UEFA Club Licensing. – To Comply or not to Comply ?
On 16 April 2018 The UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) adjudicatory chamber took decisions in the cases of four clubs that had been referred to it by the CFCB chief investigator, concerning the non-fulfilment of the club licensing criteria defined in the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
Such criteria must be complied with by the clubs in order to be granted the licence required to enter the UEFA club competitions.
The cases of two clubs::
Olympique des Alpes SA (Sion Switzerland )
and
FC Irtysh (Kazakhstan)
are of particular interest to those following the events under which the SFA awarded a UEFA License to Rangers FC in 2011 currently under investigation by the SFA Compliance Officer because
- The case documentation tell us how UEFA wish national associations to apply UEFA FFP rules
- The cases tell us what might have happened to Rangers FC in 2012 had they not gone into liquidation and as a consequence avoided the same type of sanctions that UEFA applied to Sion and Irtysh.
FC Sion (Olympique des Alpes SA)
Here we are told how the Swiss FL and then the UEFA CFCB acted in respect of FC Sion in 2017 where a misleading statement was made in the Sion UEFA licensing application.
Full details can be read at
but this is a summary.
In April 2017 the Swiss FL (SFL) granted a licence to Sion FC but indicated that a Disciplinary case was pending.
In July 2017 the CFCB, as part of their licence auditing programme, carried out a compliance audit on 3 clubs to determine if licences had been properly awarded. Sion was one of those clubs.
The subsequent audit by Deloitte LLP discovered Sion had an overdue payable on a player, amounting to €950,000, owed to another football club (FC Sochaux ) at 31st March 2017 as a result of a transfer undertaken by Sion before 31st December 2016, although the €950,000 was paid in early June 2017.
Deloitte produced a draft report of their findings that was passed to SFL and Sion for comment on factual accuracy and comment on the findings. Sion responded quickly enabling Deloitte to present a final report to the CFCB Investigation Unit. In response to the Deloitte final report Sion stated:
“il apparaît aujourd’hui qu’il existait bel et bien un engagement impayé découlant d’une activité de transfert. Ce point est admis” translated as
“it now appears that there was indeed an outstanding commitment arising from transfer activity. This is admitted”
What emerged as the investigation proceeded was that the Swiss FL Licensing Committee, after granting the license in April and as a result of a Sochaux complaint of non-payment to FIFA, had reason to refer Sion’s application to their Disciplinary Commission in May 2017 with regard to the submission of potentially misleading information by FC Sion to the SFL on 7th April 2017 as part of its licensing documentation.
Sion had declared
“Written confirmation: no overdue payables arising from transfer activities”, signed by the Club’s president, stating that as at 31 March 2017 there were no overdue payables towards other football clubs. In particular, the Club indicated that the case between FC Sion and FC Sochaux regarding the transfer of the player Ishmael Yartey was still under dispute.
The SFL Disciplinary Commission came to the conclusion that FC Sion had no intention to mislead the SFL, but indeed submitted some incorrect licensing documentation; the SFL Disciplinary Commission further confirmed that the total amount of €950,000 had been paid by the Club to FC Sochaux on 7 June 2017. Because of the inaccurate information submitted, the SFL Disciplinary Commission decided to impose a fine of CHF 8,000 on the Club.
Whilst this satisfied the SFL Disciplinary process the CFCB deemed it not enough to justify the granting of the licence as UEFA intended their FFP rules to be applied.
Sion provided the CFCB with a number of reasons on the basis of which no sanction should be imposed. In particular, the Club admitted that there was an overdue payable as at 31 March 2017, but stated that the mistake in the document dated 7 April 2017 was the result of a misinterpretation by the club’s responsible person for dealing with the licence (the “Club’s licence manager”), who is not a lawyer. The Club affirmed that it never had the intention to conceal the information and had provisioned the amount due for payment and that, in any case, it has already been sanctioned by the SFL for providing the wrong information.
The CFCB Investigation Unit accepted that the Sion application, although inaccurate, was a one off misrepresentation and not a forgery, (as in intended to deceive ) but that nevertheless an overdue payable did exist at 31st March and a licence should not have been granted.
Based on their findings, the CFCB Chief Investigator decided to refer the case to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber and suggested a disciplinary measure to be imposed on FC Sion by the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber, such measure consisting of a fine of €235,000, corresponding to the UEFA Revenues the Club gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
The CFCB Investigatory Chamber submitted that it was appropriate to impose a fine corresponding to all the UEFA revenues the Club gained by participating in the competition considering the fact that FC Sion should not have been admitted to the competition for failing to meet one of its admission criteria.
The Adjudicatory Chambers took all the circumstances (see paras 91 to 120 at http://tiny.cc/i8sxsy ) into consideration and reached the following key decisions.
- FC Sion failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 49(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the SFL not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Sion breached Articles 13(1) and 43(1)(i) of the CL&FFP Regulations. (Documents complete and correct)
- To exclude FC Sion from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next two (2) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19 and 2019/20).
- To impose a fine of two hundred and thirty five thousand Euros (€235,000) on FC Sion.
- FC Sion is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
It is now public knowledge that an actual liability of tax due before 31stDecember 2010 towards HMRC, was admitted by Rangers FC before 31st March 2011.
This liability was described as “potential” in Rangers Interim accounts audited by Grant Thornton.
“Note 1: The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. A provision for interest of £0.9m has also been included within the interest charge.”
The English Oxford Dictionary definition of potential is:
Having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.
Which was not true as the liability had already been “developed” so could not be potential.
This was repeated by Chairman Alistair Johnson in his covering Interim Accounts statement
“The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. “ where he also added
“Discussions are continuing with HMRC to establish a resolution to the assessments raised.”
This could be taken as disputing the liability but In fact the resolution to the assessments raised would have been payment of the actual liability, something that never happened.
In the Sion case it was accepted the misleading statement was a one off misrepresentation, but at the monitoring stages at June 2011 in Ranger’s case the status of the liability continued to be misrepresented and in September the continuing discussions reason was repeated, along with a claim of an instalment paid whose veracity is highly questionable.
The Swiss FL Licensing Committee did at least refer the case to their Disciplinary Committee when they realised a misleading statement might have been made. The SFA however in August 2011, when Sherriff Officers called at Ibrox for payment of the overdue tax , did no such thing and pulled up the drawbridge for six years, one that the Compliance Officer is now finally charged with lowering.
The case of FC Irtysh of Kazakhstan is set out in full at http://tiny.cc/y9sxsy and is a bit more straightforward but is nevertheless useful to compare with events in 2011 in Scotland.
Unlike Rangers FC , FC Irtysh properly disclosed that they had an overdue payable to the Kazakhstan tax authorities at the monitoring point at 30th June 2017. This caused the CFCB Investigatory Unit to seek further information with regard to the position at 31st March
It transpired that Irtysh had declared an overdue payable at 31st March but cited their financial position (awaiting sponsor money) as a reason for non payment to the Kazakhstan FA who accepted it and granted the licence. The outstanding tax was paid in September 2107.
The outcome of the CFCB Investigation was a case put to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber who agreed with the CFCB Investigation Unit that a licence should not have been granted and recommended that Irtysh be fined the equivalent of the UEFA prize money, (that had been withheld in any case whilst CFCB investigated.)
The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber however decided that a fine was not sufficient in sporting deterrent terms and ruled that:
- FC Irtysh failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 50bis(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the FFK not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- To withhold four hundred and forty thousand Euros (€440,000) corresponding to the UEFA revenues FC Irtysh gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
- To exclude FC Irtysh from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next three (3) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons). This sanction is deferred for a probationary period of (3) three years. This exclusion must be enforced in case the Club participates again in a UEFA club competition having not fulfilled the licence criteria required to obtain the UEFA licence in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Irtysh is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings. “
The deferral was because unlike Rangers FC, FC Irtysh had properly disclosed to the licensor the correct & accurate financial information required, so the exclusion was deferred for a probationary period of (3) years.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
From the foregoing it could be deduced that had Rangers FC qualified for the Champions League (or European League) and not gone bust as a result and so not entered liquidation BUT it became public knowledge by 2012 that a licence had been wrongly and possibly fraudulently granted then
- Rangers would have been fined the equivalent of their earnings from their participation in the UEFA competitions in 2011
- At least a two year ban from UEFA Competitions would have been imposed, but more likely three in view of repeated incorrect statements.
- The consequences of both would have been as damaging for Rangers survival as the real life consequences of losing to Malmo and Maribor in the qualifying rounds of the Champions and European Leagues.
Karma eh!
Interestingly in the UEFA COMPLIANCE AND INVESTIGATION ACTIVITY REPORT 2015 – 2017 , the CFCB investigatory chamber recommended that both the Kazakhstan FA and Swiss FA as licensors
“pay particular attention to the adequate disclosure of the outstanding amounts payable towards other football clubs, in respect of employees and towards social/tax authorities, which must be disclosed separately;
Would the same recommendation apply to the Scottish FA with regard to their performance in 2011 and will the SFA responses thereafter to shareholders in a member club be examined for compliance with best governance practice by the SFA Compliance Officer investigating the processing of the UEFA Licence in 2011?
This would be a welcome step in fully restoring trust in the SFA.
MERCDOC
Nice one!
For 2 years, Ogilvie was a Director of RFC and Treasurer of the SFA. (June 2003 – September 2005)- If that’s not a conflict of interests, I don’t know what is! Whilst at the SFA he took an £80k EBT when he “left” Rangers. I thought you had to fill in forms and apply for a “loan”. Ergo, knowledge of the scheme, how it was ran and the procedures required to get your dosh.
When you sell your soul to the devil, he has your pecker in his pocket.
John C,
you’re a bit o’ hero o’ mine, re. all the great work you do, …. thanks for the reply, ….. made ma night!!!
Portbhoy
BigBoab, What’s that Photo?
Stevie BC come in
This is for Jean,
I hate all those programmes like Love Island. They just use young good looking folk for no reason. Especially the girls.
So, just to remind us that there are a trillion girls who actually have talent, and brains. Like most of the ones I have ever known.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hqnfbkxLlo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIKAe8Wi0S0
PORTBHOYAUGUST 1, 2018 at 23:54Steerpkike, I have over a hundred of your very offensive posts from the old days. Being the gentleman I am, I would hate to embarrass just now.
———————
Post away. You will only embarrass yourself if its offensive. I’m hugely anti offence and I’m sure it goes unnoticed on here that despite constant provocation, I never resort to any sort of offense or insult anyone whilst posting on the forum.
I’m sure admin could tell if I was steer pike or slim Jim or Nick or the other guy who gets brought up also.
Ps. I’m.99% certain you are John Clark. And Jimbo. And Slimjim. And easyjambo.
Pps. 85.5% of stats are made up
CORRUPT OFFICIALAUGUST 2, 2018 at 00:15 I don’t understand how you can get to that point. SP League clubs voted “No to Newco”, and SF League clubs were adamant that the only way Sevco could join the leagues, was in the bottom division (Hence the reason Turnbull Hutton spoke out)…..Who was applying pressure, and why?….Are you saying the SFA were putting pressure on the SFA, or implying some other organisation did?
————————————-
Turnbull Hutton referenced there was pressure being put on them to vote for division 1 otherwise there was going to be a breakaway spl2. I have no idea who was applying that pressure but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the relevant heads of football in the SFA, SFL and maybe even the chairman of the SPL who would be thinking 12 months ahead when the cash would return whilst facing off to their own fans and saying “it wisnae us, we said no”
I don’t get your last question about the SFA putting pressure on the SFA.
steerpike, have a wee read, ….https://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/catholics-and-sectarian-crime-hardly-victims-by-johnbhoy-part-1/
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 2, 2018 at 04:49
————-
That is some shift on here, must have been a long day
some negative news must have emerged lately for a football club going by the return to distracting the blog with nonsensical arguments .
On a totally different subject ,how did TGASL get on with sending MA down the road with a flea in his ear ,even the most gullible of the support are waking up to the chaos hes causing over there .
Oh and there is a good piece on it on the DLP site ,worth a read
steerpike,
i’ve tried to post some of your obnoxious posts, but unfortunately, in their
wisdom the SFM will not print them, …….
PortbhoyAugust 1, 2018 at 22:46 Going through some archives there, an’ came across this, hope it’s allowed, ….https://youtu.be/ofhao4SHXGo
____________________
Thanks for that, Portbhoy, it was beautiful. Amazing how a song can say so much about the stupidity and loss of young lives that is war.
Sorry for such an OT post.
ALLYJAMBO.
No way was it an ot post, … it was excellent, and very much appreciated AJ.
Lawman
I’ll ask again as you ignored the last time
Are you making a financial donation to this blog ?
I am not prepared to subsidise your attempts to disrupt the blog with fabrication and deflection. So are you paying your way here, like many of the rest of us
yes or no
Two things
First a housekeeping suggestion to Tris and Big Pink.
Lawman’s Right
I think Lawman/Steerpyke has proved adept at hijacking this and other blogs in his / her continual cul de sacs and suggest he / she is given the accolade of his / her very own thread here which I suggest should be called Lawman’s Right
Renaissance or Requiem?
Henry McLeish whose football reviews and reports a few years ago were lauded but broadly ignored by our games administrators and club heads is launching his new book at The Edinburgh Book Festival on Wednesday morning 22 August 10 -11 am.
An ex semi-pro footballer before his political career he has a broad and balanced insight into the game and a genuine love of it from the grass roots up.
He has recently used some free time to look back so he can suggest ways forward and his Edinburgh appearance will have some insight into his book and then questions and answers.
Henry’s book is written more as a wake up call than a head-on crash with the decision makers and his book is not written from a vitriolic stance but looks at some facts in the cold light of hindsight.
He has looked back to analyse and then looked forward to suggest what needs to be done.
Copies of the book will be available on the day and its release date is sometime in September.
I wonder if anyone could shed light on the suggestion that there was a 2008 PAYE audit carried out by HMRC which resulted in a substantial settlement (around £0.3m).
The audit is said to have been a consequence of a “Full Compliance Review” covering dates from 1996 to 2004.
It may be that this stuff has been lost in the sea of documentation and allegation over the last few years but I hadn’t heard about it until a few weeks ago.
PORTBHOYAUGUST 2, 2018 at 07:00steerpike, have a wee read, ….https://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/catholics-and-sectarian-crime-hardly-victims-by-johnbhoy-part-1/
_____________________________________________________________________
I had a read at that and got half way down to this point where Steerpike was claimed to have said “… I am convinced you are a spastic…”
I have zero reason to disbelieve that was said as i dont think Paul McConville would have allowed it to be said if it wasnt true. I read a lot of the stuff from Pauls blogs and he came across as being more sensible than most. I even used to exchange emails with him a lot on topics. He had my respect.
Its the worst insult any human being in my circle could use. Takes a lot for me to be angry and people using sectarian derogatory terms or calling people bassas or such like really dont upset me. I pity them.
Call anyone a spastic or use that in a derogatory manner, and my inner David Banner will come out.
Its vile.
So at the risk of a sanction on here you can take that disgusting accusation and ram it where the sun dont shine portbhoy.
I only have one comment on Spoutpish and his history.
?
I should make it clear that this is not in the TU/TD sense.
I mean in the sense used in the Colosseum.
Guys we are aware of the frustrations surrounding Lawman and his obfuscation. He was doing a major back/night shift yesterday but we really don’t want to be creating any martyrs here.
Lawman was taken out of moderation yesterday after a promise to be civil. He has certainly grasped the opportunity to devour some bandwidth 🙂
Like Finloch says, it is a pointless argument that uses disinformation and cherry-picked threads to take us into an endless loop of nihilstic nonsense, but a little bit of discipline would thin it out a bit.
Perhaps Tris will agree that a dedicated thread might be appropriate.
Maybe he should only be allowed to post when accompanied by his social worker
Finloch
Lawman has a clear purpose on here. It is not to be an honest broker. It is to hijack using fabrication and misrepresentation.
In yet another of his guises ( on twitter ) he was slapped down by fellow Rangers fans for his attempts to misrepresent the implications of the Sports Direct legal judgement . He was shown to be ignoring the most relevent parts of the agreement , in order to further his incorrect position. Thats a tactic he uses on here frequently .
I just don’t believe his claims. He claims significant expertise in mergers and acquisition , close connections at Ibrox, so close that he was an uncalled witness for the Whyte trial.
The difference between twitter , which is free to use and has muting and blocking facilities , and this blog is significant . This blog requires financial contributions of it’s participants . It has no blocking and muting for anyone who isn’t a mod . I’m comfortable with the financial contribution model and also comfortable with the mods access role . However i’m not comfortable with anyone who’s mission is to undermine the blog . Doubly so if the disruptor is not making the appropriate financial support . For all of his guises
BP
There is a risk to the blog . Why would the financial contributors continue to support when Lawman is actively trying to undermine the blog and being allowed to do so ?
It’s clear to me from reading recently that many of our best contributors are more than fed up with his behaviour and motives .
Theres a certain irony in this. ;You have misrepresented me twice blatantly in the last 24 hours though i notice you never directly reply to my points.
Im afraid i havent been slapped down by anyone. The writer of the article disagrees with me and we calmly debated the merits. He believes that SD can match the new offer but still under the same terms as the current offer. I think thats ridiculous and have pointed out why the judge referred to infinite renewals. Ive not ignored any part of the agreement and ive stated my case. DLP still disagrees with me though its funny he is now being used as a poster boy considering if you go back a month or so ago, everyone on here was ridiculing him.
My involvement in the Whyte case was as a concerned fan who wouldnt stop knocking his door to ask the difficult questions the people on here constantly deride the SMSM for not doing so. I constantly bombarded both him and his solicitors to get answers about his non investment, his mortgaging of season ticket money, the loan directly from Ticketus to Rangers THEN to Wavetower to pay off the Lloyds loan which was supposed to come directly from Whyte. And it eventually involved a close acquaintance who was working with me and others on it door-stopping him 4 days before he pulled the trigger in February 2012. He had nowhere to run. I was fighting the fight and it was due to my emails etc that i spent 2 days giving evidence in Gartcosh.
Is this a bad thing ? Should the actions not be commended rather than be subject to derision ?
My mission is not to undermine the blog. The last 24 hours has descended because someone asked me my opinion on Ogilvie and i said i didnt care about him. I was then asked WHY i didnt care and i answered. I was then told i should care because he was responsible for the mess to which i opined that i didnt see it that way. Then others jumped in and started to say i was lying and making accusations.
Can i ask what you expect me to do in that situation Barca ? If i dont respond, people would just say “he isnt responding because he is lying”
As Big Pink has noted above, if you dont want me to give my views on a subject, use discipline and dont ask me about it. I never brought all this stuff up yesterday. I was only being civil and courteous by answering.
Jeez lm2 back again guess there must be a lot of coffee or some other stimulant on the go or maybe twins. I think I will head off again until the squirrels go.
Lawman
Another example of misrepresentation . The guy who really put you in your place on twitter was not DLP as you must be aware . It was someone called weerthepeople.
You still haven’t answered whether you support this blog financially . Until you state whether you do or you don’t then i’m not responding to anything you put out .
BARCABHOYAUGUST 2, 2018 at 10:48Lawman
Another example of misrepresentation . The guy who really put you in your place on twitter was not DLP as you must be aware . It was someone called weerthepeople.
You still haven’t answered whether you support this blog financially . Until you state whether you do or you don’t then i’m not responding to anything you put out .
________________________________________________________________
Well thats really strange. I have went through my full notifications and none of his replies are there at all. though when i search his name i can see his replies so there must be some sort of block somewhere that prevented it coming through.To be fair, his claims are more solid than DLP who wasnt using that thinking. I actually agree with him that if the court do not see the other retail deal as a valid offer then the auto renewal applies on the same terms as is existing. No issues with that view whatsoever. Having read the courts summation though, i dont believe thats where they are because they continue to talk about SD matching the offer.
As for contributing financially to the blog then NO i havent. I have been in moderation from pretty much the start so much of my comments appear hours after people have moved on and are 20+ posts ahead. I would like to think its only fair that once im consistently on an even basis with all posters who have posted for months without moderation, then the requirement to contribute could be levelled at me.
Bloody hell…always the same whenever really bad news hits/is about to hit down Ibrox way.
BP, I hear what you’re saying about martyrs, but it’s making the blog virtually unreadable.
There is no doubt that the posters on SFM need to have their arguments and beliefs challenged but that challenge should be fact based and objective and should contribute to the overall knowledge of all of the readers of the blog. What is occurring at the moment is Pigeon Chess and the blog is really suffering as a result.
NB – Pigeon Chess: debating with The Lawman is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; no matter what logical and expert plays one makes, he knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to his flock to claim victory.
bobcobbAugust 2, 2018 at 11:52
Fair doos….
I agree with those calling for a curb on L2.
This is not censorship. It is to protect the blog from deliberate sabotage.
His presence here is meant to derail, as it is obvious that he is an intelligent person.
Being intelligent, he knows that what he is trying to sell is nonsense.
He reminds me of a barrister, addressing a jury in defence of an obviously guilty party.
He attempts to sow a seed of doubt in the jury’s mind and appeals to their sense of “fair play”, to give his client the benefit of the doubt.
Unfortunately for L2, the case against his clients, I’m guessing D.Murray, Ogilvie and any of the original RRM, is overwhelming and has been tested in Courts and Tribunals up and down the land.
He is peddling, what in modern terms, has become known as Fake News and I believe that SFM deserves to be protected from that.
As Barcabhoy alludes to, many of us contribute to the upkeep of this blog and we expect to contribute to a clean blog, where everyone posts from a position of honesty, no matter how contrary others find their points of view.
I don’t consider this an ad hom, as I believe the ball was there to be played.
I’ve come across folk like L2 elsewhere. It really doesn’t matter how well you respond or how evidenced-based that might be, there is always some angle they pursue or – in many cases I’ve experienced – they are completely immune to what is usually a mountain of evidence against their case/position.
Whether this is because they are a troll, a paid agent provocateur or simply because they are blinkered I don’t know. It doesn’t really matter.
Having wasted time and energy with these folks in the past I now just don’t engage. At some point reality will catch up with them.
Karmageddon, perhaps.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
The Toxicity of CL Qualifying games. From a Celtic fan perspective.
Two reasons why I hate watching games in the CL qualifying where end result is in the balance as in one goal for the opposition adds to the stress.
1. The consequences of failure for the future financial and emotional well being of Celtic and the support are so huge that only in football would you have such a crazy business model. Instead of Financial Fair Play there should be fair play and all champions should play in a qualifying round unseeded. By God would that curb wage bills if big clubs are faced with the kind of decisions clubs like Celtic are. It’s a model that puts clubs out of business as we well know. The fact it was Rangers is a source of glee to Celtic fans but UEFA have created the very conditions that FFP is supposed to prevent or control. That’s my first beef.
2. The football on show is invariably crap. It’s not about winning it’s about not losing and by definition that does not create attractive performances. Even last season in the SPFL that we won I didn’t enjoy the game because on the day the football was crap. Some team selections last year were influenced by an upcoming midweek CL fixture. It’s toxicity is everywhere.
It is just part of the corruption that money has brought to what is supposed to be a sport and I’ll be glad when this toothache of qualifying is over, so I can get back to enjoying football a lot more than I do at this stage of the season.
redlichtieAugust 2, 2018 at 13:28
While I can fully understand the clamour to rid SFM of the Lawman2, an old maxim springs to mind.
To me, all that Lawman2 has succeeded in doing is showing just how bereft of compelling arguments he really is. He is inadvertently making the consensus view on SFM all the more convincing. Having said that, maybe it’s time for him to take a break and reinvent himself again, particularly as he managed to annoy somebody as knowledgeable and normally placid as easyJambo.
In many ways Lawman2 reminds me of a more polite and articulate version of the bumbling oaf that is Jim Traynor (sincere apologies Lawman if that comes across as ad hominem, there can be no bigger insult than to be likened to the arch-buffoon) who deludes himself into believing that he is actually converting people into swallowing his flat-earth nonsense.
While I’m here, Auldheid (AUGUST 2, 2018 at 13:56), spare a thought for those of us who support clubs who’ll never likely encounter the Champions League problems you highlight, but would be delighted to do so.
Lawman
I’ll give you credit for responding to my last questions
However until you make a substantail contribution to the running costs of this blog I won’t be responding further.
Whether you are in moderation or not , you use up more space on here , in various guises , than just about anyone else
so for me it’s time that you pay up or shut up
The rest of us are not here to subsidise you ,
and personally speaking I won’t from here on
LM2
Links ?
PADDY MALARKEYAUGUST 2, 2018 at 15:21LM2Links ?
Links Paddy? 🙂
Easy Jambo
This turned up today. A link to an RTC blog that explained DOS ebts and how it worked.
Basically it was a means of evading tax by paying wages through an elaborate trust money box or should it be washing machine?.
https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2011/10/18/the-wee-tax-bill-a-scam-explored/
In relation to Moore’s absence from the final wee tax bill the side letters or their absence played two crucial parts as you know, but others might not.
1. The denial of their existence allowed HMRC to pursue payment after the normal 6 year period for doing so had elapsed. HMRC were in extended time limit territory. there was no side letter for Moore so he was dropped in negotiations.
2. The side letters that were not a feature of AAM’s use of DOS, allowed HMRC to treat the ebts as wages that should have been subject to PAYE and the estimate based on that approach was different from the one based on DOS ebts alone. If memory serves me right the AAM estimate was for £2.2m and the PAYE estimate including Moore was for £3.1m. However after the adjustments of the missing sum for De Boer added but Moore’s removed the £2.8m figure was finally agreed.
The Lawman is right in that Ogilvie took no part in subsequent administration of ebts of either type but he was aware there were two kinds and that they were different and DOS unlawful, but it appears he never thought to mention this in his testimony to LNS, which is strange given a reference to the wee tax case in Dec 2011 by Regan caused Ogilvie, still SFA President at that point and before Hugh McAdam spilt the beans on side letters in Feb 2012 , to be invited to a hastily arranged dinner with Craig Whyte, Ali Russell and Regan.
The idea that he and Andrew Dickson, who briefed Regan in early December on the wee tax case issue, had no knowledge of the DOS ebts stretches credibility beyond breaking point. It has all been covered by CQN at
https://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/persistence-beats-resi2tance-the-men-in-the-room/
Since its publication the following could easily be added putting the two men firmly in the room.
” Dickson was another MMGRT recipient like Ogilvie who too gave testimony to LNS but in writing, that did not cover his knowledge of the difference between the De Boer ebts and his own, as was revealed in his testimony to the FTT on the use of the MGMRT ebts. There he admitted to the FTT under questioning to having to convince Ronald De Boer and his agent that De Boer should move from the DOS arrangement to the MGMRT one in 2003
Failure to clarify on the two types of ebts by Campbell Ogilvie, who instigated the first type and received £95K from the second in his testimony to the FTT and Dickson in his testimony meant the Decision by Lord Nimmo Smith was fatally flawed.
However the SFA, who should have been given sight of the 20th May 2011 HMRC letter immediately it was received at Ibrox under UEFA FFP rules where Andrew Dickson was still employed , rejected the request, not wanting to “rake over the coals” ”
You can all see why.
HighlanderAugust 2, 2018 at 14:34 (Edit)
Yup Lawman has been very helpful, an unknowing “devils advocate separating the wheat from the chaff” sort of way.
Rumsfeld springs to mind.
” Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.[1] ”
I anticipated your comment re other clubs supporters being delighted to encounter the same issues and I do understand why.
In my defence I’ve advocated a different way of distributing CL money in Scotland that gives the winners less and those, without whose presence they could not be winners, more. That in turn might improve their chances in Europe and help the all round co efficient but to work it would have to be pan European.
There will never be equal distribution of prize money but a greater equilibrium is needed to be fairer if not 100% fair.
Wait until you are watching a poor game behind a couch to see if its something you would be delighted to experience and I imagine getting humped by 6 or 7 goals is something you may have experienced and not enjoyed. I didn’t.
I know the pain
I have to confess that I’m not a fan of Lawman’s contributions to the blog as I view most of his contribution to be pedantry, days seem to be spent arguing over the minutiae of issues to the point that the bigger picture is lost completely.
The whole debate over whether he should be allowed to post and the subsequent impact on the blog does raise two points for me though.
Firstly the fact that there even is a debate over whether a guy who’s a bore but an undeniably civil bore should be allowed to post highlights that the blog does suffer from group-think and that not everyone is bought into the ethos of this being a non-partisan website. I would say it’s to the immense credit of the mods that they have resisted this and allowed Lawman still to contribute.
Secondly it’s often said Lawman “derails” the blog and it becomes all about him. It does but that isn’t his fault, if someone is prone to pedantry then if you ask them something or challenge them on something then they simply cannot ignore it and will respond, 80% of his stuff for the last two days has been responding to questions from posters. The consensus suggests his opinion isn’t valued so why quiz him on his views and drag it out?
I say this as someone who agrees with the central thrust of what this blog stands for but sometimes disagree with the consensus view on certain points. Not being part of that consensus is actually not always a pleasant position to take on this forum, I’ve been accused of lying about what team I support, being a PR operative (the Level 5 conspiracy is a favourite) and subjected to personal insults (generally quickly dealt with by mods) for really innocuous opinions. In fairness this is very mild compared to the stuff dealt out on any other Scottish football forum.
Some of you (many of you) may dislike my somewhat lighthearted contrarian contributions but the fact I’m allowed to make them is what makes this website different from your stereotypical forum. We should all fight to defend that as I don’t think any of us want this to become just another partisan football forum. Within that context you still have every right to ignore people like Lawman and not encourage him by adopting the Paxman role, especially if you’ve already decided his views have no merit.
Pedantry and lack of ability to see the bigger picture should not be reasons to stop anyone from posting.
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:11″So many comments in the last 12 hours or so about me defending my club but I only defend them when i believe its justified…
Using EBTs – Never defend that.”
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 1, 2018 at 16:24
Citing celtic quick news
“The chargeable sums for just these two players alone amounted to £2.8 Million plus and the debt had started to accrue over a decade before. HMRC had discussed this with MIH and Rangers PLC officials at length, had written to them repeatedly, and by this time they were scunnered!
This sum formed the basis of what is known as The Wee Tax Case and was based upon Rangers operation of what were known as DOS based EBT’s.”
Does the “never defend” using EBTS apply to DOS EBTS too?
Auldheid August 2, 2018 at 16:00
Easy Jambo
This turned up today. A link to an RTC blog that explained DOS ebts and how it worked. Basically it was a means of evading tax by paying wages through an elaborate trust money box or should it be washing machine?. https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2011/10/18/the-wee-tax-bill-a-scam-explored/
===============================
Thanks for the link.
RTC’s description of the scheme shares elements of the AAM scheme, but isn’t identical to it, e.g. in AAM each director’s shares were in separate companies and each director also had multiple companies formed for receipt the EBT funds. However, the key transactions in the funding of the EBT, the use of share options to dilute the share value, and the allocation of the shares in the money box company to the individual employees were similar, thus the scheme offered the perceived tax advantages.
———————————————
The change from “AAM terms” to grossing up under PAYE because the side letters specified “net” amounts, as you say, saw the bill increase from £2.2m to £3.2m, then through negotiation to an agreed payable of £2.8m.
Reflecting back on the criminal trial and Donald Findlay’s questioning, I can now see that he managed to provide the jury with an illusion that the amount payable had risen from £2.2m to £2.8m through inaction by the RFC directors. The impression I (and the jury?) got was that the amount had gone up due to interest and charges during the intervening months, rather than through a change to the calculation as a result of the side letters.
None of the directors, questioned about it, sought either to challenge or explain Findlay’s assertion. They simply acknowledged that the bill had gone up. You could speculate about various reasons why no-one sought to provide the court with a full and accurate account of what actually went on between November 2010 and March 2011. Given the involvement of McGill, McIntyre and Horne at various stages with HMRC, any of them could have put the record straight, but all passed up on the opportunity.
I Have posted on here most pr,oberly 4 time since TSFM started but have followed every day almost. Now being English but having many Rangers friends and we all live in Australia,The Rangers saga has been a bone of contension. I cannot believe the amount of forensic investigation that your main subscribers come up with.They would put any reporter on the papers to shame. The Question is how long can this saga go on before the last few people drop off.From my point of view The SFA and the PREMIER League of Scottish Football have no inclination to upset the apple cart. Rangers maybe a busted flush but no one is going to pull the plug on them,So let them fail and get bought to justice. Meanwhile let TSFM become a beacon for the future of Scottish football .By the way im a West Ham Supporter
EASYJAMBO
Reflecting back on the criminal trial and Donald Findlay’s questioning, I can now see that he managed to provide the jury with an illusion that the amount payable had risen from £2.2m to £2.8m through inaction by the RFC directors. The impression I (and the jury?) got was that the amount had gone up due to interest and charges during the intervening months, rather than through a change to the calculation as a result of the side letters.
______________________________________________________________
DF created many illusions during the trial.
The ultimate one being that selling 100,000 season tickets to Ticketus to pay off Lloyds Bank was to the benefit of Rangers because it saved us £1m per year.
The £26m debt it put us in to them didnt matter, because we saved £1m a year on a Term Loan payment.
It does prove though that not everything said in court is the truth of course.
Predictably, out come L2’s wingmen. Reasonable, urbane chaps that they are. It must be getting serious over by.
RMCGEDDAWN
Does the “never defend” using EBTS apply to DOS EBTS too?
__________________________________________________
Yes it does. We should not have touched any EBTS for any member of staff anywhere. Each and every one of them was a wrong decision made by Murray.
Borderman 15.47
Cheers ,mate !
THOMTHETHIMAUGUST 2, 2018 at 18:06Predictably, out come L2’s wingmen. Reasonable, urbane chaps that they are. It must be getting serious over by.
—————————–
It’s been serious for years. We flirt from disaster to disaster off the park.
You do realise I’m known as one of Kings biggest haters and don’t believe he should be anywhere near the club yeah?
TheLawMan2August 2, 2018 at 18:20
Lawman. It’s time for beet the pundit.
But I will be back shortly!
Being a complete neutral on here, I would love to see Aberdeen and Hibs winning tonight.
AULDHEIDAUGUST 2, 2018 at 16:00
Ogilvie, still SFA President at that point and before Hugh McAdam spilt the beans on side letters in Feb 2012 ,
——————
Is it Hugh Adam or Hugh McAdam,or is it two different people?
Anyway Hugh Adam feb 17,2012, but i’m sure i have a better one somewhere.
Just watching the Rangers game on Premier Sports. I didn’t know they had “We Are The People” above the tunnel on the way out onto the park.
Clearly it is a club motto, I always thought it was just a fans thing.
Is it something the club adopted recently.
HOMUNCULUS
if it is written in crayon then it was jimmy bell
Can anyone tell me why Scotland is the only country where football rivalry MUST be set aside in Europe? Derek Rae, a fine commentator, is the latest to lecture us on Twitter about wanting rivals to lose in Europe. Yet in the same thread he says it’s fine for e.g Liverpool and Man Utd fans to feel that way about each other because they ‘play in a league that has everything’. Bizarre!
Easy Jambo
Not only did Findlay convince the jury that increase was due to tardiness by Rangers he told jury the wtc was being appealed. Well that is how it was reported on Twitter at the time.
If it’s true Findlay misled the jury as it was only the penalty that was under appeal, not the full amount.
There was no appeal against the full amount by 31st March 2011. That process was done and dusted before then.
Everything after the Sherriff Officers turned up was blowing smoke in people’s eyes
Olverman kept the myth going in the RFC application for a UEFA licence in 2012 to the SFA.
This time SFA were not buying it and the penalty appeal was dismissed by HMRC a few days before RFC entered ad.inistration.
Cluster One
Looks like I tarred Adams and McAdam with the same brush.?
AULDHEIDAUGUST 2, 2018 at 22:01Cluster OneLooks like I tarred Adams and McAdam with the same brush
—————–
Understand
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 2, 2018 at 18:20
Yes it does. We should not have touched any EBTS for any member of staff anywhere. Each and every one of them was a wrong decision made by Murray.
was a wrong decision made by Murray. NOT CHEATING then
Was it just the wrong decision because he got caught .
You seem to be alluding to the existence of 80 ,or so ,side letters to win your argument earlier ,well if you believe there was 80 side letters you must believe that ragers 1872 cheated HMRC and Scottish football for over ten years because as soon as a side letter was issued tax was due .
IMO the club knew what they were doing when they were doing it and deliberately went about concealing the side letters , I think you also know this but play down the seriousness of the EBT’s to merely poor judgement .
It is things like this that lead me to the conclusion you are not on this blog to defend your clubs in any debate ,for me you have an agenda for being on here and distraction is part of that agenda .
Felt sorry for Aberdeen tonight after a decent performance against Burnley.
Then I remembered Shay Logan played for them.
Fan of Football,
I agree and for me, L2’s agenda is to protect the RFC IL old guard, including SFA placemen.
Everyone post 2011, is expendable.
i wonder who is signing off on his time sheet?
Rather than being distracted by things that the Supreme court have already ruled on I don’t see much discussion on the share issue that King promised or his inability to open a UK bank account after 3 months since promising he would. These to me are the crucial issues that will determine whether the club* sink or swim.
Nobody in the msm seems to be questioning either of these issues (surprise surprise) so that to me is what we should concentrate on. The share issue is crucial to funding the deficit , King’s guarantees to auditors are also crucial to the accounts being signed off , considering his issues in getting any money out of S.A. to comply with TOP how can auditors accept his promises? Outgoings have risen dramatically ,payoffs to Alves etc are no doubt staggered rather than lump sum but still add up over the course of the year. Retail issues seem set to drag on for the foreseeable future and with the English window closing soon any hope of flogging a dud or 2 for big money is closing quickly although that lucrative Chinese market is always an option. The sums don’t add up and I doubt a group stage place in the Europa will be enough to balance the books. There’s also a potential cold shoulder imminent and those pesky roofs haven’t fixed themselves.
Well done Hibs.
Unlucky Aberdeen, but great goal from the youngster.
And then there’s TRFC…
IMO, the Ibrox shouldn’t be anywhere near the Europa cup, and cheating other SPL teams of European experience.
But more importantly, IMO;
– at the weekend there was public disorder in the streets
– tonight there was more serious public disorder in the streets.
One club’s fans are the common denominator.
Bad publicity for Scottish football across England at the weekend.
Bad publicity in Europe / UEFA tonight for Scottish football.
Does the inept SFA have any comment?
THOMTHETHIM AUGUST 2, 2018 at 23:31
My thoughts exactly
you really don’t understand how donations sites work do you?
Another great week for Scottish teams in Europe. Hibs and Rangers both have a genuine chance to reach the group stages now although Molde and Maribor will be tough games. You would have to fancy Celtic to make the group stage again in the big cup with the way they are playing as well.
Really felt sorry for Aberdeen, their performances surpassed all expectations given Burnley have megabucks available. A real feather in the cap for Derek McInnes as well given how highly rated Sean Dyche is.
Only slight fly in the ointment is that Hibs and Rangers conceding equalisers will slightly limit the co-efficient gains as results in individual matches contribute to that. As a collective though surely this is the best Scottish showing in Europe since Aberdeen reached the UEFA group stages back in 2007?
A question for the lawman2
Can you confirm you’re nickname is after Nicky Law the former Rangers player and nothing to with you being a expert is all things legal?
BILL1903AUGUST 3, 2018 at 09:29A question for the lawman2Can you confirm you’re nickname is after Nicky Law the former Rangers player and nothing to with you being a expert is all things legal?
________________________________________________________________
That is correct Bill.
I haven’t, as yet, come across any report that mentions the nationality of the two men stabbed at Ibrox last night.
I suspect they were Croatian. The press hiding the fact TRFC fans were the culprits.
Now, if it had been the other way about…….
HS
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 3, 2018 at 09:34BILL1903AUGUST 3, 2018 at 09:29A question for the lawman2Can you confirm you’re nickname is after Nicky Law the former Rangers player and nothing to with you being a expert is all things legal?________________________________________________________________
That is correct Bill.
————————————-
I’m only glad you weren’t a fan of Ian Black or Vladimir Weise as it would’ve been even more confusing.
Poor choice of words from the Scottish Police Federation following the disturbance in Edmiston Drive last night. I’m pretty sure serious football has been going on for a few weeks now and the blame seems to be on all of Scottish football.
https://twitter.com/scotspolfed/status/1025304023371526144?s=21
Phil has a new post up : https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/08/02/an-unconditional-favourable-settlement/
On the basis that this is accurate, and I have no doubt that is the case, then this is another amateur hour and costly performance by DCK and his world-class team.
I’m particularly amused by the ‘no boycott’ clause apparently being inserted in the new contract.
PM’s reported participation in the SDI meeting delegation was interesting. I’m assuming that the parties named as defendants (DCK, PM, RIFC & TRFC) may well have been jointly and severally liable should SDI succeed with their case.
If that was indeed the situation then PM was probably facing a personal financial Armageddon.
TRFC/RIFC may too have some serious financial issues facing them if JDS are able to mount a case for recovery of costs and loss of future profit.
And who will carry the can at TRFC/RIFC for all of this?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
fan of footballAugust 2, 2018 at 22:24 THELAWMAN2AUGUST 2, 2018 at 18:20Yes it does. We should not have touched any EBTS for any member of staff anywhere. Each and every one of them was a wrong decision made by Murray.was a wrong decision made by Murray. NOT CHEATING thenWas it just the wrong decision because he got caught .You seem to be alluding to the existence of 80 ,or so ,side letters to win your argument earlier ,well if you believe there was 80 side letters you must believe that ragers 1872 cheated HMRC and Scottish football for over ten years because as soon as a side letter was issued tax was due .IMO the club knew what they were doing when they were doing it and deliberately went about concealing the side letters , I think you also know this but play down the seriousness of the EBT’s to merely poor judgement .It is things like this that lead me to the conclusion you are not on this blog to defend your clubs in any debate ,for me you have an agenda for being on here and distraction is part of that agenda .
______________________
Good post, FoF, but…
Innocent people always hide evidence, didn’t you know that?
Didn’t you know that a company is only guilty of fraud if everyone in the boardroom is aware of that fraud?
Didn’t you know that a football club is only cheating if everyone in the boardroom is aware that the actions the club is taking is cheating?
Didn’t you know that all the directors and office bearers of a company, or football club, are not duty bound, morally and under law, to accept responsibility for all the actions of their company, or football club?
Didn’t you know that what I’ve just said is a load of bollocks, but is what people representing the interests of those who have failed in their duty as a football club’s directors and office bearers would like us all to accept and believe? Or, at least, to give those visitors to the blog, who support a club whose directors have all acted either dishonestly or negligently, some comfort and reason not to turn their bile towards those who’ve let them down instead of those who have done them no more harm than to enjoy their misery after the damage was done?