FSM 20,892 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Let the hate commence..... Click here to get angry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverAndEver 72,236 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 RAINJURZ UR DEID, HH. GBTP. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smile 26,622 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Building Bridges Ebts were legal and we admitted ours. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
To Be A Ranger 4,032 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 1 minute ago, FSM said: Let the hate commence..... Click here to get angry Can't you paste it. I'm not for clicking through pages of the Record and answering ad question's just to read their unbalanced views. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacBoyd 5,654 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Fair enough really Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSM 20,892 Posted October 29, 2016 Author Share Posted October 29, 2016 Just now, To Be A Ranger said: Can't you paste it. I'm not for clicking through pages of the Record and answering ad question's just to read their unbalanced views. I'm on a tablet mate, not really possible. The story is worth it for the rage factor alone. I reckon it's all Paul Murray's fault. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE_Ibrox_Preacher 2,812 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Rangers pay off £250,000 EBT fine after failing to overturn controversial SPFL decision 09:56, 29 OCT 2016 UPDATED 10:07, 29 OCT 2016 BY RECORD REPORTER IBROX chiefs insisted the club was not liable for the actions of the Oldco company but have agreed to stump up the money after losing their case at an SFA tribunal. 171SHARES RANGERS have revealed they have paid £250,000 to the SPFL to settle a fine imposed upon the Ibrox Oldco. The Light Blues issued their annual accounts yesterday and buried in the detail was the admission that the club had finally been forced to cough up the cash to the SPFL. The SPFL – which was formed in 2013 – is the successor to the SPL. The League body – led by cheif executive Neil Doncaster – claimed it was was due the cash as part of the deal brokered by the SFA after Rangers were liquidated in 2012. The newco company that was formed by Charles Green that year agreed it would be liable for any footballing sanctions imposed by the SPL in relation to the activities of the oldco club. READ MORE Rangers halve losses to £3.3million and announce turnover increase as Ibrox annual figures are released In February 2013 an independent SPL commission set up to probe the use of EBTs at Ibrox fined the Oldco £250,000. The EBT scheme has been ruled to be an illegal tax avoidance mechanism although the case has now been appealed to the UK’s Supreme Court. Lord Nimmo Smith – who chaired the SPL probe – focused on the club’s use of undisclosed side letters to players about their EBT payments rather than the legality of the payments themselves and decided that Rangers had breached the rules by not disclosing the payments to the SFA. Crucially he also has judged that Rangers did not gain an unfair sporting advantage from their use of EBTs which saw players at Ibrox receive tax free payments of £9m in one season alone. SNS Group Rangers chairman Dave King battled against the SPFL over the Oldco fine Rangers therefore avoided the most severe sanction of losing up to five SPL titles won during the period investigated from 2000 to 2011. The commission decided Rangers had gained no sporting advantage and stopped short of stripping the club of titles and it appeared the issue was over as the fine was levied on a liquidated company. READ MORE Rangers lose appeal against £250k EBT bill but vow to fight on At the time the commission stated: "Although we are well aware that, as Oldco is in liquidation, in practice any fine is likely to be substantially irrecoverable and to the extent that it is recovered the cost will be borne by the creditors of Oldco, we nevertheless think it essential to mark the seriousness of the contraventions with a large financial penalty." Rangers always maintained that the liability for the football debts rested with the Oldco. But the SPFL was adamant the club was still liable for the cash and threatened to withhold broadcasting money and other sums due to Rangers if they didn't stump up. SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster was adamant that Rangers should pay up An SPFL statement in 2014 said: "The Rangers Football Club Limited (“Rangers Newco”) signed an agreement under which they would be liable for such sums.” Rangers, though, doggedly refused to pay up and appealed to the SFA – Scottish football’s ultimate governing body – in a bid to overturn the SPFL decision. However, in March the Daily Record revealed how three law lords sitting on an SFA Arbitration Tribunal had found against Rangers. READ MORE Rangers lose EBT side letters appeal as lawlords order £250,000 fine to be paid to SPFL The club then agreed to cough up the cash with the Rangers accounts now showing that the SPFL eventually received £286,000 to settle the dispute. The Rangers annual report issued yesterday states: "In 2012, the SPL raised proceedings against The Rangers Football Club plc (Oldco) in relation to the use of EBTs and following a hearing in February 2013 a fine of £250,000 and costs of £150,000 were levied against Oldco. "As part of the agreement to allow Rangers to participate in Scottish Football, there was a clause inserted where it was agreed that Rangers would become liable and responsible for the imposition of any sanctions by the SPL for any breach of SPL Rules and or articles by Oldco/Rangers FC (i.e. the £250,000 fine). "The Club believed that the SPFL had, through documents and actions, waived all and any right it may have had to insist upon payment under the clause, thereby holding the Club harmless in relation to the sanctions. This was disputed by the SPFL. The statement regarding the £250,000 in the Rangers annual report "Within the current SPFL rules there is a provision (known as the offset rule) whereby if any amounts are due to the SPFL, the Board of the SPFL are entitled to withhold amounts due to the Club up to the value of the amount outstanding. "The Board of the SPFL determined that it would impose the offset rule to recover the £250,000 fine from the Club. "As a result of this decision, the Club invoked Article 99 of the SFA Articles seeking a determination by an Arbitral Tribunal appointed by the SFA that the sum was not due to the SPFL. READ MORE Rangers and SPFL at war after club is landed with £250,000 oldco EBT tax fine "The tribunal was held in October 2015 and found in favour of the SPFL and as such the Club was liable to pay the fine plus associated costs. "The Club duly paid the SPFL and the total paid during the year amounted to £286,000 and has been disclosed as a non-recurring cost in the financial statements." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Reynolds 3,359 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Why are Sevco paying Rangers' fines? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
To Be A Ranger 4,032 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 3 minutes ago, FSM said: I'm on a tablet mate, not really possible. The story is worth it for the rage factor alone. I reckon it's all Paul Murray's fault. Cheers. So they imply LNS got it wrong. Also although the SPFL admit the blame lies with old Co. they are fining us regardless. WTF! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanFrontSince96 315 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 I take it we will now be chasing the prize money withheld from us? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LochendBilly 8,423 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 20 minutes ago, BluesClues said: Why are Sevco paying Rangers' fines? "The newco company that was formed by Charles Green that year agreed it would be liable for any footballing sanctions imposed by the SPL in relation to the activities of the oldco club." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B1872 21,175 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 What's this got to do with Sevco?!?! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B1872 21,175 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 31 minutes ago, BluesClues said: Why are Sevco paying Rangers' fines? Can't get my head round that either mate tbh! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macranger 296 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Right, so correct me if I'm wrong. We paid a fine imposed on the "old" Rangers, but we don't get the money we were due from, uefa for players appearances for their counrty, the extra due from everton for Jelavic, or the transfer fee for Steven Davis?? These fuckers will just make up rules to suit themselves. Also, if the SPL & SFL both went out the game to form the SPFL, did their history transfer with them, or is it a brand new league altogether? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
linfield1690 4,249 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Fuck this im angry now our board has no fight at all wankers Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
big blue Fin 3,724 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Run the white fucking flag up the pole at Ibrox. Dave King GET TAE FUCK and take your wee bouncy haired bridge building tim appeaser with you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 1 minute ago, big blue Fin said: Run the white fucking flag up the pole at Ibrox. Dave King GET TAE FUCK and take your wee bouncy haired bridge building tim appeaser with you. The board did fight it. Charles Green put responsibility at the newco's feet when he signed the ridiculous 5-way agreement. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 9 minutes ago, macranger said: Right, so correct me if I'm wrong. We paid a fine imposed on the "old" Rangers, but we don't get the money we were due from, uefa for players appearances for their counrty, the extra due from everton for Jelavic, or the transfer fee for Steven Davis?? These fuckers will just make up rules to suit themselves. Also, if the SPL & SFL both went out the game to form the SPFL, did their history transfer with them, or is it a brand new league altogether? IIt's the old SPL company with a new name. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 21 minutes ago, B1872 said: Can't get my head round that either mate tbh! Charles Green. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.A.I 36,183 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 As we should pay it IMO we can't be newco oldco when it suits regardless if you agree with fine (which I don't ) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegendofCoop 17,489 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 I actually thought we'd already paid it! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingKirk 25,831 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 what was the other options? Seen as there limited its best we pay and move on from that dark period in our history. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlegKuznetsov 10,816 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 So we've been railroaded and effectively blackmailed into paying a fine that was explicitly stipulated to remain unpaid, as defined by a committee appointed by the SFA themselves, plus legal costs, as part of a five way agreement, made before EBT judgements have been finalised, after previous drafts of said agreement wanted to strip titles without even considering the case when our main rivals and their supporter-lawyers were party to drawing up that "deal" and the governing bodies were happy to go along with it. Since then, I've been unable to take Scottish football seriously. Even Clinton and Trump would be shocked by the levels of corruption involved in this twisted serious of events, and that's before you even consider that our rivals also used EBTs, but swiftly stopped and, uniquely, voluntarily repaid the supposedly unpaid tax without request, just as they were in discussions with a government official and supporter relating to his future appointment as chairman. At the same time they went on to illegal film industry schemes which removed responsibility from the club to the players, who all happened to join the scheme either at the same time or shortly after signing, which of course merely coincides with HMRC showing a uniquely ruthless streak in pursuing Rangers after coming to agreements with numerous English clubs, many of whom put more money through the exact same scheme. Then, again almost uniquely, confidential documents relating to HMRC's case against Rangers were leaked to website that just happened to be run by people who had a penchant for anti-Protestant, sectarian terms and catchphrases about cheating, financial doping and Hector. And, of course, the SFA demanded the money at a point in time when they're cash-strapped, to put it mildly. Regan has a dreadful record since joining his old colleague from the Coors days, Lawwell, in a powerful position in Scottish football. All coincidences, of course. Ahem! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Bear 72 363 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 The media love to throw about the term 'illegal'. That word is used in a broad sense in the context of tax rules, not in the context of criminal law. Those are tax rules that may still prove to have not been broken once the Supreme Court appeal has been heard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juniorsparkie 492 Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 following a hearing in February 2013 a fine of £250,000 and costs of £150,000 were levied against Oldco. So £400,000 that worked out well, ffs. 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.