Jump to content

Any idea


KingKirk
 Share

Recommended Posts

Of when we will hear a decision from HMRC...I get the feeling their loving making us sweat. Also what's in our best interests with regards to an outcome.

In my opinion I feel it may be better if we don't win it.. As mad as it sounds I think its important we move on..winning the case may not allow this to happen, as HMRC will automatically appeal, could that run for another 18 months?

What's in The Rangers best interests?

Opinions

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of when we will hear a decision from HMRC...I get the feeling their loving making us sweat. Also what's in our best interests with regards to an outcome.

In my opinion I feel it may be better if we don't win it.. As mad as it sounds I think its important we move on..winning the case may not allow this to happen, as HMRC will automatically appeal, could that run for another 18 months?

What's in The Rangers best interests?

Opinions

The decision is not coming from HMRC it is coming from the three judges who heard the case,HMRC will be sweating on the outcome the same as us,but obviously not to such a great degree.HMRC DO NOT HAVE A DECISION TO MAKE.Their decision wil be whether to accept the judges ruling or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of when we will hear a decision from HMRC...I get the feeling their loving making us sweat. Also what's in our best interests with regards to an outcome.

In my opinion I feel it may be better if we don't win it.. As mad as it sounds I think its important we move on..winning the case may not allow this to happen, as HMRC will automatically appeal, could that run for another 18 months?

What's in The Rangers best interests?

Opinions

The decision is not coming from HMRC, but the First Tier Tribunal judges have as long as they need to make a decision, so theoretically it could be months yet :anguish: . On your other point, I agree, I think the best case scenario for us now would be a minor loss, in the region of £10m, one where the issue would be sorted, but we should hopefully be able to agree a CVA, as opposed to the potential for further months of uncertainty.

The short answer is that I don't think anyone knows when a decision will be forthcoming, other than those directly involved with the FTT

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm might be wrong but I'm sure at the time of the tribunal in January I read that the judges had to make their decision within 90 days. And the 90 days are up tomorrow.

90 days were up on the 17th mate! However the fact that it hasn't been settled now tells me that HMRC's case is not as clear cut as many papes hoped

Link to post
Share on other sites

90 days were up on the 17th mate! However the fact that it hasn't been settled now tells me that HMRC's case is not as clear cut as many papes hoped

Even if HMRC's case is not strong it surely doesn't take 3 judges 90days to come to a verdict?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its anything like criminal law, if there is a shred of doubt then they can't find us guilty, SDM, AJ and shyte were all confident of winning so here's hoping!

After this I can get back to singing no nuns priests nor holy water :crabflute:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I fundamentally cannot understand how any buyer can reach an agreement to buy the club until this BTC is resolved.

If the buyer agrees a CVA pot of 20 million and then they are awarded ownership of Rangers, their 20 Million is gone to creditors. If the Tribunal judges then find in favour of the HMRC we are back to square one.

If we reach agreement through a CVA with HMRC that addresses the BTC and leave us with no future liability then fine but surely with all the people that are due money from us, all the creditors are not going to be able to reach a settlement out of 20 million after HMRC have had their say. Plus why should we pay out against a case that has not been resolved? Why would any legitimate creditor accept a reduced share of the CVA pot due to us settling with HMRC for a case that we might yet win....

confused.com

I really don't see how we can move forward without the BTC being closed out

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is why it's taken the administrators so long. I think they thought a decision would have been reached by now. How can they possibly get a new owner if they don't know the result of the BTC.

I fundamentally cannot understand how any buyer can reach an agreement to buy the club until this BTC is resolved.

If the buyer agrees a CVA pot of 20 million and then they are awarded ownership of Rangers, their 20 Million is gone to creditors. If the Tribunal judges then find in favour of the HMRC we are back to square one.

If we reach agreement through a CVA with HMRC that addresses the BTC and leave us with no future liability then fine but surely with all the people that are due money from us, all the creditors are not going to be able to reach a settlement out of 20 million after HMRC have had their say. Plus why should we pay out against a case that has not been resolved? Why would any legitimate creditor accept a reduced share of the CVA pot due to us settling with HMRC for a case that we might yet win....

confused.com

I really don't see how we can move forward without the BTC being closed out

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its anything like criminal law, if there is a shred of doubt then they can't find us guilty, SDM, AJ and shyte were all confident of winning so here's hoping!

After this I can get back to singing no nuns priests nor holy water :crabflute:

It's not unfortunately. The decision has to be made only on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not unfortunately. The decision has to be made only on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt.

I don't believe that is strictly true. Yes, in general civil cases the burden of proof is on the balance of probabilities and not beyond reasonable doubt.

However, tax law is something else. It might look like a duck, quack like a duck and smell like a duck, but if you've got the legal letter that says it's a swan....

Tax specialists make their money by making ducks not be ducks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of when we will hear a decision from HMRC...I get the feeling their loving making us sweat. Also what's in our best interests with regards to an outcome.

In my opinion I feel it may be better if we don't win it.. As mad as it sounds

Are you taking drugs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe that is strictly true. Yes, in general civil cases the burden of proof is on the balance of probabilities and not beyond reasonable doubt.

However, tax law is something else. It might look like a duck, quack like a duck and smell like a duck, but if you've got the legal letter that says it's a swan....

Tax specialists make their money by making ducks not be ducks.

Talk of ducks aside, the standard of proof at a first tier tax tribunal is on the balance of probabilities. I wasn't putting forward a guess or an opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone know why is tking so fucking long?

are the judges going over EVERY single contract & payment from the EBT's with a fine tooth comb?

could it be they are making a decision on each and every payment individually then tallying it all up to see how much is owed?

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.

 Share

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...