BlueThunder

The thing that confuses me about Whyte is this: We can all agree that Rangers are in a mess right now, and that a monkey could have done a better job running us, which seems to point to him being a chancer and crook. Yet we had the whole Indian player and US spiel that, at the time, made me think he was trying to open up markets for us. In which case, was he actually trying to do good for the club, or just play the long game/appear to be trying to run the club?

Whatever you say about Whyte it seems he is a smart man. I'd imagine what he has done is sailing close to the wind but not strictly illegal. We shall see.

It appears so - except the small bill. Which groweth larger by the day.

Probably one of those 'Hello Radio Clyde. I'm a Rangers/Celtic fan but I think Rangers/Celtic should be disbanded/wound up/shot into space' style windups from opposition fans. Hell, it would make an exciting end to the season if Celtic were docked 10 points and had a 3bn tax bill looming though.

Well, I think his plan was simply to liquidate and strip us. There may have been repercussions if HMRC had appointed the admin re: his secured creditor status (guessing here). Whether he was going to start a NewCo I don't know. He could have raised funds to finance things by flogging players on high earnings earlier in his 'reign' but chose not to*. Instead he seemingly racks debt up left right and centre, possibly pockets the cash and makes the club liable for it all, even the money he borrowed to actually buy the club. There are those on here who are still waiting to wait, but I swear, it'll be the greatest magic trick ever if he pulls something off. Right now the best we can hope for us avoiding liquidation. Hell, he is plunging us so far into the shit that even that might look like a sensible option soon. *unless he has, and that is tomorrow's headlines. We are about to get hammered for fielding another team's players!

This was reported in the press in the first few days of administration. I don't know why it is suddenly news now.

I seem to remember when Whyte came in he told us he would wipe out our debt, which he did (at least the money owed to Lloyds). However he said he'd be liable for it UNLESS we lose the big tax case. I don't have the quote to hand but I remember it because it set off alarm bells at the time. I suspect we'll find that Rangers somehow actually owe the debt still, ie the money that bought us in the first place, if we lose the tax case I'm only taking Whyte at his word (ha!) but I really wouldn't be surprised. If this is true then he probably hoped we'd lose the case so he could liquidate us and gain us for a £1 total then sell us for a huge profit! The administration alternative would not clear debt, so his profits would be diminished.

Everything I've read so far seems to suggest a verdict in April. This is to HMRCs advantage as we need to be out of admin by the 31st of March, and it would be senseless to leave admin without reaching an agreement with HMRC as we'd go straight back into admin or even be liquidated should the case go against us.Admin offers us some protection prior to the verdict supposedly.

We'd better check the bike is still there....he may be making his escape on it!

Exactly how long before we get a pic of Whyte in a Celtic top? Wouldn't surprise me given the way there is a new story every day Aside from taking us into admin, selling our history and possibility pocketing our money, he has single handedly crippled our attempt at 4IAR with pathetic transfer attempts and the points deduction.

Don't expect fantastic graphics and raging battles though. It is all about atmosphere. Play it in the dark and with headphones.

I damn near choked to death laughing when I read that.

So am I right in thinking if we reached a settlement the decision would never be made public?

Where have you been? The whole case is based on HMRC believing we used the EBT scheme incorrectly. HMRC can go back as far as they like if they feel we have done something wrong. Frankly I have no idea whether we will win or not. Craig Whyte and Murray both said they were confident...... Ah, bugger!

One worrying thing I heard today was that the decision isn't expected until April, which is obviously after the euro deadline, so I'd imagine we'd stay in admin until then at least. Mind you, Darrell King said we could theoretically agree a maximum price with HMRC prior to the outcome. (I'm assuming this scenario means that we pay nothing if the case is won by us, or pay up to the amount we agreed if we lose). I'm not sure how this would affect us in terms of being able to leave administration before April though.

The Scotsman, or Scotland on Sunday. Found it on NewsNow.

A KEY witness at Rangers’ tax tribunal over the use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs) has told Scotland on Sunday he believes the club can still win the case that could otherwise land them a bill for more than £50 million from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. The source, who asked not to be named with a judgment still possibly two weeks away, called into question owner Craig Whyte’s implication of the so-called “big tax case” in the Ibrox club’s plunge into administration last week. HMRC insisted that the reason was a further £9m in unpaid tax accrued since Whyte took over the club last May. “Until a fortnight ago, it was widely reported that Rangers’ chances of winning the tribunal were 50-50, now it is said they will lose,” the source said. “Yet nothing can have changed in that intervening period, with the tribunal ending last month [18 January]. It has been said Whyte must have got wind of the outcome ahead of the club being placed in administration, but he can’t have done so. The opinion of the judges must remain strictly confidential until they make public their decision. If Rangers won the EBT case, their future should have been secure. Now it won’t be and, in that scenario, serious questions must be asked of Whyte.” The source says there are “myths” about how EBTs were administered when Sir David Murray owned Rangers, and that HMRC made “no headway” in convincing the three judges who will decide if these were operated in a manner that changed them from a legal tax avoidance loophole to a tax evasion scheme. EBTs are believed to have been run by around 5,000 businesses in the UK, including football clubs south of the Border. They became illegal in December 2010 but, until then, firms had been able to exploit the tax laws to provide sums to employees without PAYE or National Insurance as long as these were in the form of discretionary, repayable loans. At the tax tribunal, HMRC argued Rangers’ use of them for nine years was, in fact, a way to help mostly foreign players evade tax on salaries and bonuses. The source, who is not connected to Rangers but had clients who benefited from EBTs, claims that this entirely misrepresents the scheme in operation at Ibrox. “It was totally and absolutely correctly administered, and the club met all their legal responsibilities and complied with all tax laws,” said the source. “They took advice from top-notch lawyers and a whole battalion of the best accountants on a global level. “I have read a lot that isn’t true about how Rangers were supposed to have misused them. They weren’t written into the players’ contracts of employment. They were totally separate. Money in any EBTs was not a salary sacrifice. The EBTs were independently administered offshore in Guernsey. I have heard it said that players had letters stating they did not have to pay these loans back. The tax commission hammered away at that but made no headway because these letters categorically do not exist.” The Rangers Tax Case blog, which has covered the situation exhaustively for almost two years, claimed the “smoking gun” for HMRC was a number of letters indemnifying players from any future tax liabilities on money placed in their EBTs. The source insisted: “There is nothing unusual in that as it is always employees who set the schedule basis for tax and there was no great gain for the players.” But the source also admitted: “The very slight weakness is that the administrators in Guernsey weren’t always as diligent in their book-keeping as they should have been. Players buggered off back to Argentina, Italy and Australia and they didn’t keep track of these movements, as was incumbent on them. This was tightened up, though, over time.” -------------------------- Given the last paragraph, I think I know the identity of three players who used EBTs

No wondering he was on the verge of tears - I believe he has never won a title with any of his clubs (if memory serves) and things were looking rosy for hima few months ago. Also rumours he could be one of the players let go, so perhaps this was his last match.

This Yahoo rubbish about tainted title is absolutely laughable. It is bad enough that their fans are spouting it on phone-ins, but we now have Lennon getting involved, and Radio Clyde et al pundits reporting that our administration was caused by financial recklessness when it was caused by Whtye not paying tax this year. They are so insecure that they will try ANYTHING to claw back some titles.

Without the points deduction absolutely. If we were maybe 8 points behind then yes, I'd say it was still possible, but with it being 14 points I don't see Celtic dropping the 8/9 points outwith the OF matches. I we did win - based on last year- I think my head would pop.

Yeah, we have actually been cutting our cloth for the best part of a decade in general, and particularly in the last 5 years or so. Celtic have certainly benefited from a weakened Rangers during that time already.

Do we have their IP addresses?

C'mon guys. He is an entrepreneur...... Wait, y'all thinking what I'm thinking?..... Goodnight TexasRanger, you've brightened up my night. Cheers

Indeed. Quite obviously utter rubbish but it makes me smile and takes my mind off things so thanks to TR for that. Incidentally TR, now you are over here, why did someone say you have the same IP address as all your other posts?