Baingate And The Tax Scenario

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

I know another bloody thread But.....

Mr Bain, club said he had resigned. now to do that he would have either said to Craig Whyte as he was the only person that could accept this. Or tender in writing.

So if he tendered it in writing , game over

If he had asked for a meeting with Craig Whyte, now I for one do not think Craig Whyte , would have had such a meeting without having witnesses present.

Now do we take the clubs version that he tendered his resignation, well i for one do.

Now for the tax scenario.

Firstly , the scheme that the club set up, bearing in mind this was under a Murray company (my understanding) as to the owners of the scheme. Now these schemes are usually brought about by changes in the Budget. And without knowing the full facts of the budget that created the start up of this particular scheme. My guess would be it would be changes to pension schemes which have been hit and bleed to death by various Governments. You used to get your highest rate of tax relief for pensions. Eg years ago when the Beatles at their peek the highest rate was 98p in the £. This did not mean that they paid £980k for every million they earned, as they tax had different tax bands based on earned income so you work through the bands.

Now a really good tax consultant would show his clients as a 98p in the £ tax payer, But MAYBE ONLY £5000 would be taxed at 98p in £. This would under the rules allow the Beatles to pay eg £1mil into pensions that would have(at that time no tax on the growth) and reduce taxable profits by 980k for every million invested.

Stay with me.

Through time pensions are not worth the investment that they once were. So the big legal firms , investment specialists and tax consultants go over Budget changes to investments with a fine tooth-comb. So this would have been the birth of such a scheme.

Now to egt the scheme passed for the market place would be put before the revenue for approval, as the guys who come up with the budget plans are not as good as the guys who work in the private sector , so they leave loopholes that take ages to come to their attention.

So of they go the three wise men like tax consultant, investment specialist and the big law firms to find people/business to tell them about this wonderful scheme.

For the player can be like manor for heaven bearing in mind that they could take pension at age 35. and big companies can save fortunes in tax.

So it's presented to Murray his guys say Davie boy this is a cracker , we will save a great deal through this scheme plus will help us get the bigger players. Now back to the old board

So down the road some guy sitting in a dank dark basement in HMRC notices a shortfall in numerous taxes being paid. yip they have discoverd that a loophole has appeared and we need to close this. So lets go to town. Send letters waring them we want our money.

Next (nearly there) this £2.8m plus the interest that suddenly AJ our previous chairman announced. How can this be afterall do compnaies not do tax returns and was this not an old demand.

So think of this after the end of their tax year . The companies auditors turn up (could never understand why they come on after the year end as the only way to reduce tax after year end is bonuses) They then produce accounts to the Financial Director to bring to the Board so there we have the board with the fully audited accounts. Who signs of these accounts.wouldit be the c

Chairman maybe CEO and more than likely the Financial Director, so off they go to the Revenue they look and accept them or they say wait a minute here, we think you owe us this and here is the reason why , so back and forth it goes Revenue-club-revenue (get the picture) Comes a time when the Revenus say nope you must pay this £2.8m and by the way we are adding interest as of now.

The eg above I ASK THE QUESTION HOW CAN THIS BE A SURPRISE , THAT IS ANNOUNCED JUST BEFORE THE BUY-OUT IS TO TAKE PLACE?

Both tax situations have nothing in common the smaller one looks like someone has overlooked this.The big one is just the tax discovering that the loophole ahd been successfully

used and they are desperatley trying to close (which they will) but also hit schemes that have been up and running . And if waht i mentioned way way back the proper tax agreement had been recived for this scheme to be out in force, then the only way HRMC can get what they are looking for is to prove that the scheme has been run properly as to the scheme rules.

AND NOTE I SAID THEY HAVE TO PROVE. these schemes should have audit dates to make sure they are performing and doing what they are designed to do.

Sorry for the ramble ,must have made mistakes but , whoever points them out and can be discussed but might stop all this doom and gloom just now.

Someone in connection with the club must have looked at this scheme when put forward to agree to it.

the above is my take on the various rumours and alleged comments in the public domain.

Pheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew Craig Whyte if you read this and want to offer me a job I am very very good

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Not my recollection mate.

My understanding is that we suspended him when he was in America, then before even speaking to him, Craig Whyte said in a Sunday paper interview that there was no way back for Bain.

As for your tax situation you are partly right and partly wrong.

The brainchild of the scheme was tax advisors as you have said and back then loads of businesses were signing up to the idea. HMRC find out its going on and investigate businesses to see if they have been doing it properly and if they believe they havent, then they make a demand. Clearly when they looked at ours, they believed we were on the wrong side of right.

Now having entered into a FULL investigation, Rangers handed over all our books as we felt we had done the right thing. It was then during this exercise that HMRC discovered a different scheme that they didnt like(the £2.8m one) The club and its lawyers have accepted they got that one wrong, hence agreeing to pay that bill.

As for auditors....Auditors dont prepare accounts. Auditors only check accounts. So the Finance Director create the accounts and once finished, auditors come in and go through everything to ensure they are right, then sign them off. It is true though that the auditors should have been checking that we were on the right side of wrong on the big tax case.

This all means that if we are found guilty, then we do have a Potential PI claim against the tax advisors and the auditors. But as PI cover is normally limited to £2 million or not much greater, this wont really help us.

Hope that helps.

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

Not my recollection mate.

My understanding is that we suspended him when he was in America, then before even speaking to him, Craig Whyte said in a Sunday paper interview that there was no way back for Bain.

As for your tax situation you are partly right and partly wrong.

The brainchild of the scheme was tax advisors as you have said and back then loads of businesses were signing up to the idea. HMRC find out its going on and investigate businesses to see if they have been doing it properly and if they believe they havent, then they make a demand. Clearly when they looked at ours, they believed we were on the wrong side of right.

Now having entered into a FULL investigation, Rangers handed over all our books as we felt we had done the right thing. It was then during this exercise that HMRC discovered a different scheme that they didnt like(the £2.8m one) The club and its lawyers have accepted they got that one wrong, hence agreeing to pay that bill.

As for auditors....Auditors dont prepare accounts. Auditors only check accounts. So the Finance Director create the accounts and once finished, auditors come in and go through everything to ensure they are right, then sign them off. It is true though that the auditors should have been checking that we were on the right side of wrong on the big tax case.

This all means that if we are found guilty, then we do have a Potential PI claim against the tax advisors and the auditors. But as PI cover is normally limited to £2 million or not much greater, this wont really help us.

Hope that helps.

Most certainly did , got the auditor part ass from elbow cheers. Was he scheme not set up int eh name of MIM?

I 'm sure i read Craig Whyte said he resigned.

Again thanks for taking the time to read and set me right on points you mentioned

[delamonty 992]

Wasn't Bain over in the US of A @ Walter's white water rafting trip? It was announced that were were 'financial irregularities' and he was suspended. Doubt he resigned.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Most certainly did , got the auditor part ass from elbow cheers. Was he scheme not set up int eh name of MIM?

I 'm sure i read Craig Whyte said he resigned.

Again thanks for taking the time to read and set me right on points you mentioned

My understanding was that Bain had offered his resignation in March but it wasnt accepted. Whyte then suspended him and said there was no way back. I suppose you could say that technically Bain then resigned however it is considered as "constructive dismissal" which is when the Company leaves no option for an employee BUT to resign.

[Edmiston Drive 3,846]

My understanding was that Bain had offered his resignation in March but it wasnt accepted. Whyte then suspended him and said there was no way back. I suppose you could say that technically Bain then resigned however it is considered as "constructive dismissal" which is when the Company leaves no option for an employee BUT to resign.

Yeah see what you mean. Well hope they find something. Annoyed me when i saw him sitting in the stand looking bored and fiddling with his mobile

[stuger70 1]

I think Craig Whyte said in one of his interviews that Bain had resigned or offered to resign earlier in the year before the takeover was complete before the takeover had been completed.

[spanther22 474]

Wasn't Bain over in the US of A @ Walter's white water rafting trip? It was announced that were were 'financial irregularities' and he was suspended. Doubt he resigned.

in those papers leaked today it said bain was in new york on business.

[crooner 0]

If he resigned, he will be claiming constructive dismissal.