[Larry-AV]

Jolyon Maugham has consistently said that what is in dispute is the amount of tax that is due. This amount will depend on how the monies paid into the EBT scheme are defined ... as income or as loans, to which the appropriate tax regime will then be applied.

It amazes me that folks are still complaining that Rangers retained more of their money by avoiding tax ... what else is a tax avoidance scheme for if not for that ?
I wonder how many folks who are complaining about Rangers have themselves avoided tax ?
Anyone would think that EBTs were for the exclusive use of Rangers and Rangers alone !

Turning to Mike Ashley, I think he will launch a two-pronged attack.
As Worthing posted (above), Ashley is challenging the SFA's verdict on Dave King being a 'fit and proper person'.
The other prong will be on the resolution before the AGM to stop persons with dual interests (in football clubs) voting on matters affecting Rangers. This resolution has been proposed to bring Rangers' rules into line with those of the SFA on dual ownership and to prevent any further fines from the SFA in this matter.
However, as a shareholder Ashley has his rights and I would think those rights under Law would trump any SFA rules or resolution that restricted his rights as a shareholder.

So, if Ashley cannot get the SFA's ruling on Dave King reversed, he still has another string to his bow, with which I think he would win, whether he challenges the SFA, Rangers, or both.

Add this article : Skysports - Mike Ashley has challenged the SFA over its approval of Dave King