.

    Mr Whyte it seems moved quickly from receiving a letter claiming in excess of £3.7 million pounds in unpaid tax to being warned that “a warrant would be served on him by a sheriff officer who would also provide him with a leaflet entitled Dealing with Debt to help him assess his options.”

    Bad enough you might think though I’m sure the leaflet was reassuring.

    As it happens the letter contained further bad news.

    “If the debt remains unpaid, I will arrange to present a sequestration petition in your local sheriff court. The effect of this is that you are likely to be made bankrupt and a Trustee appointed to sell your assets and pay your creditors.”

    Bad times for Craig White I’m sure you will agree, but clearly bad times that have passed.

    I’m not aware of this sequestration petition actually coming to fruition in a sheriff court or even arriving at a sheriff court.

    Actually considering that, at what point does defending yourself constitute stalling?

    “Even then Whyte continued to stall, appealing to a tribunal against the judgment. As HMRC do not discuss private tax dealings, the outcome as yet remains unknown.”

    Some Rangers fans will busy themselves with the idea that HMRC could have / should have prevented Craig Whyte from taking ownership of their club. It’s a fanciful idea at best and one that I’m sure Sir David Murray will put them right on.

    It doesn’t end there, some Rangers fans will busy themselves with the idea that HMRC could have stopped Craig Whyte in his tracks when he failed to pay the PAYE when it fell due. The idea, such as it is,is that HMRC could have served a winding up order in much the same way as they did with Hearts.

    Given that a winding up order is essentially asking a court to put a company into liquidation it’s difficult to see how this would have been helpful, unless the company had the funds to make the payment or the wherewithal to cut a deal.

    More importantly you can’t simply go around serving winding up orders on companies who you believe owe you money. There has to be no dispute, monies due have to have been previously agreed. It’s the actual lack of agreed payment or the timing off it that that gives cause for a winding up order from a court.

    Rangers and HMRC have been in dispute for quite some time.


  30. Did HMRC have 28 days to appeal the UTTT case. And how long have they got left to appeal as the time scale must be almost up


  31. oddjob says:

    August 5, 2014 at 4:03 pm

    19

    0

    Rate This

    Scapaflow,

    Exactly, and how much “due diligence” did Jackson conduct before he boldly produced his “Motherwell born billionaire, with wealth off the radar” exclusive ?

    Surely he did some checking, companies house etc? Then again…
    =================================
    Should’ve checked with Hector’s House 😆


  32. Den says:
    August 5, 2014 at 8:41 am

    “The extract you posted does not say it was administrative error…”
    —————————-
    Yes you are correct. Having read back through the decision I couldn’t find this phrase so offered up an explanation of why it might have been suggested in the ruling. Thanks for correcting me. I’m not sure why I adopted it as a touchstone.
    I tried to interrogate ‘Reasons for decision’ but my Scrib’d link is broken.


  33. scottc says:
    August 5, 2014 at 12:26 pm

    “There was a document (perhaps from Charlotte) to that effect.”
    ————————–
    The nearest I can get is a document labelled ‘Don’t tell Murray’. I think the title was a bit tongue in cheek as the extract below is from an e:mail sent to Phil Betts who was on the Rangers Board at the time (1st March 2011). Its hard to believe that Murray didn’t know what was afoot.

    However, as you can clearly see the assistance of Octopus on the GRFC deal is clearly something of an open secret. I’m not sure of the extent of Paul’s knowledge or how much he may have gone on to say to others, but (having cut off the discussion at this end with Sam), I think it would be in both our interests to ensure Paul does not reference us with the deal again, to anyone. It would be all too easy for Chinese whispers to crater the deal I fancy, for reasons I’m sure you now all to well.

    I think the reason that the Ticketus/Octopus connection needed to be kept quiet was because purchase of the football club was beyond the scope of the Ticketus agreement with Whyte. When Ticketus sued Whyte for their £24M they pled ignorance that the funds were used for the club purchase.

    It was some time ago that I read the Ticketus decision so my recollection comes with a caveat emptor.


  34. Alba Bhoy says:

    August 5, 2014 at 7:32 pm

    See this part?

    ” Alastair Johnston, Rangers chairman at the time, pleaded with Murray not to sell the club to Whyte. He was subsequently axed.

    Presented with the revelations last night, he said: “On the back of this, I would welcome a full-scale, independent investigation into the actions of HMRC around the Rangers issue.”

    I hope they do. Rangers telling lies to HMRC, evasive when answering, incomplete answers. Bring it on.

    The worst charge HMRC would face is gullibility.

    The best Rangers would face is guilty of truth evasion, tax avoidance AND tax evasion.


  35. oddjob says:

    August 5, 2014 at 2:03 pm

    Regarding the record’s “exclusive”.

    I am glad Danish Pastry and Scapaflow brought me back to reality, as I was beginning to believe in “Groundhog Day”!

    With regard to demands for full investigations, all I can say (and I repeat a comment I previously made)’is, on 25th June 2012, the Crown Prosecution Service instructed the then Strathclyde Police to investigate the sale of Rangers football club to Craig Whyte, and also the conduct of the club’s directors.

    Following that instruction the police searched several properties.

    Is this investigation still on going, or has it been passed to BDO or the Insolvency investigators?
    —————————————————————-
    The polis investigation is over hence the release of all Charlotte materials to the courts perusal which someone at BDO is compiling right now for the continuing case in Jan 15.


  36. Auldheid says:

    August 5, 2014 at 10:33 pm

    Bring it on !

    As a taxpayer I want to know why they let a Company, run by an individual with a history of defaulting on tax, run up a £13,000,000 deficit on tax deductions and run rings round them re the Wee Tax Case.

    Also an inquiry into the lack of cooperation from Rangers in the matter of the existence of EBT side letters, the lack of candour on the part of some witnesses among other things.

    It wont happen though.


  37. Cluster One says:
    August 5, 2014 at 7:31 pm
    ‘..Did HMRC have 28 days to appeal the UTTT case. .’
    ——-
    No, I think they have 3 months from the date of notice of the decision in which to seek leave to appeal. Some time still to go!


  38. Sorry about that: I tried to copy and paste from the tribunal site!


  39. MoreCelticParanoia says:
    August 5, 2014 at 4:03 pm
    31 1 Rate This

    Quote of the day in today’s Daily Record ‘hotline’ “I’ve been spoiled this summer with the World Cup, Wimbledon and the Commonwealth Games. But now the Scottish football season is about to start it’s all downhill from here”

    Is there any other industry where those with a direct interest in the success of that industry, actively and relentlessly talk it down and flood potential customers with a message of negativity?
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Reginald Perrin, Grot ??


  40. OT. Watching the game from ibrox and if passing was a points system Hibs would be well ahead, much improved Hibs. I tell you what if they can find an end product the team they are playing tonight may not find their right of passage so easy.


  41. Wrote that piece long ago but my internet went down and just came back up. Hibs didn’t get the result but as I said better looking team.


  42. Forever Green says:
    August 6, 2014 at 12:19 am

    Believe it or not the extent of the Fit and Proper Test was that someone at Rangers, probably the company secretary sent a note to the SFA saying that Mr Craig Thomas Whyte is a fit and proper person. That was it, and remains it as far as I can see.

    I am sorry, but given the history, going back to the closure and stripping of the Ravenscraig carcass, I find it stretches my credulity beyond breaking point that DM did not know who CW was, & that’s before you throw the dossier into the mix.

    DM was famous for throwing people he had meetings with off guard, by asking them about their kids ballet classes or whatever, he checked everybody out.

    Though I agree, that by that stage, he didn’t care, he wanted out from under.


  43. fara1968 says:
    August 6, 2014 at 12:15 am

    MoreCelticParanoia says:
    August 5, 2014 at 4:03 pm

    Is there any other industry where those with a direct interest in the success of that industry, actively and relentlessly talk it down and flood potential customers with a message of negativity?
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Reginald Perrin, Grot ??

    Or maybe Ratners?


  44. Castofthousands says:
    August 5, 2014 at 8:59 pm

    Re SDM introducing Octopus

    What I remember CoT is an interview with CW (possibly) or some correspondence from him to the likes of Gary Withey, where he had been in discussion with RFC about the purchase price and someone at RFC introduced the concept of Ticketus as ‘people we have dealt with before’ for fund raising


  45. briggsbhoy says:
    August 6, 2014 at 12:37 am
    12 2 Rate This

    OT. Watching the game from ibrox and if passing was a points system Hibs would be well ahead, much improved Hibs. I tell you what if they can find an end product the team they are playing tonight may not find their right of passage so easy.
    ———

    I’ll join you in OT Briggsy and confirm an excellent excellent Hibs.

    Yes, if boxing, well ahead on points, and definitely on artistic impression! Unlucky too. Ref was overall very good (before any conspiracies start 🙂 ). Sending-off did seem a tad harsh and more or less sealed Hibs’ fate, but it was an unnecessary tackle. Daft laddie. I heard Flower of Scotland being belted out — probably a riposte to GStQ, or that one about ‘surrender, no’.

    Btw, this match was sent on SNW, a Canadian sports broadcaster that my new provider has available. So Scottish football does seem to have agreed some kind of deal with a few companies (or one company who can do as they see fit with the international rights?).


  46. Folks,

    Already I have had to remove five posts about the refereeing performance last night. I understand the wider point made by Barcabhoy, especially with regard to proven misconduct by officials, but specific criticisms of decisions is a highly subjective task and not appropriate to the blog.

    I do understand the question of trust which arises, and I believe that Auldheid’s call for an independent refereeing service is an interesting idea – however I am sceptical that it would put the lid on controversy completely.

    I have no doubt that there will be those who will provide us with a statistical breakdown of sendings off and other questionable decisions over the course of the year. Maybe waiting for the bigger picture to emerge, if one does emerge, would be a better course of action.


  47. Well that’s me seen the three biggies in the Championship now and while it will not be the league that has the best players it looks like being close and exciting.
    Both Hearts and Hibs are playing a nice passing game with very few balls pumped up top.
    Falkirk will most likely continue with the same philosophy.
    The thing that is worrying the Bears on some forums is that with a real clear out of playing staff and starting from scratch Neilson and Stubbs seem to have good footballing teams in the making after a number of weeks. Meanwhile McCoist puts out a similar squad to years gone by with a few additions,nothing seems to have changed and as the game went on they looked like being second best.I got the feeling Boyd has put on his true blue comfort blanket and looked slow and lazy once again despite his good showing last season. Sending off was a bit harsh but Templeton looked like the only Rangers players that was going to do some damage and had jinked out a few challenges just before.

    The board will of course be happy that the crowd was similar to early round fixtures last year, therefore while boosted by Hibs fans the level of support down Govan way is probably still pretty sound.

    As discussed the other day IMHO it may be that, once again, McCoist will be the spanner in the works on the road to the premiership.


  48. WOW 18,000 WOW

    That’s 32,987 below capacity and 5,000 of those were visitors. I’d expected many, many more given all the selling points: first season in a professional league in their history, against “Old Foe” rivals, in the most competitive league and first game of the season with all those high profile signings. If that doesn’t get more than 13,000 bear bums on seats then the ST strike is irrelevant compared to the Walked Away With Indifference Effect. (WAWIE © mcfc 2014).

    This must be a crushing blow for Wallace and Nash’s spreadsheet cash flow predictions – definitively puts them on Worst Case Scenario worksheet. Or maybe calls for a whole new worksheet – Melt Down Scenario. What gates can they now expect for less glamorous fixtures?


  49. scottc says:
    August 6, 2014 at 8:13 am

    “What I remember CoT is an interview with CW (possibly) or some correspondence from him to the likes of Gary Withey,..”
    —————————
    I’m just having a look through the back catalogue to see if I can spot anything. I’ve already came across another piece of correspondence with Ticketus/Octopus (Ross Bryan) and Phil Betts concerning club purchase before the event. It’s quite possible (S)DM kept himself off the e:mail distribution for reasons easily surmisable. I’ll keep digging to see what else I can unearth.

    In the process, something struck me about the current witch-hunt concerning HMRC.

    Whilst it remains highly likely that Craig Whyte was the source of the ‘Charlotte’ material, there are of course other possibilities that cannot at this moment be ruled out. As Ianagain mentions above, the true source may become clear when the Collyer Bristow proceedings commence in January 2015.

    So another possibility is that the Charlotte material was leaked via HMRC somehow. I know there was a summons (warrant?) served on Rangers (I think by HMRC) and that amongst other items, computers were removed by Sheriff officers in part payment of the outstanding debt. The Charlotte information concerning the High Net Worth Unit (the full content of which pretty much mirrors the DR article) seemed to be a partial photocopy of a larger document. I came across another piece of HMRC correspondence during my perusal and again this was a photocopy snippet. So the Rangers correspondence all seems to be ‘electronic’ whereas these two HMRC documents are ‘paper’. This wouldn’t preclude a source close to Rangers being the leaker but it might equally indicate other possibilities.

    If the computers removed by Sheriff officers had the majority of ‘Charlotte’ information onboard and was then added to by sources close to HMRC then this up to a point would fit the Charlotte profile. Even if this speculation is incorrect it might be sufficient to inspire a campaign of action against HMRC.

    So perhaps the general command has been sent out to squeeze HMRC to see if a leak ‘pops’. It might also have the effect of making HMRC think twice about appealing the UTT.


  50. Disagree entirely. 18,000 is a decent draw in the circumstances for the first round of the challenge cup and I would expect a full house at the weekend. A win there (and with apologies to the Hibs fans, and a nod to the fact they were down to 10 men) especially if Hearts offer as little in an attacking sense as last night and Ally will consider it a job half done one game in.

    The defiant ‘surrender, no’ ticket in its purest unadulterated form has yet to be played whereby should sevco start to struggle it will actually improve gates, not take away from them. Bizarrely what Wallace doesn’t want this year is a procession.

    It doesn’t take away from Phil’s comment that they would have preferred another 20,000 STs (especially if it is an uninteresting procession) but I think that is what differentiates Wallace and Nash – they have the ability to think on their feet and deal with “we are where we are” rather than simply crying like a bairn that “its no fair , no fair…”


  51. Question for MCFC.

    I was down in the north west at the weekend (ok I’ll admit, it was Blackpool) and there were a few City fans with tops on. What do the three stars signify?

    Not having a dig, I’m genuinely interested.


  52. mcfc says:
    August 6, 2014 at 10:24 am

    As mentioned above I think the crowd was OK for a 1st round tie

    There is not much to go on in terms of comparisons being T’Rangers have only had two home ties in the competition.

    24k crowd against Queen of the South in the Quarters two season back

    and 16k v Berwick Rangers in last years 2nd round.

    For arguments sake you could say 13k is a third of a 39k season ticket target while Hearts had a crowd of nearly 7k against Annan that represents more than 50% of the 12k season tickets sold to date.

    However Celtic were criticized for not publishing crowd figures for last years League Cup match v Greenock Morton which was estimated to be 17k. Therefore it can easily be argued that regardless of who you are playing the early rounds of the lesser cups don’t attract fans.

    I wouldn’t get hung up on the crowd numbers as yet. The proof of the pudding will be what happens after a few months and what the results are. If McCoist can get a string of wins with good attractive play then they will be OK. However if the product on the park is not that great and there are a few poor results then the ‘pay as you goers’ could decide to slowly walk away.


  53. TSFM 9.22

    A hindrance to restoring complete trust even if refereeing became an independent service the SFA ( or anyone on market testing terms ) offer the SPFL is the recognition that whereas other clubs lose then adjust budgets, RFC as was did not do that and their total business model meant they had to win. It was not a sporting imperative but a commercial life or death one.

    Their successor seem hell bent on pursuing the same business model that ultimately depends on CL money.

    There is an excellent article on the difficulties small countries face in even tryong to qualify for the CL posted earlier and it is the perception that RIFC absolutely MUST win to survive that puts referees under intense scrutiny.

    So whilst an independent refereeing service would help, the game also requires adoption of stricter FFP practice in Scotland that remove that deep survival suspicion from the scene.

    Both stricter FFP and independent refereeing would benefit referees and the game as a whole.


  54. The passage of time can throw new light onto old information. Charlotte published so much information so quickly that it was difficult to absorb its implications. As I’m reading back perhaps you’ll permit me the license to post up snippets that catch my eye which at the time might have looked incomprehensible but which now make a bit more sense.

    This first bit is from a post she made on TSFM early on in her career.

    The strategy of negative stories about oldco/newco are for the primary benefit on one group only. Those in litigation considered a strategy to benefit by short trading on the RFIC share price. All they needed were a few willing punters to assist.

    The RIFC share price has altered dramatically over the term. Most of the trades appear to have been small but I think there were a few big ones in there. Those of you that take a special interest in these matters might want to consider whether the above statement might have a basis in reality.

    This particular post is ended by an intriguing comment that doesn’t immediately strike me as significant but perhaps others will lodge it in their memory banks and make sense of it in the fullness of time.

    I still don’t get why Ticketus were so keen to get the 49 million deal signed off in November though.

    Now the £49M refers to a contingency in the event the BTC was lost. I’ve very recently revisited the document that deals with this facility. The funding source on this document purports to be an organisation called Advance Entertainment LLC. I’ve never been able to uncover anything significant concerning Advance Entertainment so don’t know if they had a relationship with Ticketus, whether they were Ticketus or whether this document refers to an entirely different source of funds.


  55. tomtom says:
    August 6, 2014 at 10:53 am
    MCFC.

    I was down in the north west at the weekend (ok I’ll admit, it was Blackpool) and there were a few City fans with tops on. What do the three stars signify?

    Not having a dig, I’m genuinely interested.
    ============================================
    Fair question – there is some debate – some say they represent the three rivers of Manchester: Irwell, Irk and Medlock. But some say they represent 30 league titles we bought with our new found riches from a dead club somewhere 🙂


  56. Some interesting reading on the bears den on last night’s performance. I didn’t see/hear anything of the game until this morning. I agree 18k isn’t a bad turnout and the season start will see a marked increase no doubt BUT I have said many times the pay at the gate brigade will diminish if the reports on bears den are accurate and performances of individuals, the team and the manager are poor.. Reports suggest if the harsh sending off hadn’t happened the good money would have been on Hibs to progress.. Not labouring on ref’s decisions but most of the bears are a tad unhappy… I wonder if I will have similar thoughts about the celtic tonight….


  57. Smugas says:
    August 6, 2014 at 10:40 am

    Disagree entirely. 18,000 is a decent draw in the circumstances for the first round of the challenge cup
    ====================================
    Smugas – I take your point but I think the selling points I mentioned should have been able to create excitement in a willing, enthusiastic fan-base . To me the run of the mill crowd in the circumstances suggests a distinct lack of excitement. I guess we’ll soon see the reality – but I doubt Wallace & Nash were encouraged by much that happened last night – except perhaps the non-Hertzian nature of official errors.


  58. From twitter, one of the leagues better players is for the off it looks (STV guy)

    @ChristopherHarv
    At Edinburgh airport Tommy Wright confirms to me that @swfc bid for Stevie May yesterday afternoon. In driving seat to conclude deal on Fri.


  59. mcfc says:
    August 6, 2014 at 11:12 am
    0 0 Rate This

    tomtom says:
    August 6, 2014 at 10:53 am
    MCFC.

    I was down in the north west at the weekend (ok I’ll admit, it was Blackpool) and there were a few City fans with tops on. What do the three stars signify?

    Not having a dig, I’m genuinely interested.
    ============================================
    Fair question – there is some debate – some say they represent the three rivers of Manchester: Irwell, Irk and Medlock. But some say they represent 30 league titles we bought with our new found riches from a dead club somewhere 🙂
    —————————

    Thanks


  60. Could we not have a separate thread, similar to the OC/NC one, to debate the shortcomings of the referees? We’re generally very open minded on here and given the wide range of fans that regularly post it could be interesting to see how the ref’s perform throughout the leagues rather than concentrating our focus on one particular club.


  61. Barcabhoy,

    I totally reasonable point of view.
    I think the general sense of decorum on here would guard against intemperate comment on officials and merely highlight anomalies in the performances of referees.

    Was it just televised matches involving TRFC that were graced by Grade 1 officials and, if the practice is to very continued, will Hearts and Hibs also benefit from the higher standard of officials?


  62. Am on a road trip with work for a few days. Driving along lsast night when 5 live did a preview of the Scottish football season. Nearly swereved off the road in anger/frustation. Quotes from pundits along the line of:

    Premiership = “procession” “too many diddy teams”

    Championship = “much more interesting/competitive”

    “in and out of administration”

    “demoted to the fourth tier”

    “celtic need a strong rangers”

    All acceptad at face value by the presenter.

    Will be listening again on I-player at the weekend to get precise quotes and e-mailing auntie – not that it will do any good but i pay my licence fee and expect better than this nonsense.


  63. Totally OT, [& run past TSFM].

    I’m currently back in sunny [?] Glasgow for the first time in a couple of years, and for purely selfish reasons thought it could be an opportunity to meet some fellow Bampots – especially as I don’t normally get the chance to discuss TSFM topics ‘offline’.

    I am suggesting meeting up in a Glasgow city centre bar on a quiet Monday or Tuesday night this month.

    For obvious reasons and to maintain discretion, it would have to be a relatively ‘small’ group – and anonymity can also be maintained on the night.

    If you are interested, please drop me a PM over the next couple of days.

    Would be good to put faces to some of the monikers.


  64. Refereeing

    I think low quality refereeing is extremely corrosive to football – but it’s a horribly difficult job and one I’d never want to do. Ask any kid who’s seen the home-supplied ref clearly favour his own kids. I remember doing the “that’s how it works son, get used to it and play football” speech to my 11 year old. The short comings of many refs were highlighted by our own home ref who was highly qualified and scrupulously fair – even to the point of causing family ructions by sending off his own son – to the verbal annoyance of his wife and daughter.

    Anything that is extremely corrosive to football deserves discussion here – but refing also deserves thoughtful consideration that mistakes do happen, and refs are human and do not have slow-mo replays from six cameras to make a decision over ten minutes. They are generally trying to do a difficult job to the best of their ability – and where would our game be without these strangely motivated souls? But if patterns of incompetence or bias can be demonstrated with reasonably objective evidence, I believe they should be discussed here with a very low tolerance for “we was robbed” whining.


  65. The Rangers 1 – 1 Hibernian

    Stating the obvious – but – if this had been the first game of the league it would have been a draw after 90 minutes with 22 on the pitch – all other things being equal ( 🙂 ). Not encouraging for anyone who took Ladbrokes’ 20/1 that The Rangers will complete the season unbeaten. I think they have sufficient advantages to win the league – but not at a canter – and that could be bad financial news for Wallace & Nash on the face of it – but then again it may present an opportunity to deal with the onerous contract of Mr McCoist – or as he is now more commonly known “He was a great player but, McCoist. . . “.

    McCoist has been unsackable for two seasons – but faced with a growing understanding of the issues facing NewCo, many bears now seem at ease with the concept of OldAlly and NewAlly. That is, that NewAlly can be liquidated without damaging the history, titles and glory of OldAlly.

    So £800K plus extras saved each year (I don’t believe he ever took a real pay cut) and chances are any punter picked at random from Greggs could do a better job. Kerching Mr Wallace, Kerching Mr Nash.


  66. Discussions around crowd size is only really credible for cup games. Once the league kicks off they’ll revert to the hilarious posturing that is reporting season tickets sold plus walk ins as the attendance regardless of how many actually turn up.


  67. mcfc says:
    August 6, 2014 at 2:40 pm
    ==============================

    Honest Mistake?

    Sorry, did I get that wrong – “with 22 on the pitch” – was Handling (the Hibs goal scorer) sent off 11 mins before 90 minutes or 11 minutes before 120 minutes? The BBC report is unclear.


  68. Orderings off at Ibrox might be passé on TSFM, but it appears not at Hearts 😯

    I’m not too sure it’s wise of Robbie Neilson to say this sort of thing, might just backfire, but nice to see someone involved in Scottish football uninterested in becoming a football pundit 😆

    http://www.edinburgh…ibrox-1-3500426


  69. The main issue with Refereeing is consistency.

    Last night Templeton jinked out of a few challenges but IIRC he was heading across the park in the middle of the Hibs half when challenged from behind. No intent to injure and no intent to stop a goal scoring opportunity. Merely a rash challenge that resulted in no more than a tripping of Templeton.

    As the season progresses we will all witness similar challenges, probably involving players actually heading towards goal, that will end up with just a free kick or a yellow card.Some may result in a red card.

    Even T’Rangers fans will see similar fouls against them not resulting in the opposition being sent off and will rightly wonder why no red card.

    The ref had to make a decision on the spur of the moment but that does not mean that decisions should not be scrutinised with a view to ensuring that there is a degree of consistency when his colleagues come across a similar situation. Either all refs have to give a red in similar situations or Beaton is told to calm the beans.

    The problem is that once again limited or no information appears to be given out to customers from the SFA with regard to the process by which refs performances are scrutinised.

    For those who are interested here is an article on what the NFL do.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1867480-how-are-nfl-refs-held-accountable-for-their-performance

Comments are closed.