Smile 26,608 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 This threads mad with a wee spoonful of mental thrown in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWTC 2,247 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 No need for the name calling and arguing in the thread. Why cant we all just get along and showe the same respect to others that we would wish to be shown to ourselves.I apologise for the name calling and arguing to anyone ive caused offence to, except for one person.Im sure you will understand that its difficult to keep a cool head when your accused of being a tim, and perhaps i didnt handle it too well, but its extremely offensive, especially given the accusation was made based on one mis-informed post that i accepted may be incorrect. Im still stunned by the reaction, as any good bear would be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWTC 2,247 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 This threads mad with a wee spoonful of mental thrown in. Too right by the way Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterC 12,270 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I apologise for the name calling and arguing to anyone ive caused offence to, except for one person.Im sure you will understand that its difficult to keep a cool head when your accused of being a tim, and perhaps i didnt handle it too well, but its extremely offensive, especially given the accusation was made based on one mis-informed post that i accepted may be incorrect. Im still stunned by the reaction, as any good bear would be.No worries mate. Best thing to do if you are accused of being a shettleston is to use the report function and myself or one of the other mods will deal with it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebooler 4,509 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I really do miss Spangles' input in threads like this.............................................................. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWTC 2,247 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 No worries mate. Best thing to do if you are accused of being a shettleston is to use the report function and myself or one of the other mods will deal with it Thanks for that, its never happened before so i was unaware of that function. Will do if it ever, god forbid, happen again. Id report cartmen if he hadnt made himself look so silly. Anyway cheers for the advice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis 1,011 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Did Spangles get a ban? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I've never once had to invent anything regarding you or your posts on this board.You, however? Where would you want to start? There's so much of your spite for all that is The Rangers on this board that I could offer up your hateful commentary on pretty much everything from Smith to McCoist to the support and on and on and on.You know it. We all know it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluepeter 5,627 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Did Spangles get a ban?Maybe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWTC 2,247 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Did Spangles get a ban?Na, im right here Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFC55 108,919 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Na, im right here Spangles is on this thread but its not you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWTC 2,247 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Spangles is on this thread but its not youFunny, i cant smell shite,... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJ 743 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Im not sure they ever were found guilty.I dont think they paid a penny though they accrued for it,Call it gut instinct if you want, we will lose this case and owe them something.Arsenal paid up in fear of losing planning permission for the Emirates - £12M if I remember rightly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I am worried about our friends across the city if this goes our wayAfter 3 years of humiliation on the park they have thrown all their energies into our demise, hypothesising for months on end when we will be finishing, writing blogs under multiple names pretending they have an inside track to the case and ignoring the fact that the people feeding them all this shite have been wrong about everything so far ("fakeover" us having to sell all our players, administration two years ago)If we win, and i have no idea if we will or won’t, what will these poor people cling to then.....or will they maybe notice that after three years of winning nothing they have a bit of a crisis on their hands not us…..Im not so sure we will win but I am 100% with you on the rest. It really would be the biggest kick in the baws to the online mentalists ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 The Arsenal case was not about EBT's but about image rights, so has no bearing on this.Whyte's bid and the boards bid both went active the day the tax case restarted. I can only assume they could then see HMRC's hand and had little to fear.I can't see Whyte jumping in if there was much possibility of losing this big style.Just think what a fecking waste of time by all those timmys knocking up all those websites and posts about this. They've got themselves foaming over our inescapable demise. They should know better, yet they'll still keep counting us out, only to get devastated again.Even animals learn.The Arsenal case was about EBT's Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Arsenal paid up in fear of losing planning permission for the Emirates - £12M if I remember rightly.I cannot find a single shred of evidence they paid it.They made a provision of circa £8 million in their accounts for the tax, but there is no articles or news that ive found that states they went to court or settled on that amount.Just because they make a provision, doesn't necessarily mean they paid it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJ 743 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I cannot find a single shred of evidence they paid it.They made a provision of circa £8 million in their accounts for the tax, but there is no articles or news that ive found that states they went to court or settled on that amount.Just because they make a provision, doesn't necessarily mean they paid it. In 2005, Arsenal was forced to pay nearly £12m in tax after it set up a series of front companies and offshore trusts to reward its stars.http://www.cityam.com/news-and-analysis/football-stars-face-tax-bill-crackdownThe case is being handled by the elite football division of HMRC's special compliance team.They've successfully targeted other clubs trying to dodge paying tax - including English giants Arsenal, who were hit with a bill of almost £12m. http://www.thesun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/2950423/Rangers-chiefs-in-tax-U-turn-as-HM-Revenue-and-Customs-probe-club.htmlAll a year before the Emirates opens with £100M going to the club from Emirates, for the 15 year naming rights - a deal that was done a year before the tax bill. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJ 743 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 The Arsenal case was about EBT's Chelsea and Man Utd players, to name a couple, were about image rights, Arsenal was EBT's. If I remember correctly, the Premiership fought on behalf of the players, for the image right case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 In 2005, Arsenal was forced to pay nearly £12m in tax after it set up a series of front companies and offshore trusts to reward its stars.http://www.cityam.com/news-and-analysis/football-stars-face-tax-bill-crackdownThe case is being handled by the elite football division of HMRC's special compliance team.They've successfully targeted other clubs trying to dodge paying tax - including English giants Arsenal, who were hit with a bill of almost £12m. http://www.thesun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/2950423/Rangers-chiefs-in-tax-U-turn-as-HM-Revenue-and-Customs-probe-club.htmlAll a year before the Emirates opens with £100M going to the club from Emirates, for the 15 year naming rights - a deal that was done a year before the tax bill.To be fair, you have just lifted 2 articles from papers mate, both of which are opinion, just like below."Sir David Murray stands to take a hit of £108 million if he sells his 92% stake in Rangers FC to a buyer willing only to take on the club’s estimated £30m debt."http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/corporate-sme/murray-faces-108m-hit-if-rangers-buyer-refuses-to-take-on-club-s-debt-1.1020769If Arsenal had paid that sum of money, it would be listed in their accounts in my opinion. Here is what their accounts said:"The effective rate of tax is a consequence of provisions made to deal with a recent House of Lords ruling on the deductibility for corporation tax purposes of contributions made by companies to Employee Benefit Trusts ("EBT"). The Group has used an EBT, as part of its remuneration arrangements, for a number of years and claimed a corporate tax deduction for the contributions made in line with the then current law. We are reviewing the House of Lords ruling and assessing its impact on the Group, however, we believe it is prudent in these accounts to reserve for the tax which may become payable in the event that tax relief for the Group’s past EBT contributions is denied."http://www.arsenal.com/assets/_files/documents/jul_08/gun__1215525750_accounts2005.pdfThe provided for £11m of which £3m was natural tax due on profits. There is no mention of a further £4m penalty the following year in the accounts and documented evidence from 2005/06 that this happened.Surely if they paid it, there would be an article from 5 years ago backing this up ? No ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luv2CtheRANGERSscore 3 Posted June 10, 2011 Author Share Posted June 10, 2011 I was just giving an honest answer to a shitty question well below the standard I expect from fellow bears to be honest.Quits?In fairness most of my posts are full of stupid questions I'm just reading the replies now I think it's a fair point there must be something in it for hmrc to pursue it this far I'm not scare mongering I just think we shouldn't be so flippant to say it is black and White I think we will be fined a nominal amount for something that's all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luv2CtheRANGERSscore 3 Posted June 10, 2011 Author Share Posted June 10, 2011 I was just giving an honest answer to a shitty question well below the standard I expect from fellow bears to be honest.Quits?In fairness most of my posts are full of stupid questions I'm just reading the replies now I think it's a fair point there must be something in it for hmrc to pursue it this far I'm not scare mongering I just think we shouldn't be so flippant to say it is black and White I think we will be fined a nominal amount for something that's all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts