Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Billy Whizz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug	17m
Morning of evidence from HMRC who said notion of not paying tax through EBT scheme was a "fantastically silly proposition."

	Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug	17m
HMRC also said it would be "catastrophic for the public purse" if this scheme is all that's needed to avoid paying tax. #EBT ##Rangers

Any idea if Hmrc won this, would any of the players have to pay the tax back. Sorry if it's on this thread somewhere, but there's a lot of pages on it!

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Any idea if Hmrc won this, would any of the players have to pay the tax back. Sorry if it's on this thread somewhere, but there's a lot of pages on it!

One of our IFAs will be along soon, but I gather this is day 1 of 4. Final verdict on this stage due sometime in the future.

[tamig]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Any idea if Hmrc won this, would any of the players have to pay the tax back. Sorry if it's on this thread somewhere, but there's a lot of pages on it!

It won't be a quick one. Early days yet.

[Hamish]

Will be decided on 12th July I heard. But then according to some everyday is the 12th of July.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Will be decided on 12th July I heard. But then according to some everyday is the 12th of July.

It would be glorious if it went HMRC way

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Any idea if Hmrc won this, would any of the players have to pay the tax back. Sorry if it's on this thread somewhere, but there's a lot of pages on it!

Very unlikely.

Any money due would the company's liability. However, it's less about the money here than the principle. HMRC have a few more cases pending, where there is money at stake. If this case goes their way, it will help them in those other cases.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Any idea if Hmrc won this, would any of the players have to pay the tax back. Sorry if it's on this thread somewhere, but there's a lot of pages on it!

There is no chance of the players ever having to pay money back.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There is no chance of the players ever having to pay money back.

Wouldn't say "no chance". If there was evidence of collusion between the players and their employers, in an attempt to defraud HMRC, the players would be liable to prosecution and repayment.

That hasn't been suggested yet, so it's unlikely, but never say "never" about this story.

[AndyM_1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug	17m
Morning of evidence from HMRC who said notion of not paying tax through EBT scheme was a "fantastically silly proposition."

	Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug	17m
HMRC also said it would be "catastrophic for the public purse" if this scheme is all that's needed to avoid paying tax. #EBT ##Rangers

Excuse my cynicism but those points are laughable coming from HMRC who seem to shy away when it comes to chasing down oligarchs operating in the UK or large companies and their big nasty lawyers and evil accountants for tax avoided when its easier to throw their weight around with small business and sole-traders.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Excuse my cynicism but those points are laughable coming from HMRC who seem to shy away when it comes to chasing down oligarchs operating in the UK or large companies and their big nasty lawyers and evil accountants for tax avoided when its easier to throw their weight around with small business and sole-traders.

The complexity of the tax system is a rich man's (and accountants) dream.

[southsider]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Excuse my cynicism but those points are laughable coming from HMRC who seem to shy away when it comes to chasing down oligarchs operating in the UK or large companies and their big nasty lawyers and evil accountants for tax avoided when its easier to throw their weight around with small business and sole-traders.

Small Business ? This was a football club paying players £30-40 THOUSAND per week and paying no tax while we get hammered with tax and N/I on our wages of 1% of that. Cheats of the highest order were the former Rangers FC and I will be cheering on HMRC from the touchline. More importantly stops King getting a bigger payout.

[tamig]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Small Business ? This was a football club paying players £30-40 THOUSAND per week and paying no tax while we get hammered with tax and N/I on our wages of 1% of that. Cheats of the highest order were the former Rangers FC and I will be cheering on HMRC from the touchline. More importantly stops King getting a bigger payout.

That's the way I see it. Strange assertion to put the hun (old) in the same category as hard working one man bands - which is the implication I took from that post.

[Ozyhibby]

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/r...medium=twitter

[Deansy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Any idea if Hmrc won this, would any of the players have to pay the tax back. Sorry if it's on this thread somewhere, but there's a lot of pages on it!

'Pay the TAX back' ?? - didn't even pay a penny of the so-called 'LOAN's back, let alone the tax !!

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

'Pay the TAX back' ?? - didn't even pay a penny of the so-called 'LOAN's back, let alone the tax !!

To be fair, the Loans only become payable upon the death of the recipient.


Give them a chance to pay it from beyond the grave before you criticise

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

'Pay the TAX back' ?? - didn't even pay a penny of the so-called 'LOAN's back, let alone the tax !!

It's one or the other. If it's a loan, there's no tax. If there's tax to pay, there's no loan repayment due.

[Gettin' Auld]

I found this after a wee search - From someone who attended day 1 of the appeal.

Quote

Today in Court 2 in Parliament House.

The teams:
For HMRC: Mr Julian Ghosh QC, Mr Thomson QC. Supported by 2 solicitors and a number of HMRC people.
For MG and Others, Mr Dunlop, QC and another bewigged person whose name I didn’t catch,supported by three solicitors.
On the bench , my lords Carloway, Mackenzie and Drummond-Young, bewigged or gowned.

Sadly, Mr Ghosh is very quiet-spoken and from 4 rows back and him with his back to us,I missed quite a lot through hearing only parts of what he said, usually the links of his argument!
Very briefly,Mr Ghosh gave an outline of the essence of the scheme.

He made much of the point that the Main Trustee knew from a ‘letter of wishes’ and the loan application how much was to be settled in any sub-trust.

He emphasised that this Trust money was part of the remuneration package earned for work done.The only reason it was deemed not taxable was that the money was not paid directly to the employee.

The employee was free to say ” don’t pay me, pay someone else..my wife, brother or whatever.”

In this case, the ‘someone else’ was the Main Trust, in the employee’s belief that loans would be obtained, that the Trustee’s discretion would be used in the right way.

That, said Mr Ghosh, is the principle involved. It would be catastrophic for the public purse if that was all that needed to be done to avoid tax.

The finding that it was a true exercise of discretion is unsound. The significance of that point was missed by the FTT.

Judge Mackenzie : It was not apparent.

Mr Ghosh said that it is that principle that this Court is to decide.

He then discussed the Main Trust (set up by MGL) documents, mentioned that were 5 different employers, and then a whole lot of sub-trusts. And subsequent variations . In one Trust only, Sir David Murray as Protector was given ‘absolute’ powers ( And here Mr Ghosh said that what SDM did in exercise of those powers ‘he simply could not do!)
I kind of missed what it was he did, but apparently he had power to exclude future employees and/or include them, or maybe both

Mr Ghosh said the scheme worked thus: communication between the Trust and the employer, communication between employer and employee, and communication by ‘letter of wish’ between the employee as Protector of his sub-trust and the Main Trust.

He selected three particular cases- Bain, McLean and McCann, and discussed relevant documents, (letters of wishes and side letters) showing the true nature of the Trusts, with the employer undertaking to make payment if a loan were ever to be refused. For example, in the McLean case the letter said ” In the event that the…..the CLUB will pay to you the balance….”

And the monies to be paid were in all footballer cases earned income, and in Bain’s case, bonus for good performance.

So,Mr Ghosh said, we have got to a place where cash payments were being made by the employer on terms where the money is being paid to someone else, in a diversion of earnings to avoid tax.

He then ran through how various sections of the Income Tax Act would apply to such earnings ( requirement on employer to deduct tax, even if payment made to an intermediary or to a person acting on behalf of the employer.

he moved on to consider whether these payments whether made by the employer to the Main trust or whether by the Main trust to a sub-Trust, were to be regarded as ’emoluments’.

He referred to a number of cases :A case involving a partner in KPMG who tried to assign his earnings { and, in parenthesis, he observed that Mr Thornhill had argued that it was an assignment of proprietary interest in his assets as a partner, in the only case that he had won: discreet smiles all round}

And the case of Collins, in which in the sale of shares part of the ‘consideration’ was to be paid to the Company to be held by someone else.

The overall argument, in Mr Ghosh’s submission is ‘YOU the employee are due the money. if was paid to someone else at your request, so what?

He went on to fillet the Defra case, the Edwards and Roberts case, and showed that a true reading of these did not support any view that payments made by an employer into a Trust were anything other than remuneration.

in the present case, the footballers were given an unconditional guarantee that they would get paid, even if their Trust were to refuse a loan.

There was then discussion by Mr Ghosh of Lord Hodge’s judgement in a NIC case in which a distinction had been made by Lord H between earnings and emoluments in so far as National Insurance Contributions was concerned… The case of Mr McHugh, a company director who benefited because his Trust provided a pension for life ( when he was aged 54 , provided he lived to age 60).

There was no such contingency applying to the Trust loans: the football players had a very present hope and expectation of being paid here and now.

Mr Ghosh’s position is that here we have the employee getting a payment of remuneration in a way that he is happy with..

Then Mr Ghosh gave his view of how Ramsay was to be understood.Basically, look at the true transaction, look at the parties, what is the transaction realistically. One is to assess the actual parties, and the relevant actions, and look at the provisions and then look at the actions realistically.

Is it part of a remuneration package?

Yes, it is! Thar’s what McLean got, and McCann…

He cited the SPI(?) case where they wanted to sell gilts to City Bank, and wanted them back commercially.To beat Ramsay, there was a contingency clause about there being a sale, and then a sale back.It is not good enough to build in artificial contingencies just to beat Ramsay.

The true transaction was that there was no sale.

At this point Mr Ghosh explained that he was not attacking the findings of fact of the FTTT.

But we just have to accept that the payments made to the trust were the application of wages.

Ramsay, Edwards and Roberts tell us… the players were told if you get a loan we’ll pay you money, and the letter of wishes is what decides the settlement.

There followed a bit from Mr Ghosh about the ‘causal connection’ between the money paid into the Main trust and the the money paid to the Sub-trust and, subsequently to the player.
Lord McKenzie remarked that if there was no causal connection between the employer and the Main Trust, isn’t the link broken?

Mr Ghosh replied that the causal chain doesn’t start until the money is paid to the player following receipt of letter of wishes and loan application. I think that’s what he said

And in the case of non-players, if the money was not paid to the appellant as an employee, then on what basis would it have been paid?

And Mr Ghosh moved on to show that what was paid was ‘remuneration’ He used McMillan’s ( Group tax and pensions manager)letter in which he used words and phrases such as ‘footballer’s packge…and balance recorded in the side-letters’ ‘remuneration package, part payable through the trust’ and ‘for non-footballers, payment in lieu of bonus earned’

Mr Ghosh again emphasised he was not attacking the Findings of fact. But he remarked that the it was annoying the way the Tribunal recorded the evidence)

He then itemised certain sentences and word in the evidence given by McCann’s agent, Naco Novo’s agent, Mr Bain’s side letters relating to his discussion with SDM about looking for payment in respect of 6grand tax that Bain had had to pay,

and then, on the question of ‘unreserved disposal’ he faulted the the arguments in the Sempra case as being quite wrong.

And criticised a number of the FTTT’s paragraphs ( 234 misses the point,it has nothing to do with entitlement), 235 is incorrect (nobody is talking about ‘absolute transfer of funds),237 is just rubbish or irrelevant- ‘absolutely and unreservedly is NOT the test.

And the Finding in Law number 4 is mistaken( This seems to be about Trust Law, and Lord Drummond-Young clarified what Mr Ghosh was saying, and then both agreed on the point (whatever it was)

Mr ghosh continued by saying that the FTTT had made several non-findings of fact and non-findings of law, and arrive at ‘Accordingly..’
at which point Lord Carloway interjected that ‘accordingly is usually followed by a non-sequitur.!

And then it was home time, at 4.00 pm.
Court reconvenes at 10.30 tomorrow.

[brog]

[QUOTE=Gettin' Auld;4409681]I found this after a wee search - From someone who attended day 1 of the appeal.

Ghosh, well done!! Have the MSM picked up on this? I'm in London but don't see anything in DR today.

[Gettin' Auld]

[QUOTE=brog;4409683]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I found this after a wee search - From someone who attended day 1 of the appeal.

Ghosh, well done!! Have the MSM picked up on this? I'm in London but don't see anything in DR today.

Not that i'm aware of.

I found it easily enough if they're interested though. It was on The Scottish Football Monitor site.
http://www.sfm.scot/hmrc-vs-mgh/#more-3242

[Ozyhibby]

Season kicks off two weeks on Saturday and they still only have 17 players.

[Cropley10]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Season kicks off two weeks on Saturday and they still only have 17 players.

Wasn't it reported, glowingly, that King was going to "over-invest" to make sure they're competitive in the top flight though??

Bit strange. What's happened to the war chest??


Sent from a phone

[Stonewall]

Julian Ghosh: there's a name from the past.

Knew him from university and played football and cricket with him. To say he was an eccentric character would be an understatement. Dundee Utd fan iirc.

[Ronniekirk]

Was told today by gers fan at my work that Season Tickets went on open sale today and they shifted 11 thousand in one day not looked for confirmation of this anywhere as he could be at the Wyndham up But seems a huge amount to shift in one day Anyone else heard anything

[bigwheel]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Was told today by gers fan at my work that Season Tickets went on open sale today and they shifted 11 thousand in one day not looked for confirmation of this anywhere as he could be at the Wyndham up But seems a huge amount to shift in one day Anyone else heard anything

In their dreams......not a chance

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Was told today by gers fan at my work that Season Tickets went on open sale today and they shifted 11 thousand in one day not looked for confirmation of this anywhere as he could be at the Wyndham up But seems a huge amount to shift in one day Anyone else heard anything

I rather think if this was anywhere near true it would be all over the media - the MSM would be creaming themselves about it.

[Ronniekirk]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I rather think if this was anywhere near true it would be all over the media - the MSM would be creaming themselves about it.

Agree I ,will check with the other guy at my work who works in ticket office and is more grounded.

[AlbertK86]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Was told today by gers fan at my work that Season Tickets went on open sale today and they shifted 11 thousand in one day not looked for confirmation of this anywhere as he could be at the Wyndham up But seems a huge amount to shift in one day Anyone else heard anything

Do you work at Carstairs ? 😉

[Ronniekirk]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you work at Carstairs ? 

No but the person at the wynd up is a good candidate for admission there

[AlbertK86]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No but the person at the wynd up is a good candidate for admission there

Yep that was where I was going with it !!!!!!

[greenginger]

http://www.rangers.talent-sport.co.u...roductsubtype=


Get your Sevco Season Ticket here. Anyone want to count the dots ?