zurcher

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2225257/Neighbours-fury-porn-film-boss-builds-helipad-garden-Surrey-mansion-planning-permission.html Now this is feckin hilarious, this is the guy who advised minty et al on their EBT scheme. Check the video at the bottom of the page for an example of his advising talents...I now have a vision of him and minty chasing some scantily clad girls around the office with the Benny Hill music playing in the background... Hopefully this isn't a repost but I couldn't see it.

Fuckin hell! Not only is that the worst result in Sevco's short history, it's probably the worst result associated with the name rangers. Albion are clearly the worst team in senior Scottish football. There have been some chuckles this season but I'm genuinely shocked at that. Good for Stirling but Jesus!

Stop confusing matters around the EBT, I've explained it a few times before and I will try to do so again. Firstly, it's feck all like a pension, it may take advantage of pension rules, but the only way in which it's similar is that the payments come from your employer and no tax is paid on them. It can be used legitimately, and is used in fact, as a company sharesave scheme, but that's generally only used as it's against market rules to sell shares under their value, so companies buy them via the trust and place them in trust for their employees at a beneficial rate, all above board and open, all documented and well controlled. An EBT the way Rangers used it, and the way all other tax dodgers use it, is a managed fund in the name of the actual employee (possibly just a numbered reference, but that's irrelevant as it is tied to the employee in some way), to which money is added at regular intervals by the employer, usually in the form of monthly payments when the salaries are due. For example - Person A works as a contractor for Company A, his employer (Company Z) bills Company A 10k for a month's work, as per the agreement between companies A and Z, and this is paid. Company Z then pays 5k to Person A's account as salary, and 5k to his Trust. So far, so legal-ish. Now the first tricky part - The agreement between Person A and Company Z will be in the form of two contracts, one showing the 5k per month which is what he'll be showing when he does his tax returns, and one showing 10k a month which he most definitely will not. Second tricky part - the other 5k per month going into the trust most definitely belongs to Person A and is nothing to do with Company Z (or Company A for that matter) once it's there, hence why it's utterly irrelevant whether Murray did or didn't pay back 1 pound or 100 pounds or 1 pence towards the "loans". There is no loan, it's just weak legalese for give me my money but make sure I don't have to declare it to the taxman. The employees access these funds by submitting a loan request to the trust manager who will send the money wherever they want it to go and ask no questions. In some cases all it'll take is a phone call, in some they'll ask for a paper "loan application" in an attempt at arse covering, but there is complicit agreement that this "loan" will never be repaid. It is just allowing Person A to access money which belongs to him, which has been paid from his employer and for which no tax or deductions have ever been applied (save maybe a management fee from the trust manager). This above is the way in which it usually works, but in the case of Rangers there is no middle man and the company set them up themselves. They were aware this was certainly on shaky legal ground when it was set up, they ALMOST CERTAINLY used dual contracts, and the players may eventually be hit with large tax bills, the British based ones anyway. If I was Dodds, Rae or any of the rest of them I'd be saying absolutely nowt about it, but the fact these clowns are openly discussing it means Rangers didn't even bother trying to explain it to them past "here's what we'll pay you as salary, and here's what we'll pay you into your trust which you then get by speaking to this guy". Now Rangers, as the employer here, is responsible for all deductions on payments made to staff, hence why they are now twitching on the mortuary table after being consumed by the tax bill, and some of the ex-players and staff might be facing bankruptcy hearings themselves soon enough if they haven't got the cash to pay several years worth of backdated tax bills and interest. So please, stop referring to the EBT as a pension and confusing the issue by suggesting that payments could be made back to the offshore bank for them, that's never going to happen, there is no way to do this at all and in fact, there is no loan. HMRC decided many years ago these were not compatible with UK tax law and as such have been chasing companies down. If you ran one but were willing to pay the tax owed, then no problem, just Rangers lived so far beyond their means that the heft of the outstanding tax destroyed them, not to mention Whyte's use of employee deductions as petty cash too, obviously.

As far as I understand it, EBTs are only acceptable if used to buy and sell shares for a tightly controlled company sharesave scheme, and even under this, may still be taxable. Generally speaking, EBTs which are anything to do with employment, and which actual cash is paid into are deemed to be taxable, and so anyone using them is likely to face a hefty bill for back taxes.

Look, I know you're just trolling and probably nothing is going to change your mind, but EBTs are NOT legal, they are, in fact, ILLEGAL, at least in the common form of paying a tax free amount into trusts for employees to take "loans" which are never repaid . I've explained before how they work and why they're dodgy, and, importantly where Rangers are concerned, why there WILL ALMOST DEFINITELY BE secondary contracts. I've also said that Rangers may have believed they were legal at the time, but as with all these things, all they had to do was to sit down with an inspector from HMRC and ask them, they didn't do this for the same reason as everyone else, the knew them to be dubious but thought they'd get away with it. Now HMRC has decided they'll have all the tax due on them and, in theory at least, have the right to go back as far as they want to claw back the tax. But don't take my word for it, read HMRC's opinion on it yourself, an easy googling will show you they deem these schemes to be wrong and have gone so far as to offer people (companies and employees) a period of time in which to volunteer information on their EBTs and settle the outstanding tax due, obviously to avoid embarrassment and potentially costly litigation and see here - http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/employers/employee-benefit-trusts.htm There is plenty of information around on this, and this is what brought Rangers down in the first place, and the basis of the BTC. Rangers were found to be using illegal methods to avoid tax when paying their employees and were hit with a bill, they appealled but folded in the meantime due to Whyte's non payment of any dues whatsoever, despite taking the deductions from employees. (side note, this is insane, and surely he'll eventually go to prison for this. The theory is that he wanted to use it as a bargaining tool for the BTC but to take deductions and then not pay them is bad enough, he allegedly was actually using this money to run the club!! Nuts!) Even if Rangers had won the appeal, HMRC have taken this type of thing as far as the House of Lords before and won (search for Macdonald (HMIT) v Dextra Accessories Ltd if you're interested in that) and so would eventually have faced a bill that would have killed them even had Craig Whyte been running the place honestly and well. Just stop with the nonsense and do some reading on it.

I'll lay money on that being the page with the worst spelling, most ill-informed crap and poorest grammar in the comments section on the whole Reuters site too

Yeah, that's why you're in here arguing with us day and night, because you just don't care what we think. And I'm sure it's been pointed out many times before, but I'll do it again, none of the clubs are at any serious risk of failing, some of them may have some cash flow, or even solvency issues, but the debts are usually small and spread out, so none of them should have any trouble at all in getting approval for a CVA if they do end up in administation. The reason your old club actually failed and died is because the biggest creditor was your beloved defender of the faith, HER MAJESTY'S Revenue and Customs, who refused to accept Green's non existent offer of a vague "yeah we'll pay you something eventually" - a figure was never actually put on it, but it's unlikely to have been more than 1 or 2p in the pound. They had cheated the tax for so long that HMRC refused to let them off with doing it any further, so said no, the club folded, and Charlie started his attempt at a phoenix. None of the other clubs have anything remotely like the financial problems you had and will be fine if they do end up in some financial difficulties. With the possible exception of Hearts, who are in debt only to Mad Vlad, and that's a slightly weird and unpredictable situation to be in. *edit for tense fail.

Haha, am I privvy to information? You're the ones certain it will happen, so please do tell us where you're getting this information from since you seem so sure. It won't happen, and there is no call for it to happen. Apart from among sevco fans like you who are fuckin desperate for it to happen so they can have some kind of small ammo to throw back at their one time rivals who are in the champions league while sevco are sadfacing away in the third division, unable to win away from home and getting dumped out of the diddy cups to dwindling crowds. Feck Sevco, I'm just gonnie start calling youse Fourth Lanark. The decline is underway.

You're a class act. Not going to happen, regardless of how much you fantasise about it to distract yourself from the pishflaps, mid-table-4th-tier, start up tribute act that you follow, and the fact you have the worst manager in the league. And even if by some insane turn of events they do decide to go ahead with some sort of money sharing scheme, when sevco apparently eventually get to your "rightful place" at the top, you'll be sharing too. Oh no, wait, Charlie with more disrepute charges than suits wants to keep you in the SFL doesn't he?

absolutely spot on, a man with so little care for the effect his stupid outbursts have on the general atmosphere around sevcoites and the people of Scotland who have to live with them shouldn't be allowed near the game. He's taking them back decades, playing up to bigotry and paranoia in order to advance his feckin investment, then he'll feck off back to Yorkshire and leave with his pockets stuffed with ih peepul's hard-earned money and not care for the bitter, angry and divided fools he's left behind or the long term poisonous effects they'll have on the country.

There will be no gate sharing. Share TV, sponsorship and outside money round more equally, but the gates should be kept by the club. So Sellick and Newco have much more paying fans, they always did, it's only really since the advent of the SPL that Scottish fitbaw has gone so far down the toilet. The Champions League money also skews things, but I don't imagine there'll be much call for Sellick to share that out between us diddies either. The remaining half of the old firm will lose their rights to veto any sharing of cash outside them and their former best buddy/biggest enemy, but I don't see any need for the wee teams to get handouts from the gate receipts.

Hahaha you win the internet!!

It has nearly died laughing a few times since the Sevco roadshow started but the heart is still beating

I heard the ref's cousin had a mate who once had a pint wi a guy who knew someone whose daughter once had a summer internship wi Harper MacLeod! It's a pure conspiracy man! Pure obvious innit?

fuckin 4 mins into injury tiume equaliser at the brokes? feck me, what a moment! The sevcoites will be telling that one to their children in years to come "I was there when..." oh wait