[hibeejim21]

David Murray himself said they couldn't afford the players without ebts. He gave that as evidence at one of the hearings.

[Larry-AV]

The players were covered by side letters that guaranteed the salary.The liability lies with their employer. As they are being liquidated currently,that is now BDO.

So from what i can grasp HMRC will lodge a claim with them. They won't care about the players, BDO might be able to go after murray and the board however.

I am not so sure about these 'side letters'. Okay, they may have 'guaranteed' the salary, but that salary has now been defined as income, so I return to my original point : that income is subject to income tax at the relevant rate and is payable by the recipients of that income.
No 'side letter' could put its recipient above the Law of the Land; just imagine your own job. Would a letter from your employer saying you will not be paying the tax you are liable for have any standing in Law ? ... It would work if your employer said 'I will pay all of your tax' and did that, but that is not the case with the EBTs, as no tax was paid. So I think the duty to pay the tax falls on the employees.

[Trusevich]

David Murray himself said they couldn't afford the players without ebts. He gave that as evidence at one of the hearings.

No, he didn't.

[supercooper]

Are we really going through all this pish again?

---

David Murray himself said they couldn't afford the players without ebts. He gave that as evidence at one of the hearings.

No, he didn't.

Ah but he will have evidence to back this up Trus...

[Paigntonhibby]

Are we really going through all this pish again?

its current news so I would say aye

[TIN TIN]

The latest judgement on the 'Big Tax Case', 04/11/2015.

SECOND DIVISION, INNER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION


OPINION OF THE COURT delivered by LORD DRUMMOND YOUNG in an appeal to the Court of Session by THE ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND Appellant; against a decision of the Upper Tribunal dated 8 July 2014 in relation to assessments to tax made on
(1) MURRAY GROUP HOLDINGS LTD; (2) MURRAY GROUP MANAGEMENT LTD; (3) THE PREMIER PROPERTY GROUP LTD; (4) GM MINING LTD; and (5) RFC 2012 PLC (in liquidation) (formerly The Rangers Football Club PLC)

If Rangers had been 'liquidated', how come Rangers' Oldco is cited as a contestant in this Case ?

Rangers 2012 are still in liquidation Larry. What do you not understand about that and the appointed liquidators are BDO. Seemples 

---

E

Looks like a considerable amount of investment/ more loans will be required to get to the end of this current season

Hence King's statements about funding the other day.

Everything is in hand, no need for you to panic, Tin Tit.

No panic from me bitch. Everything in hand- haha- begging bowl out again to the 3 bears to get beyond Xmas, wow , what a fantastic business plan that sounds. Tick tock - the sequel. 

[Larry-AV]

If Rangers had been 'liquidated', how come Rangers' Oldco is cited as a contestant in this Case ?

Rangers 2012 are still in liquidation Larry. What do you not understand about that and the appointed liquidators are BDO. Seemples 

---

I am well aware that the Oldco is 'in liquidation', TT.

What is evdent from many press reports is that many journalists are not so aware, saying Rangers 'were liquidated'.

Rangers were not and never have been 'liquidated'.

[TheWorthinGer]

There's no arguing with the decision: the players money should have been taxed. Unless BDO appeal that's how it'll stand.

Even when it was initially found legitimate it bugged me that people earning vast sums were not subject to tax. Now that it's been declared less than legitimate I remain just as annoyed - if not more so.

It's not our problem, so no need to continue down a futile road.

As for "sporting advantage" that's mere speculation - counterfactual fantasy. And it has indeed been dealt with.

[Larry-AV]

I posted this on AVillaFan back in 2012 ... I stand by my 'gut feeling' today {2015} as much as then.

In Topic: The SPL Thread
It's most unlikely that the EBT was set-up in the first place without legal advice.
Now I'm no lawyer, but it seems the EBT scheme was tax-avoidance (legal) when it was set up.
HMRC are now saying it was tax-evasion (illegal). I suppose the legal arguments will be about what interpretation, 'avoidance' or 'evasion', is correct, with the verdict hanging on that. Like most folk, I have no idea what that verdict will be.
The case brings in the word that no-one wants to see in Law - 'retrospective', as in :
I did something yesterday which I was told was legal, now you are telling me it was illegal.
As for a 'gut feeling', I think any scheme that enables millionaires to escape PAYE stinks.

[TheWorthinGer]

My mistake: it's The Murray Group that has The right of appeal and not BDO.