will_1974 204 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 my point is though that HMRC clearly thought the board before Whyte were needing looked at, considering a lot of fans claimed them to be whiter than whyte (pun intended)I think you are right Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tontospal 1,116 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Whyte and Withey are going to jail. Ticketus have lost their money. As for the rest - swept under a big carpet imo.Only if we let it.We must make the most of yesterday's decision and make our enemies and those responsible pay. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Educator 1,572 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 I feel that by making implications that SDM and AJ could be investigated on the same level s Whyte is just HMRC trying to muddy the waters as a means of self defence. By now it's fairly obvious to everybody that the campaign that was waged against Rangers had a lot more to it than a regular attempt gain taxes. Their deals with numerous clubs and individuals over the period of he BTC is the proof of this, basically they are trying to hold of being forced to name the person/persons within HMRC who were behind this.To this end it would not surprise me if they appeal the appeal result as I honestly believe that the appeal that was launched against the original result was a means by which they could not name names during an active case. Likewise I doubt if any Police investigation into these people could be made for he same reason. Let's face it how long have the Police had to investigate the theft of tax and court documents in relation to the BTC? Documents that subsequently ended up online and being used by so called journalists working on a certain BBC shown documentary. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
True Azure 1,414 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7741859.stmSo very strange that they would NOT come to a settlement with us then. Could someone of influence been pulling some strings perhaps?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1690tamRFC 5,001 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 Didnt the SFA do a fit and proper person test on criag whyte before he took over? As your ment to do at any club! Would be ironic considering he had been previously been a banned company director. Then had to the fact the tried to sanction the 5 way agreement! They av to be brought to task.I remember when Regan was asked about this at the time he actually admitted that the fit and proper person test was not applied to Whyte as it would have cost too much money, aye not as much as it cost us you cunt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimfanciesthedude 25,044 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 I feel that by making implications that SDM and AJ could be investigated on the same level s Whyte is just HMRC trying to muddy the waters as a means of self defence.are you 100% confident that murray doesnt have anymore skeletons in his closet? im not Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dummiesoot 16,123 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 I remember when Regan was asked about this at the time he actually admitted that the fit and proper person test was not applied to Whyte as it would have cost too much money, aye not as much as it cost us you cunt.As far as I was aware the old SFA test was basically 'are you a fit and proper person?' Pile of shite really. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jelavic191 4,558 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 http://news.bbc.co.u.../uk/7741859.stmSo very strange that they would NOT come to a settlement with us then. Could someone of influence been pulling some strings perhaps??I think there was a certain ex-MP who may have pulled some strings. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchibaldLeitch 380 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 my point is though that HMRC clearly thought the board before Whyte were needing looked at, considering a lot of fans claimed them to be whiter than whyte (pun intended)Yes, regarding their use of the EBT scheme. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave-brock 9 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 Yes, regarding their use of the EBT scheme.That's correct. HMRC had been looking at Rangers with respect to the use of EBT's for years before Murray sold up. That's why we ended up with a fraudulent chancer who called himself Ethan Hawk , then Ellis and Whyte managing to use up a "captain of industrys" valuable time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimfanciesthedude 25,044 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Yes, regarding their use of the EBT scheme.That's correct. HMRC had been looking at Rangers with respect to the use of EBT's for years before Murray sold up. That's why we ended up with a fraudulent chancer who called himself Ethan Hawk , then Ellis and Whyte managing to use up a "captain of industrys" valuable time.would it surprise anyone if it was something completely different, look at how desperate the board were for murray not to sell, Paul Murray with his imaginary 25million quid bid (cunt couldnt even offer up 500k for exclusive bidding rights in admin) to AJ's dossier on Craig Whyte that has never been seenEveryone used to think the old board were protecting their gravy train, what if they were hiding something else and shit scared that a new owner would uncover it all, as it stands whyte never because he was more crooked Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Robot 21,513 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 I don't get what the other parties have to moan about as an exclusivity agreement was set up and only CG paid for it. Unless BK and TBK also paid it then D&P done nothing wrong as there was transparency on what people had to do to get involved. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blumhoilann 6,712 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Regardless of HMRC's dealings with Rangers,whether proper or not,lead to the almost demise of Scotland's greatest Club.HMRC have questions to answer and must be investigated to discover the leakage of so-called,secure information. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carsons Dog 9,878 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Implied in Herald Online ArticleBut an HMRC source said: "The company, Rangers Football Club Plc, did not go into liquidation because of this tax case. It is a matter of public record that Rangers was placed in administration by its principal shareholder and director because it was unable to pay its creditors, including HMRC."HMRC voted against the CVA proposed by the administration. ÂLiquidation allows a full investigation into the conduct of the owners and financial officers of the company, which would not be possible in a CVA."It wouldn't be the case that HMRC would vote down a CVA based on Âwanting directors' conduct to be looked as a general rule, as happened with Rangers."The behaviour of the board in the three years prior to the operating company going into administration in February 2012 was already being looked at by the Insolvency Service's Investigations and Enforcement Directorate.An "HMRC source" said Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edtheger 6 Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 would it surprise anyone if it was something completely different, look at how desperate the board were for murray not to sell, Paul Murray with his imaginary 25million quid bid (cunt couldnt even offer up 500k for exclusive bidding rights in admin) to AJ's dossier on Craig Whyte that has never been seenEveryone used to think the old board were protecting their gravy train, what if they were hiding something else and shit scared that a new owner would uncover it all, as it stands whyte never because he was more crookedmate Celtics lawyers went through rangers books with a very fine tooth comb and could find no wrongdoings 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.