Jump to content

Rangers' tax bill is £6m higher than previously thought


disgruntled_bear

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I warned you from the start about this con man.

I was told stories about him from certain people from the very beginning and I knew they were true.

If this club is ever run again by one man, I may think twice about where my money is going.

Link to post
Share on other sites

to replace it with 27 million to ticketus and 15 million to the tax man with no catering income. etc.

masterplan.

We potentially owe £49 million for the tax case. Whyte has more or less doubled our debts. Guys a genius.

At what point does it become cheaper just to start a brand new club from scratch with a new stadium? Not suggesting it mind, just illustrating how grim it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's £6m more this week and wouldn't be surprised if another couple of million are added on again next week. Whyte has taken us for a ride and there will be interesting news from Strathclyde Police no doubt in the coming days.

Hope so (tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

We potentially owe £49 million for the tax case. Whyte has more or less doubled our debts. Guys a genius.

At what point does it become cheaper just to start a brand new club from scratch with a new stadium? Not suggesting it mind, just illustrating how grim it is.

whatever point it is whyte will make sure we reach it. or already has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We potentially owe £49 million for the tax case. Whyte has more or less doubled our debts. Guys a genius.

At what point does it become cheaper just to start a brand new club from scratch with a new stadium? Not suggesting it mind, just illustrating how grim it is.

as of this moment in time the big tax case has not been decided so we owe he haw to that

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in a nutshell, Whyte bought Rangers for £1, paid off the debt to Lloyds by borrowing....sorry selling 25% of the Season Ticket income for 3 years, before he had actually bought the club for £1. put the £20 million in his own company first and not paid any VAT on it, effectively doubling the clubs debt to the taxman and moving the clubs £20 million debt from Lloyds to him.

He's down a £1 but potentially up £20 million and the club is in the shit. He does realise if this turns out to be as bad as it looks, there is every likelihood that his statement that 'he doesn't do walking away' may turn out to be the only true thing he's uttered in years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

can someone work this out

according to the BBC there (im not doubting it or defendibng whyte) they said that the money that HMRC got ringfenced for the wee tax case was used to clear the VAT bill owed on the ticketus deal

how is that allowed, i thought ring fenced money meant it cant be touched by anyone, how then could HMRC use it to pay a different bill

thats like your bank going into your account to pay a debt on another account you have with them, is that not illegal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

can someone work this out

according to the BBC there (im not doubting it or defendibng whyte) they said that the money that HMRC got ringfenced for the wee tax case was used to clear the VAT bill owed on the ticketus deal

how is that allowed, i thought ring fenced money meant it cant be touched by anyone, how then could HMRC use it to pay a different bill

thats like your bank going into your account to pay a debt on another account you have with them, is that not illegal?

banks do this all the time.

they will move money from your savings to cover a direct debit.

we are no longer appealing the small tax case so the cash is theirs. what they apply it to is neither hear nor there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

banks do this all the time.

they will move money from your savings to cover a direct debit.

we are no longer appealing the small tax case so the cash is theirs. what they apply it to is neither hear nor there.

Why would they apply it to another bill and why would they tell all and sundry?

Link to post
Share on other sites

banks do this all the time.

they will move money from your savings to cover a direct debit.

we are no longer appealing the small tax case so the cash is theirs. what they apply it to is neither hear nor there.

so why pay the VAT and not the older bill, is it not better to close an old account than to keep it open, especially as it must be accruing interest and penalties :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 28 April 2024 11:30 Until 13:30
      0  
      St Mirren v Rangers
      The SMiSA Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Main Event and Sky Sports Football

×
×
  • Create New...