OlegKuznetsov 10,816 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I wonder if they're playing to the gallery and about to indulge in some more mud-slinging HM Revenue and Customs' Rangers tax case appeal to be heard in public By Mike Farrell 13 September 2013 16:34 BST Rangers: The tax case appeal hearing will take place next year.© SNS Group HM Revenue and Customs’ appeal against the Rangers tax case will be heard in public, it has been announced. The tax authority is appealing the First Tier Tax Tribunal that ruled in favour of the Murray Group Holdings and its subsidiary, Rangers oldco. In the tribunal decision released last November, a majority of two to one on the panel found that payments made through offshore employee benefit trusts (EBTs) to players and staff at Rangers should be classified as loans and did not attract PAYE and national insurance. There were five cases where the payments made to employees should be classified as wages and were taxable, the panel found. HMRC launched an appeal against the ‘big’ tax case in the Upper Tribunal last year and it is set to be heard on several days between January and March 2014. Colin Bishopp is the Upper Tribunal judge overseeing it and his directions issued at an earlier preliminary hearing in the case were released on Friday. In it, he confirmed that all further hearings in the case will be made in public, after the previous case was held in private. Judge Bishopp said: "It was common ground before me that the presumption is that tax appeals are heard in public, and with no concealment of identity or detail. I accept that, in the past, there was good reason to fear that the personal safety of certain individuals was threatened; but the information now before me indicates that the threats have abated and have probably disappeared. "Even if the identities of some individuals were concealed in the First-tier Tribunal’s decision, the nature of the issues was not." He stated that the original decision to withhold the identities of those giving evidence in the case came about because of the "strong feelings" football can generate. Judge Bishopp explained: "It is undisputed that various threats of a serious nature have been made, and that the Strathclyde Police have been compelled to offer advice and protection to several individuals involved in RFC’s affairs. Some of the threats have come from disappointed Rangers supporters; others from supporters of rival teams who have formed the opinion that RFC’s use of the EBT gave it an unfair financial advantage. "Largely because of those threats the hearing before the First-tier Tribunal was held in private. Some of the witnesses who gave oral evidence were resident outside the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom courts and tribunals, and therefore could not be compelled to give evidence; they did so only on condition that their names were not revealed. The two HMRC officers who had dealt with the matter, too, were believed to be under threat and their identities were concealed. In consequence the decision was released in a heavily redacted and anonymised form." 'No special status' The judge also noted that many of those who gave evidence could be identified by piecing together their First Tier Tribunal evidence with the findings of the independent Scottish Premier League commission chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith that found Rangers breached the rules by failing to disclose EBT payments. After the case last year, former Rangers owner Sir David Murray stated that the decision left the oldco, which is now in liquidation, and his company facing a "minimal tax liability". Originally, HMRC had sought £36.6m from Rangers oldco for PAYE and national insurance for its use of EBTs from 2001 and 2010. It also alleged that four companies related to Sir David - Murray Group Holdings Ltd, Murray Group Management Ltd, the Premier Property Group Ltd and GM Mining Ltd – owed a further £10m in unpaid taxes on the EBT payments. The panel that heard the first case ruled that most of the trusts were "valid" and payments made to players and staff were loans that are "recoverable" by the trusts. Rangers oldco, now known as RFC 2012 plc, went into administration last February with debts of between £50m and £124m, depending on the amount allotted to the big tax case. Duff and Phelps were unable to agree a company voluntary agreement (CVA) among creditors and liquidators BDO were appointed last October. Rangers’ assets, including Ibrox stadium and the Murray Park training ground, were sold to a newco, formerly Sevco Scotland Ltd, which was backed by Charles Green’s consortium last June in a £5.5m deal. Judge Bishopp said he took into account the financial collapse of Rangers and subsequent fallout into allowing the hearings to be held in public. He stated: "Perhaps because of such feelings, professional football clubs are often regarded as having a special status. In some respects that may be the correct view; but it should nevertheless not be overlooked that a modern professional football club is not a 'club', in the sense of an unincorporated association of members who join together in pursuit of a common purpose, but a commercial enterprise whose function is to generate profits for its shareholders. "From that perspective it has no special status, and there is no reason why its tax affairs should not be as open to scrutiny as those of any other profit-making organisation. The players, too, have no greater right to conceal their tax affairs from public scrutiny than any other taxpayer. The fact that they are in the public eye is irrelevant. "Any application for privacy, anonymity or redaction of detail must therefore be supported by the same type and quality of evidence as would be required of another taxpayer, and will be granted only for the same reasons." Under his direction, the HMRC employees who dealt with the case will remain anonymous in the Upper Tribunal hearing, while other witnesses who were not compelled to give evidence during the original case will not have to give evidence.Source: STV - http://news.stv.tv/scotland/239433-rangers-ebt-tax-case-hmrc-appeal-to-be-heard-in-public-judge-rules/? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 At what point do these tax people become accountable to someone who says enough is enough - wasting more public millions after already losing something like 10 million going after us, to get fuck-all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Big fucking deal it was out in public last time around because the cunts were leaking info. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,630 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Good. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcb 1,167 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I honestly believe that HMRC will exhaust all levels in the appeals process in a attempt to get a decision they're happy with. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Educator 1,572 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 It's a fair old chunk of text to take in over one read through, but this initially seems a dodgy as fuck. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Its unbelievable this is still going, nearly a year since we won FTT yet we have to put up with the taxman acting the big bully with taxpayers money after we win the appeal too we should make sure the idiots who have wasted millions of the public's money lose their jobs for this shit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
allgers 735 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 They want to turn this into a circus... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
VERITAS VOS LIBREBETS 3,424 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I hope that they will pay all our costs and compensation when we win.Cuntiest cunts from cuntsville. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
corkinator 611 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I think these clowns see this as an open goal. If the keep appealing, appealing, etc, they will eventually get the verdict they want, and who at Rangers is going to appeal the appeal?then they go after other clubs in the UK. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Educator 1,572 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Was wondering if this is totally legal. In the past I was always led to believe that the details of peoples tax dealings with HMRC were private and that they could not discuss them in public. Could we actually be about to see HMRC discuss SDM's or anybody else's tax record in public? I wonder if they're setting themselves up for a number of law suits brought by the former owner and players. Perhaps someone can clarify the confidentiality angle to this.Btw, if they do get away with this I get the feeling you will see the title stripping back on the agenda along with the definition of whether or not the SFA/SPFL will still recognise us as the same club. Personally I don't trust any of the people anymore. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straight-Edge-Loyal 6,700 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I hope that they will pay all our costs and compensation when we win.Cuntiest cunts from cuntsville.hoi i used.that in the manure thread.get your own patter i agree with your first point fuck HMRC and for the record manure to. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 11,453 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 What a waste Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,511 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I hope the HMRC win.Dont agree with aggressive tax avoidance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helicopter Sundae 6,457 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Legalbeagle, are you in?Please advise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue and True 311 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I hope the HMRC win.Dont agree with aggressive tax avoidance.FFS Mitre I think what you meant was you hope that the case is heard in the proper manner and the ruling is in line with the laws of the land. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SE5 107 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Michael Farrell. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brazz1972 397 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 If HMRC win the appeal.... Can oldco appeal the appeal? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,511 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 If HMRC win the appeal.... Can oldco appeal the appeal?Not unless someone funds the appeal.What would be the point? Nothing to do with us anymore. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertent 2,081 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 A judge desperate for a moment in the sun. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEPPS BOY 77,603 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 No doubt the court will be full of tarriers... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brazz1972 397 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Not unless someone funds the appeal.What would be the point? Nothing to do with us anymore.I'm making a joke of how pointless the appeal is mate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertent 2,081 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 No doubt the court will be full of tarriers...Like most days then Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitre_mouldmaster 21,511 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I'm making a joke of how pointless the appeal is mate.Would imagine the appeal means a bit more to the HMRC.No lawyer, but imagine if they lose this as a kind of test case, then it fecks them over. If they turn it round and get a victory, they can probably go after more companies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodvale1690 43 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I hope the HMRC win.Dont agree with aggressive tax avoidance.you really are anty anything that's good news for rangers ya plonker 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.