| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? 13:43 - Jul 6 with 4399 views | Hooped_Pullie |
According to media sources, in the wake of HMRC's great victory over the now-defunct Glasgow Rangers tax-free bonanza vehicle, a total of 39 English clubs (Prem and FL) are being 'reviewed' with a view to some stonking tax bills being sent to those who have in the past paid players (and possibly others) via trust-based arrangements.
You don't reckon that could possibly include us...surely not ?  |  | | |  |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 13:58 - Jul 6 with 4342 views | kingsburyR |
We are an absolute banker!!!! (scuse the pun) |  |
| Dont know why we bother. .... but we do! |
| |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 14:23 - Jul 6 with 4252 views | eastside_r |
Potentially very expensive for those clubs involved. HMRC do not f*ck about.
They will say this is the tax that you should have collected from your employees to pay to us, you are now liable to pay this.
And also here's a fine for colluding with tax evasion.
I would be surprised if we did not get caught up in these schemes in the mad-money days. |  | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 14:39 - Jul 6 with 4210 views | MrSheen |
Rangers were using these 2001-2009, before we got into our silly money phase. Hopefully it would be a Zesh Rehman rather than Julio Cesar-sized sized tax bill. [Post edited 6 Jul 2017 14:41]
|  | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 15:10 - Jul 6 with 4151 views | karl |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 14:39 - Jul 6 by MrSheen |
Rangers were using these 2001-2009, before we got into our silly money phase. Hopefully it would be a Zesh Rehman rather than Julio Cesar-sized sized tax bill. [Post edited 6 Jul 2017 14:41]
|
I've followed the Glasgow Rangers case with interest but with no indepth knowledge.
My recollection is that several clubs were using these trusts and were warned by HMRC that they viewed it as 'illegal' and would be pursuing payment. Celtic were i think one of these clubs and subsequently ceased the practice and paid what was calculated to be due, this is probably why they are/were so adamant to see GR face justice.
Incidentally it was probably GR's use of 'side letters' to the players detailing that these trust payments were indeed earnings rather than a loan that was the downfall, these side letters werent registered with the SFA/SPL and made the players registrations illegal and showed up their lack of tax/nic payments.
I think Arsenal were always mentoned as a primary user in England, hopefully someone in SW thought it was a good idea too! |  | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 15:51 - Jul 6 with 4070 views | QPR_John |
I imagine if the club is caught up in a tax avoidance scheme many will have to end their support | | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 17:40 - Jul 6 with 3930 views | PlanetHonneywood |
Speaking of fines, how are we doing with the FFP? |  |
| |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 17:43 - Jul 6 with 3922 views | stevec |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 15:51 - Jul 6 by QPR_John |
I imagine if the club is caught up in a tax avoidance scheme many will have to end their support |
Nice one
 |  | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 18:15 - Jul 6 with 3878 views | Brightonhoop |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 15:51 - Jul 6 by QPR_John |
I imagine if the club is caught up in a tax avoidance scheme many will have to end their support |
Don't know about ending support, but it would be on a par with signing John Terry.
If Clubs are lumbered with players tax bills then they are going to have a harder time over ticket prices et al as well as looking pretty stoopid.
And the players, struggling to live on £10,000 s a week so avoid tax illegally? Does nothing for the games image.
I hope just once we're not tainted.... |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 19:52 - Jul 6 with 3771 views | danehoop |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 18:15 - Jul 6 by Brightonhoop |
Don't know about ending support, but it would be on a par with signing John Terry.
If Clubs are lumbered with players tax bills then they are going to have a harder time over ticket prices et al as well as looking pretty stoopid.
And the players, struggling to live on £10,000 s a week so avoid tax illegally? Does nothing for the games image.
I hope just once we're not tainted.... |
I think if you were chelshite, manshite or manshityy that you might be interested in this story. |  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 20:06 - Jul 6 with 3727 views | davman |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 19:52 - Jul 6 by danehoop |
I think if you were chelshite, manshite or manshityy that you might be interested in this story. |
They'll pay their way out of it and the HMRC will take a club of our size to the wall... |  |
| |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 08:51 - Jul 7 with 3521 views | JamesB1979 |
Unless I'm wrong, you only pay tax on profits. So, I think we can safely say this is one potential issue that won't impact us. | | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 09:06 - Jul 7 with 3502 views | terryb |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 08:51 - Jul 7 by JamesB1979 |
Unless I'm wrong, you only pay tax on profits. So, I think we can safely say this is one potential issue that won't impact us. |
That is corporation tax.
I believe this is for PAYE/NIC that should have been collected from the players wages. | | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 09:30 - Jul 7 with 3465 views | ElHoop |
Companies which used EBTs were offered a way out via settlement in 2015 - this apparently yielded £1.5 billion! F*ck me that's a lot of EBTing to have confessed to. If anybody decided not to take advantage of that opportunity to settle, given the prevailing mood, then more fool them - they deserve to sink without trace. Hard to know whether we were involved. We seemed to elect more for big wages and spreading the cost rather than funding big transfers and money up front, so I suppose that it's possible. Either way, 'Image rights' could still emerge as another problem though.
https://www.accountancyage.com/2017/07/05/rangers-tax-case-to-have-dramatic-cons |  | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 09:38 - Jul 7 with 3443 views | francisbowles |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 09:30 - Jul 7 by ElHoop |
Companies which used EBTs were offered a way out via settlement in 2015 - this apparently yielded £1.5 billion! F*ck me that's a lot of EBTing to have confessed to. If anybody decided not to take advantage of that opportunity to settle, given the prevailing mood, then more fool them - they deserve to sink without trace. Hard to know whether we were involved. We seemed to elect more for big wages and spreading the cost rather than funding big transfers and money up front, so I suppose that it's possible. Either way, 'Image rights' could still emerge as another problem though.
https://www.accountancyage.com/2017/07/05/rangers-tax-case-to-have-dramatic-cons |
IF...........this was going on before the current owners bought the club, who would be liable? | | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 10:03 - Jul 7 with 3412 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 09:38 - Jul 7 by francisbowles |
IF...........this was going on before the current owners bought the club, who would be liable? |
The current owners!
Its the entity that remains and, if you buy a company, then you also buy all past and present obligations. Unless you can prove deliberate illegality at the time you presumably did due diligence, then you're stuck with it.
Followers of EU dodgy dealings and probably, corruption, will of course be laughing at this and saying one word; Greece! | |
| |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 10:08 - Jul 7 with 3395 views | francisbowles |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 10:03 - Jul 7 by PlanetHonneywood |
The current owners!
Its the entity that remains and, if you buy a company, then you also buy all past and present obligations. Unless you can prove deliberate illegality at the time you presumably did due diligence, then you're stuck with it.
Followers of EU dodgy dealings and probably, corruption, will of course be laughing at this and saying one word; Greece! |
Yes, I understand that but in the case of criminal wrongdoing, if that is what this is, i.e. defrauding HMRC?
Surely there must be comeback on the previous owners and the players who haven't paid their taxes. | | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 10:31 - Jul 7 with 3352 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 10:08 - Jul 7 by francisbowles |
Yes, I understand that but in the case of criminal wrongdoing, if that is what this is, i.e. defrauding HMRC?
Surely there must be comeback on the previous owners and the players who haven't paid their taxes. |
In the absence of concealed illegality and/or any clauses in the sale to cover such things, I doubt past-owners will be sweating at the moment.
As for the players, who were obliged to pay tax, then it would likely depend on whose responsibility it was to actually pay the tax. That being said however, at one firm I worked at, the firm was deducting tax from salaried partners wages, but when 2008 hit, they stopped paying HMRC! When the firm eventually went nipples north, the equity partners not having a pot to phish in, the tax man wanted paying and notwithstanding that my former colleagues had already 'paid' tax, they had to pony up a second time!
HMRC are ruthless and having seen them at work, if you think vultures could strip a carcass to it's bone, the HMRC could still get a meal out of what's left. The only thing we can definitely say is this; if HMRC are to be paid and want to be paid, they will be paid and probably, with interest! | |
| |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 10:33 - Jul 7 with 3341 views | ElHoop |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 10:08 - Jul 7 by francisbowles |
Yes, I understand that but in the case of criminal wrongdoing, if that is what this is, i.e. defrauding HMRC?
Surely there must be comeback on the previous owners and the players who haven't paid their taxes. |
It's normally the employer's responsibility to assess employment status and deduct PAYE and NIC where appropriate. So this responsibility would always stay with the employer, regardless of the identity of its shareholders. I don't think that anything was ever mentioned in the accounts, even potentially, so hopefully we will be OK on this one. | | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 11:57 - Jul 8 with 3044 views | PinnerPaul |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 09:06 - Jul 7 by terryb |
That is corporation tax.
I believe this is for PAYE/NIC that should have been collected from the players wages. |
Not if you pay their company.
Nothing illegal in that, its then up to that company to pay the "employee" and sort out the tax.
Its paying a "trust" to deliberately avoid tax liability that's the problem. | | | |
| Rangers Tax Ruling - Implications ? on 15:35 - Jul 8 with 2898 views | Irish_Hoop |
The PAYE/NIC liability is primarily the employees. When HMRC win a case such that tax is underpaid, the employer can agree to pay the liability on behalf of the employee. This is more costly, because you will have to gross up the underpaid tax to reflect the extra benefit you are now providing to the employee.
Where the employer no longer exists, as is the case here - the liability belongs to the old company which was liquidated, not the new one - then that option is not available.
Going after the individuals is therefore the only route open to HMRC, which may be tricky in respect to players who are no longer UK tax residents | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
