Sporting Advantage

[TrueBluez1972 2]

9 minutes ago, Virtuoso said:

They weren't deemed illegal, they were deemed to have been used in such a way that tax should have been paid (i.e, they were mismanaged). EBT's continue to be used to this day, there's nothing illegal in them ffs. If they were illegal, SDM and the Murray group would find themselves up on charges of tax evasion (there is no criminal enquiry here and believe me, if HMRC thought there was cause for one, there would be one).

We we declaring them in our end of year results ffs!!! That's not what you do when evading tax, avoiding yes - evading no. Big difference between them.

Next up, SDM didn't choose to fight it - he offered to settle and it was rejected.

Now, that letter you were referring to where HMRC deemed EBT's illegal 

And your assertion that people 'aren't in their right minds (either personal or corporate) if they believe that they could be paid earnings and not pay tax' 

Proof of the first and why you think the second? This should be good....

ps: I see you completely omit my points regarding your chosen points of info (rangers tax case and the offshore blog) 

You keep asking. And I keep telling you. The sentence I used was: "HMRC have always said the EBTs were illegal (or used language such as "we think this tax scam does not work")." Can you read the last bit of the sentence, or even take into account what I said previously re HMRC not being a court or that they have stated in a letter that the company acted fraudulently? 

"Next up, SDM didn't choose to fight it - he offered to settle and it was rejected." Even if he did (where is this evidence?) he took the chance and it blew up in his face. If tax was just paid correctly in the first place we wouldn't be here. The writing was on the wall after the failed attempt to avoid/evade tax via the DOS years. Rather than just paying tax correctly he then took up another convulted scheme to avoid paying correct tax - the EBTs. "Mismanaged" you say?? LOL. Understatement of the century.

Lots of very intelligent men are highly paid to find loopholes to allow companies and millionaires to avoid/evade their taxes.  Whilst I pay 40% (which I morally agree with by the way).

The DOS, EBTs were not lawful. If they were lawful the judgement woudl have been different. If they were not lawful were they lawful? Unlawful/illegal... semantics

I think the fundamental difference here is that I have come to the conclusion that I cannot personally condone unlawful tax avoidance/evasion in any walk of life and unfortunateley this extends to my club.

 

[dummiesoot 16,005]

57 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

Re your penultimate sentence: The issue is that the tax avoidance scheme that we used was not legal (as shown by the verdict). If they were not "legal" as you put it what were they?

You will no doubt say that the judgement merely shows that tax was due. HMRC were chasing payments for years. SDM decided to fight it and through the liquidators ultimately lost. 

Unfortunately the company currently operating the club is not paying back this debt. The company paying it back via the creditors pot does not own and operate a team that plays football....

 

Remind us again, who operates the sellik team, pays wages etc, they have all sorts  of shit going on.

 

I will be honest, I am surprised you are still here you are fucking reeking. Did you rake offence when you received your letter from sellik about being a smelly bastard?

[TrueBluez1972 2]

3 minutes ago, dummiesoot said:

Remind us again, who operates the sellik team, pays wages etc, they have all sorts  of shit going on.

 

I will be honest, I am surprised you are still here you are fucking reeking. Did you rake offence when you received your letter from sellik about being a smelly bastard?

No idea. I do not support sellic. But that letter re BO was hilarious.

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

2 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

No idea. I do not support sellic. But that letter re BO was hilarious.

I hope the 1972 doesn't indicate your date of birth, might understand a delusional kid at 12,13 coming up with your rubbish but at your age you must have some serious issues. I'm not interested in your views so please don't quote them.

[Virtuoso 27,180]

5 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

You keep asking. And I keep telling you. The sentence I used was: "HMRC have always said the EBTs were illegal (or used language such as "we think this tax scam does not work")." Can you read the last bit of the sentence, or even take into account what I said previously re HMRC not being a court or that they have stated in a letter that the company acted fraudulently? 

"Next up, SDM didn't choose to fight it - he offered to settle and it was rejected." Even if he did (where is this evidence?) he took the chance and it blew up in his face. If tax was just paid correctly in the first place we wouldn't be here. The writing was on the wall after the failed attempt to avoid/evade tax via the DOS years. Rather than just paying tax correctly he then took up another convulted scheme to avoid paying correct tax - the EBTs. "Mismanaged" you say?? LOL. Understatement of the century.

Lots of very intelligent men are highly paid to find loopholes to allow companies and millionaires to avoid/evade their taxes.  Whilst I pay 40% (which I morally agree with by the way).

The DOS, EBTs were not lawful. If they were lawful the judgement woudl have been different. If they were not lawful were they lawful? Unlawful/illegal... semantics

I think the fundamental difference here is that I have come to the conclusion that I cannot personally condone unlawful tax avoidance/evasion in any walk of life and unfortunateley this extends to my club.

 

Back up what you are proclaiming HMRC said. Provide links to this (and not on the aforementioned blogs or the DR).

2nd paragraph - after the Supreme Court ruling:

After the verdict, Murray expressed dismay at the damage caused to Rangers by the case before it had reached a decision, while also confirming a settlement of over £10 million had been offered to HMRC two years previously.

That wasn't just from SDM - it was stated in a court of law by his lawyers.

Now back to your claims about personal avoidance. Why the fuck should I pay full tax (either 40% here or between 45% - 55% in Norway) if I can reduce it or minimise it to virtually fuck all). I'm assuming you're in a position that maybe doesn't allow for this - that doesn't mean it's immoral for anyone else.

No one is condoning illegal tax evasion. For the last time, EBT's were and continue to be legal.

Fuck me!!!

[born a blue nose 90,765]

Should have just took the players on casual 

[kelvd1873 7,159]

1 hour ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

Unfortunately the company currently operating the club is not paying back this debt. The company paying it back via the creditors pot does not own and operate a team that plays football....

By fuck your definetly at it. Away ye go back to your own team!! Why would newco pay oldcos debt?? Would you buy a repossessed house thats mortgaged higher than its true value and pay the old owners credit card debt too?? And why in your mind is that unfortunate? Bigger picture here but if your side weren't so blood thirsty 5 years ago we might still be run by oldco and have a massive tax debt to deal with hamstringing us for years to come? Thankfully we're not??

[TrueBluez1972 2]

51 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

I hope the 1972 doesn't indicate your date of birth, might understand a delusional kid at 12,13 coming up with your rubbish but at your age you must have some serious issues. I'm not interested in your views so please don't quote them.

I do not need your permission nor did I ask for your opinion. Tuck your neck in. You are out of your depth.

[kelvd1873 7,159]

2 hours ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

Re your penultimate sentence: The issue is that the tax avoidance scheme that we used was not legal (as shown by the verdict). If they were not "legal" as you put it what were they?

Ok then if it wasn't legal why did David Murray, in his official statement release after the result on Wednesday state the following. At no time has HMRC or any of its associates accused anyone of tax evasion? If it was illegal this would not be the case. Try harder next time

[jintybear 8,536]

On 09/07/2017 at 11:48, TrueBluez1972 said:

Re your penultimate sentence: The issue is that the tax avoidance scheme that we used was not legal (as shown by the verdict). If they were not "legal" as you put it what were they?

You will no doubt say that the judgement merely shows that tax was due. HMRC were chasing payments for years. SDM decided to fight it and through the liquidators ultimately lost. 

Unfortunately the company currently operating the club is not paying back this debt. The company paying it back via the creditors pot does not own and operate a team that plays football....

 

I don't often accuse people of supporting them but you really aren't doing yourself any favours. EBTs were perfectly legal until 2010 when we stopped using them.

http://www.paystream.co.uk/employee-benefit-trust-scheme-now-illegal

No go back to kerryfail street there's a good bhoy 

[Virtuoso 27,180]

9 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

I do not need your permission nor did I ask for your opinion. Tuck your neck in. You are out of your depth.

What was your previous username on here 

[TrueBluez1972 2]

14 minutes ago, kelvd1873 said:

By fuck your definetly at it. Away ye go back to your own team!! Why would newco pay oldcos debt?? Would you buy a repossessed house thats mortgaged higher than its true value and pay the old owners credit card debt too?? And why in your mind is that unfortunate? Bigger picture here but if your side weren't so blood thirsty 5 years ago we might still be run by oldco and have a massive tax debt to deal with hamstringing us for years to come? Thankfully we're not??

Because we could have taken the moral high ground and said yes we ran a tax scam (and it was a scam) that was not available legally to other clubs - or at least if they did run them there would be no financial benefit, and paid the debt back.

The OP title is "Sporting Advantage".

The advantage was gained during the EBT years at that time.  To say otherwise is just obfuscation.

We can say now with the benefit of hindsight that the punishment of us going down etc means we have paid the price and it has been an  nightmare one thing after another overt the past 5 years.

But that does not answer the Q of the sporting advantage gained from conducting a tax avoidance/evasion scam where tax shuoldl have been properly deducted.

I am not one of these who love to rub others noses in it that we are the most successful club in the world etc. From this perspective it matters little to me whether we have won 48 or 54 titles.

I think it is inevitable that eventually we'll be stripped of the titles one way or the other.

There is a clamour for blood.

We'd be rightly clarmouring for blood if they were in our position and that tells me all I need to know.

[plumbGER 24,518]

Canni believe the rhabid bheggar hasn't been banned yet.

@cushynumber your slacking mate.

 

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

2 hours ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

Re your penultimate sentence: The issue is that the tax avoidance scheme that we used was not legal (as shown by the verdict). If they were not "legal" as you put it what were they?

You will no doubt say that the judgement merely shows that tax was due. HMRC were chasing payments for years. SDM decided to fight it and through the liquidators ultimately lost. 

Unfortunately the company currently operating the club is not paying back this debt. The company paying it back via the creditors pot does not own and operate a team that plays football....

 

Are u thick?? 

The first two tribunals found in sdm favour. Do u a knolwledge that? 

The question was not how legal they were. They were 100% legal. The question was how much tax was die on them . The answer to that ranged between zero and whatever paye would dictate. 

That is simple to understand. You would need to be thick or a duplicitous  pond scum not to get that.

 

[Brackley Bluenose 4,479]

13 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

Because we could have taken the moral high ground and said yes we ran a tax scam (and it was a scam) that was not available legally to other clubs - or at least if they did run them there would be no financial benefit, and paid the debt back.

The OP title is "Sporting Advantage".

The advantage was gained during the EBT years at that time.  To say otherwise is just obfuscation.

We can say now with the benefit of hindsight that the punishment of us going down etc means we have paid the price and it has been an  nightmare one thing after another overt the past 5 years.

But that does not answer the Q of the sporting advantage gained from conducting a tax avoidance/evasion scam where tax shuoldl have been properly deducted.

I am not one of these who love to rub others noses in it that we are the most successful club in the world etc. From this perspective it matters little to me whether we have won 48 or 54 titles.

I think it is inevitable that eventually we'll be stripped of the titles one way or the other.

There is a clamour for blood.

We'd be rightly clarmouring for blood if they were in our position and that tells me all I need to know.

Trust me bheggar, the titles will never, ever be stripped. I love how much it pains you. I take so much solace that I was born on the right side of the tracks, I don't glorify in the killing of British soldiers, my club didn't harbour child abusers and we very much are the people. 

[TrueBluez1972 2]

2 minutes ago, Brackley Bluenose said:

Trust me bheggar, the titles will never, ever be stripped. I love how much it pains you. I take so much solace that I was born on the right side of the tracks, I don't glorify in the killing of British soldiers, my club didn't harbour child abusers and we very much are the people. 

I am 100% Rangers to the core. I've just let it go. Because I'm an adult.

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

1 hour ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

I think the fundamental difference here is that I have come to the conclusion that I cannot personally condone unlawful tax avoidance/evasion in any walk of life and unfortunateley this extends to my club.

You really dont have a fucking clue. 

Tax avoidance is never illegal.  It is structuring ur affairs so u avoid invurring the tax in the first place. Not so u avoid paying tax once it is incurred. Are u really that dumb?

[kelvd1873 7,159]

24 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

Because we could have taken the moral high ground and said yes we ran a tax scam (and it was a scam) that was not available legally to other clubs - or at least if they did run them there would be no financial benefit, and paid the debt back.

Not available legally to other clubs? What so arsenal chelsea and celtic just imagined them did they? What are you on about? The clubs in question paid the tax later after enquireies from HMRC (celtic might be different if it was tipped off by john reid). Murray tried to pay tax owed to HMRC but was knocked back as they wanted our scalp as their test case. You seem like you want everything you say to be true, funny that because your agenda is negative to Rangers at all points. I can honestly feel your hurt from the other side of the planet and it's laughable??

[Virtuoso 27,180]

15 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

I am 100% Rangers to the core. I've just let it go. Because I'm an adult.

Your posting history dictates otherwise. I'm surprised you're still here to be honest.

Another fucking obsessed bheast.

[TrueBluez1972 2]

7 minutes ago, Virtuoso said:

Your posting history dictates otherwise. I'm surprised you're still here to be honest.

Another fucking obsessed bheast.

That's your problem Virtuoso. In order to silence a minority it is claimed that they are bheasts etc. Case closed. They are hounded and kicked off forums. I can assure you that I personally know four other "prominent" supporters who are also posters on this forum who think the same as me. Unfortunately they are not prepared to put their heads above the parapet out of fear of reprisal. 

[FlippinEck 3,705]

The whole thing is another campaign set out to damage us. Forget just stripping the titles off the successful teams of the EBT era, why aren't they asking for the redistribution of prize money for teams who lost out on higher places or reinstating teams back into the league or lost revenue. Well that wouldn't be as easy as just saying your titles are gone. The minute it goes to any kind of official vote (which it wont), the titles are gone.

[the_r_sole 366]

1 minute ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

That's your problem Virtuoso. In order to silence a minority it is claimed that they are bheasts etc. Case closed. They are hounded and kicked off forums. I can assure you that I personally know four other "prominent" supporters who are also posters on this forum who think the same as me. Unfortunately they are not prepared to put their heads above the parapet out of fear of reprisal. 

which rule of the competitions we won during the years ebt's were in operation do you believe has been broken to merit stripping of a title?

[Virtuoso 27,180]

6 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

That's your problem Virtuoso. In order to silence a minority it is claimed that they are bheasts etc. Case closed. They are hounded and kicked off forums. I can assure you that I personally know four other "prominent" supporters who are also posters on this forum who think the same as me. Unfortunately they are not prepared to put their heads above the parapet out of fear of reprisal. 

[Brackley Bluenose 4,479]

38 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

I am 100% Rangers to the core. I've just let it go. Because I'm an adult.

You sweep child abuse under the carpet very nonchalantly just like your horrible club. Scum 

[Johnny Dangerously 7,562]

22 minutes ago, TrueBluez1972 said:

That's your problem Virtuoso. In order to silence a minority it is claimed that they are bheasts etc. Case closed. They are hounded and kicked off forums. I can assure you that I personally know four other "prominent" supporters who are also posters on this forum who think the same as me. Unfortunately they are not prepared to put their heads above the parapet out of fear of reprisal. 

Haha, it's a message board, what reprisals you on about? Banned for taig like patter like yours maybe.

There's no death squads on here, ha