boss 1,941 Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Like your style - demonstrate you've got a subscription to FT to prove your credentials.Nice one Haha, nice catch. :lol: Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHB 63 Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Haha, nice catch. :lol:See post #24 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 See post #24Haha. Well what are you doing posting a link that you can't read, that we can't read, that naeb'dy can read? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHB 63 Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Haha. Well what are you doing posting a link that you can't read, that we can't read, that naeb'dy can read? I could read it and I don't have a subscription. So I assumed everyone could. For everyone's benefit .....Rangers’ plunge into administration has cast a shadow far beyond the anguished fans of the historic Glasgow football club.The main challenge to Rangers’ financial future is a potential bill of up to £75m from its use of employee benefits trusts, an obscure tax-planning mechanism in which clubs paid players’ wages into offshore trusts to minimise income tax and national insurance.But tax lawyers reckon that these trusts were used by hundreds of businesses – not just football clubs – to reward their high earners and the amount of potential tax claims could reach £2bn.Neal Todd, a lawyer at Berwin Leighton Paisner and an expert in tax planning, said his firm had knowledge of some 300 inquiries HM Revenue & Customs had launched into an array of UK companies that used EBTs to remunerate high earners.The Financial Times understands that this includes City of London banks, finance funds, manufacturing companies and Premier League football clubs.“There is deep anxiety that EBTs are now being challenged [by the Revenue] in a retrospective way,” said Mr Todd. “The amounts at stake are potentially sizeable [as] this was a widely used way to remunerate staff in a tax-efficient manner for many years.”Last year the Revenue, in an effort to entice those who received their pay offshore back into the tax system, offered a nine-month grace period to those who had operated EBT schemes to pay their tax liabilities without incurring a penalty. That ended in the new year when the law had been changed explicitly to outlaw EBTs for remuneration purposes. The Premier League in England said some clubs had used EBTs in the past. “We’re talking seven or eight years ago. It was never common practice and no Premier League clubs use EBTs any more,” a spokesperson said.Rangers went into administration this week after the UK tax authority claimed it had not received £9m of payroll taxes that were due in the past year, while its trust case is still to be settled by a tribunal.Elliot Weston, a corporate tax partner with the international business lawyers Lawrence Graham, said the administration suggested Rangers were anticipating an adverse decision. “Going into administration looks like a pre-emptive strike against HMRC,” he said.One Rangers adviser said the Revenue wanted to set a precedent for bigger targets in England. “The HMRC consistently refused to settle our employee benefits trust case because they saw it as an important test case for other football clubs, businesses and individuals,” said the adviser.The Revenue declined to discuss the specifics of any case.“HMRC’s main focus on EBTs continues to be by engagement with our customers to see how we can settle by agreement,” a spokesperson said. “However, where an employer using an EBT does not come forward, we will look to take action through litigation.”In Glasgow, fans have rallied round Rangers this week even as the club is set to be docked 10 points – and with that any realistic chance of retaining the Scottish Premier League title – after entering administration. Some have voiced hope that the club might be taken into a form of joint ownership by its huge fan base or sold to wealthy foreigners, as happened to Chelsea and Manchester City.But angry supporters hung a banner on the gates of Ibrox stadium that read: “Memo to HMRC – we will not stand idly by and let our club die.”Eschewing banners for barristers, the message from the UK’s boardrooms is likely to be the same.“We’ve seen an onslaught of challenges [by the Revenue]; undoubtedly there will be litigation on them,” said Mr Todd. “If Rangers lose, there will be considerable worry in the City.” Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 I could read it ...Thanks for posting the article. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
topgoalie 637 Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 After losing in the High Court yesterday HMRC will be looking for an example to set, they would not think twice about permanently ploughing us under, that action would set alarm bells ringing through out football.I am encouraged that this result was announced before our own tribunal result, I hope I am not clutching at very thin straws. http://goo.gl/z818Slisten HMRC are as accountable as any for their actions,as an accountant told me pre Rangers admin,this country is fckd [for better words],and need any way of recompensation available,ie go after anyone............ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.