SPL Season 2010-2011 **Spoilers** (Read the Rules Before Posting) - Please read new additions to ru

[Jokester]

Dont let facts get in the way eh?

The facts are, journalists are reporting that the chairman did in fact admit that if they lose the case they will likely go bust. Even if he didn't admit this, this is still the case and had been known about for months now.

Rangers are hardly going to say anything other than they're confident in winning the case because of that are they as they've got no choice in facing HMRC in court.

 

[McMav]

Yes the Journalists are saying that I have however posted the report from the full board at Rangers stating that he infact has never SAID that.

 

[afraser2k]

It was more the nod of the head from the chairman when asked the question. It's the same thing that eventually caused the row on the radio between Jim Traynor and Chick Young.

In other news the SPL have announced Easter Sunday as the date for the final Old Firm game of the season as weekend holidays are on either side of it: Source. Either way it's going to be a nightmare that weekend.

 

[lordfletch]

The facts are, journalists are reporting that the chairman did in fact admit that if they lose the case they will likely go bust. Even if he didn't admit this, this is still the case and had been known about for months now.

Rangers are hardly going to say anything other than they're confident in winning the case because of that are they as they've got no choice in facing HMRC in court.

how do you know that rangers will go bust if they lose the tax case (if its even rangers who have a case to answer) , you dont know this , where are your hard facts?

 

[doopydug]

Anyone know where I can watch the Celtic game on line?

 

[Jokester]

how do you know that rangers will go bust if they lose the tax case (if its even rangers who have a case to answer) , you dont know this , where are your hard facts?

Because getting hit by a £50m tax bill will force them into administration, RFC were struggling with £30m of debt, if they get hit by the full £50m on top of the existing debt (so totalling £70m or so by the end of this year) it's a totally different ball game, even if they are able to fund it full stop. To avoid it they need someone who can write that kind of money off, is Whyte willing and able to do so?

The key issue with the case is whether the way RFC paid their players (their employees which will be a key point that HMRC will argue in court) via these funds that they set up via a 3rd party was in fact a tax avoidance scheme to reduce their income tax and NI payments. There is no prior precedence in terms of case law as regards this so it's no different to what so called tax specialists were arguing about IR35 related setups before HMRC started winning court cases.

Yes the Journalists are saying that I have however posted the report from the full board at Rangers stating that he infact has never SAID that.

Indeed, he never SAID that. But he intimated it by nodding in response to the question.

 

[doopydug]

......aaaand back to the top we go.

Sounded like a straight forward win at Parkhead - should have been by a greater margin.

Motherwell steamrollering on too - very impressive

Aberdeen....what can I say?

 

[eddiemcgarrigle]

Jokester, you'd be as well to hit your head off of a brick wall. There is no admittance among the Rangers support on this board that they even have a tax case to defend against. Deny, deny, deny.

The argument between Chick Young and James Traynor is testament to this. A nod is as good as a wink is an old saying but it rings true here. Alastair Johnston nodded in agreement when asked if the case against the Tax Man could force Rangers out of business if they lost. He has now denied he said anything of the sort, which is true in a sense, but there are seven journos who all account for the somber proceedings when he nodded the answer to the tax question. Deny, deny, deny. Do we see a theme here?

Anyhoo, Celtic back on top with a demolition of Hibs. We should have won by a greater margin but weird and wonderful decisions by the referee stifled play somewhat.

 

[afraser2k]

......aaaand back to the top we go.

Sounded like a straight forward win at Parkhead - should have been by a greater margin.

Motherwell steamrollering on too - very impressive

Aberdeen....what can I say?

Sounded like Hibs were woeful and Celtic getting two penalties in the game. Just wonder if Samaras is back to his old self after getting his new contract and that's why he's on the bench? Also, good to see Ljunberg getting a bit of a game even as a late sub.

Aberdeen vs Hibs looks like a nervy encounter for this weekends fixtures.

 

[Ahleckz]

*sigh* we lost again. Guess we'll just have to hammer Celtic in the Cup Semi and eventually get some silverwear back into Pittodrie... Hey! A man can dream, right?

 

[lordfletch]

Because getting hit by a £50m tax bill will force them into administration, RFC were struggling with £30m of debt, if they get hit by the full £50m on top of the existing debt (so totalling £70m or so by the end of this year) it's a totally different ball game, even if they are able to fund it full stop. To avoid it they need someone who can write that kind of money off, is Whyte willing and able to do so?

The key issue with the case is whether the way RFC paid their players (their employees which will be a key point that HMRC will argue in court) via these funds that they set up via a 3rd party was in fact a tax avoidance scheme to reduce their income tax and NI payments. There is no prior precedence in terms of case law as regards this so it's no different to what so called tax specialists were arguing about IR35 related setups before HMRC started winning court cases.

rangers are not struggeling with £30m debt, and where did you pull this magical £50m tax liability from ? deal in facts please not speculation.

 

[Haiku]

Sounded like Hibs were woeful...

That seems to have been the case, particularly in the first half. Although with Hibs fielding such an unfamiliar and inexperienced back four, Celtic were bound to score goals.

In unrelated news, Rangers face UEFA sectarian charge. UEFA should clobber them if the allegations are true. Isn't this about the fourth or fifth such case in as many years?

 

[afraser2k]

In unrelated news, Rangers face UEFA sectarian charge. UEFA should clobber them if the allegations are true. Isn't this about the fourth or fifth such case in as many years?

Sounds about right, though I think it's laughable that they only seem to target Rangers fans for sectarian singing out of our SPL clubs when they're in Europe. Plenty of our other clubs fans have sections of support who do it.

 

[davestar_delux]

Sounds about right, though I think it's laughable that they only seem to target Rangers fans for sectarian singing out of our SPL clubs when they're in Europe. Plenty of our other clubs fans have sections of support who do it.

Agreed, Hearts and Motherwell should be looked at by UEFA next time they are in Europe. And in the meantime by the SFA but they are fairly useless.

 

[Nor]

I'd rather see the SFA charged instead of Rangers. Rangers need to do more, but they have done significantly more than the SFA have ever done. Another embarrassment for the Scottish game this

 

[davestar_delux]

I'd rather see the SFA charged instead of Rangers. Rangers need to do more, but they have done significantly more than the SFA have ever done. Another embarrassment for the Scottish game this

Rangers pay it lip service but no more as if they really cracked down they would lose business.

Martin Bain came out today and said the same things people on this thread are saying, "other people do it too" which is frankly a pathetic and childish argument that makes it seem okay and fails to deal with the problem.

What he should be saying is, it's disgusting, outdated, we don't approve of it and from here on in we will be identifying people singing it and banning them one by one until the rest get the message.

 

[afraser2k]

Rangers pay it lip service but no more as if they really cracked down they would lose business.

Martin Bain came out today and said the same things people on this thread are saying, "other people do it too" which is frankly a pathetic and childish argument that makes it seem okay and fails to deal with the problem.

What he should be saying is, it's disgusting, outdated, we don't approve of it and from here on in we will be identifying people singing it and banning them one by one until the rest get the message.

Agreed, unfortunately the police have already said that there's not much they can do about the problem due to the number of people that sing and that it would just cause more trouble than they can handle. This is just encouraging more fans to sing them.

In the end it's up to the SPL to start fining/docking points of any club whose fans are found to be singing sectarian songs but a lot of the other clubs will be fearful of any precedence set.

 

[davestar_delux]

Agreed, unfortunately the police have already said that there's not much they can do about the problem due to the number of people that sing and that it would just cause more trouble than they can handle. This is just encouraging more fans to sing them.

In the end it's up to the SPL to start fining/docking points of any club whose fans are found to be singing sectarian songs but a lot of the other clubs will be fearful of any precedence set.

Docking points is an idea but it's not the players on the parks fault. And any club singing sectarian stuff should be fearful - I don't think that should be a deterrent to taking action.

I'm sure the police could manage if they tried. It is their job after all. They could take peoples details, arrest them afterwards or simply identify them and arrest them at home, or inform Rangers who could letter them saying they are banned, their season book revoked and not to attend the ground, they'll be identified on entry etc.

They could also get the details of the Internet types who engage in the same thing on Rangers forums and have them done as I think that contributes a lot to the problem as well.

 

[Jokester]

rangers are not struggeling with £30m debt, and where did you pull this magical £50m tax liability from ? deal in facts please not speculation.

They were more in debt than they were now (£27m now is it?). The £50m figure is the potential cost once the tax liability and PENALTIES are added to it. Let's be clear about this, HMRC have only went after RFC as a test case because RFC can't afford to settle out of court. If HMRC wins, they will go after other clubs that were practicing these sort of payment schemes - who else were doing this? Celtic? Aberdeen? big English clubs like Man Utd or Chelsea?

 

[McMav]

They were more in debt than they were now (£27m now is it?). The £50m figure is the potential cost once the tax liability and PENALTIES are added to it. Let's be clear about this, HMRC have only went after RFC as a test case because RFC can't afford to settle out of court. If HMRC wins, they will go after other clubs that were practicing these sort of payment schemes - who else were doing this? Celtic? Aberdeen? big English clubs like Man Utd or Chelsea?

Yes you are correct many many clubs use these schemes. Also big business use them and hmrc have to date never won a case vrs big business becasue there was a loophole there to be used and it has been used they are now upset because of the failure of government to close this loophole (I believe it is now closed.) and are now trying to retrospectively hit in the test case Rangers with a view to hit EVERY club that has used it.