NUMBER 7 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 The administrator announced today that HMRC were willing to discuss Rangers tax issues with them, and had they wished, they could have issued a winding up order on them rather than putting them into administration. Why then did HMRC issue notice of winding up orders to Falkirk and Heart of Midlothian, for Hee Haw of a debt compared to Rangers ? Why does every other business in the country get reminders and then notice of further legal action for payments due in respect of VAT PAYE and NIC around the 20th of a month after the month for which it was due, and this lot can go almost 10 months and pay nothing. I don't know who is to blame more for their situation, Murray or Whyte, what I do know is that some of Murrays other businesses have operated over the years in let's say, less than legitimate fashion ! I cannot accept all these folk that think there would be no future in Scottish Football without Rangers. I personally think it could be the best event ever to happen. The majority of their fans would just spend more time in the pub and the bookies, their few decent fans might follow their local or another team, and domestic violence would be reduced on days where previously their we're old firm matches. The Winding up notice to Falkirk last year was the wake up call to put a number of years of bad off field management in order, that led to a clear out of players we could no longer afford and being enforced to play youngsters, one of whom is Murray Wallace a former Rangers / Murray Park lad considered by them at 16 not to be good enough. The best laugh is we have now pocketed £350,000 for him with a potential further similar amount to come. Thank you Rangers for clearly not knowing a player when you see one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 The administrator announced today that HMRC were willing to discuss Rangers tax issues with them, and had they wished, they could have issued a winding up order on them rather than putting them into administration. Why then did HMRC issue notice of winding up orders to Falkirk and Heart of Midlothian, Don't know about Hearts but in Falkirk's case it was because we defaulted on an already in place agreement with HMRC. Rangers have no such arrangement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUMBER 7 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Don't know about Hearts but in Falkirk's case it was because we defaulted on an already in place agreement with HMRC. Rangers have no such arrangement. If Falkirk defaulted on a previous agreement with HMRC, then HMRC were quite entitled to take whatever action they felt appropriate, they were obviously getting pissed off with us, that just emphasises the type of clown who was our M D At that time. I'm pretty sure though that Falkirk would have been making some sort of contributions and not having paid nowt for 10 months. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamonds are Forever Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 The administrator announced today that HMRC were willing to discuss Rangers tax issues with them, and had they wished, they could have issued a winding up order on them rather than putting them into administration. Why then did HMRC issue notice of winding up orders to Falkirk and Heart of Midlothian, for Hee Haw of a debt compared to Rangers ? Why does every other business in the country get reminders and then notice of further legal action for payments due in respect of VAT PAYE and NIC around the 20th of a month after the month for which it was due, and this lot can go almost 10 months and pay nothing. I don't know who is to blame more for their situation, Murray or Whyte, what I do know is that some of Murrays other businesses have operated over the years in let's say, less than legitimate fashion ! I cannot accept all these folk that think there would be no future in Scottish Football without Rangers. I personally think it could be the best event ever to happen. The majority of their fans would just spend more time in the pub and the bookies, their few decent fans might follow their local or another team, and domestic violence would be reduced on days where previously their we're old firm matches. The Winding up notice to Falkirk last year was the wake up call to put a number of years of bad off field management in order, that led to a clear out of players we could no longer afford and being enforced to play youngsters, one of whom is Murray Wallace a former Rangers / Murray Park lad considered by them at 16 not to be good enough. The best laugh is we have now pocketed £350,000 for him with a potential further similar amount to come. Thank you Rangers for clearly not knowing a player when you see one. I've got to say I don't really got why Murray has got such a hard time over this. As I see it there are two scenarios. The first one is Rangers win the EBT case, in which case the lasting legacy of Murray's time in charge is an £18 million bank debt, which for a club the size of Rangers, and compared to the debts of much smaller Scottish clubs, is not a lot. For the amount of trophies they have won and some of the players they got to see during Murray's time that's a pretty good deal I'd say. The second scenario is Rangers lose the case, in which case Murray will get the blame. However, surely this is a decision that would have been taken after professional financial advice? I suppose in the end he would have to take the blame, but he would obviously been mis-advised. At worst he made a misjudgement on poor advice. I keep hearing and reading idiots going about 'this is the man that spent £12 million on Tore Andre Flo', well yes he did and there's no doubt he was pretty reckless and stupid for a long spell at Ibrox, but he corrected that by clearing most of the debt. Craig Whyte is the reason Rangers are f**ked. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 18, 2012 Author Share Posted February 18, 2012 Just prior to the start of next season...... I had a dream.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 I've got to say I don't really got why Murray has got such a hard time over this. As I see it there are two scenarios. The first one is Rangers win the EBT case, in which case the lasting legacy of Murray's time in charge is an £18 million bank debt, which for a club the size of Rangers, and compared to the debts of much smaller Scottish clubs, is not a lot. For the amount of trophies they have won and some of the players they got to see during Murray's time that's a pretty good deal I'd say. The second scenario is Rangers lose the case, in which case Murray will get the blame. However, surely this is a decision that would have been taken after professional financial advice? I suppose in the end he would have to take the blame, but he would obviously been mis-advised. At worst he made a misjudgement on poor advice. I keep hearing and reading idiots going about 'this is the man that spent £12 million on Tore Andre Flo', well yes he did and there's no doubt he was pretty reckless and stupid for a long spell at Ibrox, but he corrected that by clearing most of the debt. Craig Whyte is the reason Rangers are f**ked. Murray created the EBT scheme, he had rangers in the Murray group of companies as it helped offset profits from some of his other companies. On Monday night Alistair Johnson talked on Radio Scotland about Lloyds banking group not allowing rangers debts to be wrapped into the Murray Group's debt to Lloyds where they were sharing the risks on an equity basis. The debts were said to be greater than the £18M that Lloyds made them accept for Rangers, so Murray did well for Rangers to limit the debt to that. No doubt that Murray was in charge over the period, he was hands on through the 90's and early 00's. To claim Whyte is wholly to fault is crazy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veteran Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Irrespective of any court settlement which emerges surely the SFA and indeed the SPL must take action against Rangers for their failure to honour debts owed to other clubs in the SPL , namely Dundee Utd,Hearts,Inverness etc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Irrespective of any court settlement which emerges surely the SFA and indeed the SPL must take action against Rangers for their failure to honour debts owed to other clubs in the SPL , namely Dundee Utd,Hearts,Inverness etc They will - as soon as any of these clubs makes a complaint. We've seen that in previous years if clubs have been slow with ticket shares etc. An SPL rule specifically provides for compensating clubs owed money, by redirecting prizemonies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 An interesting argument on your call tonight. Traynor stated that , if Rangers do get liquidated , the SPL are under no obligation to demote Rangers from their league as they are a seperate entity from the SFL . Correct me if I'm wrong , but I can recollect Livingston being demoted from the SPL ! Surely a precedent has been set there ! All on our supporters bus seemed to agree 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordieBoy80 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 An interesting argument on your call tonight. Traynor stated that , if Rangers do get liquidated , the SPL are under no obligation to demote Rangers from their league as they are a seperate entity from the SFL . Correct me if I'm wrong , but I can recollect Livingston being demoted from the SPL ! Surely a precedent has been set there ! All on our supporters bus seemed to agree I don't think they were demoted by the SPL, when Livingston went down it was because they finished bottom not because they were in admin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) An interesting argument on your call tonight. Traynor stated that , if Rangers do get liquidated , the SPL are under no obligation to demote Rangers from their league as they are a seperate entity from the SFL . Correct me if I'm wrong , but I can recollect Livingston being demoted from the SPL ! Surely a precedent has been set there ! All on our supporters bus seemed to agree Well you were all wrong. Firstly, no clubs has ever gone into liquidation whilst in SPL. Only club to have gone into liquidation in SFL since Third Lanark is Airdrieonians. Livingston were demoted by SFL (from First Division to Third Division), while in administration, after they failed to lodge a bond required to guarantee their ability to complete their fixtures. They weren't actually demoted simply for the act of going into administration in itself, notably. Gretna were demoted by SFL (again First Division to Third Division), while in administration, immediately after relegation in 2008... since Raydale didn't meet standards for First Division football, and since they were clearly about to be liquidated. Gretna's administrator resigned them from SFL (but not their country FA, the SCFA - nor SFA, I think) in June 2008, and they were liquidated in August. SPL has a fixed punishment for administration, the deduction of 10pts, which Rangers have received. If The Rangers FC plc goes into liquidation, its league share (what defines 'the club') can be transferred to a new company, with SPL permission, for £1. Otherwise it lapses. Edited February 18, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PELE Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 The administrator announced today that HMRC were willing to discuss Rangers tax issues with them, and had they wished, they could have issued a winding up order on them rather than putting them into administration. Why then did HMRC issue notice of winding up orders to Falkirk and Heart of Midlothian, for Hee Haw of a debt compared to Rangers ? Why does every other business in the country get reminders and then notice of further legal action for payments due in respect of VAT PAYE and NIC around the 20th of a month after the month for which it was due, and this lot can go almost 10 months and pay nothing. I don't know who is to blame more for their situation, Murray or Whyte, what I do know is that some of Murrays other businesses have operated over the years in let's say, less than legitimate fashion ! I cannot accept all these folk that think there would be no future in Scottish Football without Rangers. I personally think it could be the best event ever to happen. The majority of their fans would just spend more time in the pub and the bookies, their few decent fans might follow their local or another team, and domestic violence would be reduced on days where previously their we're old firm matches. The Winding up notice to Falkirk last year was the wake up call to put a number of years of bad off field management in order, that led to a clear out of players we could no longer afford and being enforced to play youngsters, one of whom is Murray Wallace a former Rangers / Murray Park lad considered by them at 16 not to be good enough. The best laugh is we have now pocketed £350,000 for him with a potential further similar amount to come. Thank you Rangers for clearly not knowing a player when you see one. The only reason Rangers are in administration is because Craig Whyte did not pay the tax owed from when he was in charge. Nothing to do with anyone else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) Well you were all wrong. Firstly, no clubs has ever gone into liquidation whilst in SPL. Only clubs to have gone into liquidation in SFL since Third Lanark are Airdrieonians and Gretna FC. Livingston were demoted by SFL (from First Division to Third Division), while in administration, after they failed to lodge a bond required to guarantee their ability to complete their fixtures. They weren't actually demoted simply for the act of going into administration in itself, notably. Gretna were demoted by SFL (again First Division to Third Division), while in administration, immediately after relegation in 2008... since Raydale didn't meet standards for First Division football, and since they were clearly about to be liquidated. SPL has a fixed punishment for administration, the deduction of 10pts, which Rangers have received. If The Rangers FC plc goes into liquidation, its league share (what defines 'the club') can be transferred to a new company, with SPL permission, for £1. Otherwise it lapses. I knew you'd come up trumps !! BTW , what is the current situation about demotion ? Is Traynor right , or can Rangers be booted out ? My understanding is that if they are expelled they would have to apply to the SFL for admission . Edited February 18, 2012 by theoriginalhedge 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 One aspect i've been thinking about here (i'm bored) is the timing of the Tax Case. The Administrators want the club to continue in it's current form, and exit Administration in time for the 31st March deadline for European competition licensing etc. I heard the tax case won't be until April possibly, therefore any agreed CVA would surely not cover this money as no decision has actually been reached on whether Rangers are liable for it or not. Surely IF Rangers get through this Administration unscathed, by the end of March THEN lose the tax case, they'll be instantly fucked again. I would think this would increase the likelihood of them going down the "Rangers 2012" route (ie HMRC unable to claim the tax case money), or coming to a settlement with them. After all, i can't imagine the Administrators spending a few weeks trying like f**k to save the company, when they know full well there's a near-future decision on the way that could land them with a £75million bill. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) I knew you'd come up trumps !! BTW , what is the current situation about demotion ? Is Traynor right , or can Rangers be booted out ? My understanding is that if they are expelled they would have to apply to the SFL for admission . They can't be expelled for being in administration. If the company is liquidated, then either: ... a transfer of league share is approved (in which case the club continues, in a new company, as e.g. Middlesbrough in 1986 or Leeds Utd in 2007); ... a transfer of league share is not approved (in which case the club as a football entity ceases to exist). If the club as a football entity ceases to exist, then: ... a new club could apply for any resulting SFL vacancy - provided it met SFL criteria, including a suitable ground and SFA membership; ... an existing club like East Stirlingshire could be bought, renamed and relocated, as "Airdrie people" did to Clydebank. Edited February 18, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 They can't be expelled for being in administration. If the company is liquidated, then either: ... a transfer of league share is approved (in which case the club continues, in a new company, as e.g. Middlesbrough in 1986 or Leeds Utd in 2007); ... a transfer of league share is not approved (in which case the club as a football entity ceases to exist). If the club as a football entity ceases to exist, then: ... a new club could apply for any resulting SFL vacancy - provided it met SFL criteria, including a suitable ground and SFA membership; ... an existing club like East Stirling could be bought, renamed and relocated, as "Airdrie people" did to Clydebank. Ok , Sorry I knew about the administration situation but was a little unclear about liquidation. I just wonder if any SFL clubs would have the balls to block admission should your latter scenarios take place ? I doubt it , but that would be the ultimate kick in the balls for them !!! After all they tried to have all the Angus sides kicked out in the 60s . Payback time would be sweet !! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Ok , Sorry I knew about the administration situation but was a little unclear about liquidation. I just wonder if any SFL clubs would have the balls to block admission should your latter scenarios take place ? I doubt it , but that would be the ultimate kick in the balls for them !!! After all they tried to have all the Angus sides kicked out in the 60s . Payback time would be sweet !! While it would be utterly hilarious, there's next to NO chance of it happening. What happened re the Angus sides in the 60s? Why did they attempt this? I heard vague stuff about it years ago. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 The administrator announced today that HMRC were willing to discuss Rangers tax issues with them, and had they wished, they could have issued a winding up order on them rather than putting them into administration. Why then did HMRC issue notice of winding up orders to Falkirk and Heart of Midlothian, for Hee Haw of a debt compared to Rangers ? Why does every other business in the country get reminders and then notice of further legal action for payments due in respect of VAT PAYE and NIC around the 20th of a month after the month for which it was due, and this lot can go almost 10 months and pay nothing. I'm guessing HMRC are prepared to wait in Rangers' case because there's still the chance of them getting an extra £50million or so if they win the tax case? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 It wasn't all the Angus sides, it was Brechin City + 4 others (Stranraer, can't remember the other 3), it was a Rangers plan for league reconstruction circa 1964, 1965 if I remember correctly, reducing the number of teams to 32. Got nowhere. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 While it would be utterly hilarious, there's next to NO chance of it happening. What happened re the Angus sides in the 60s? Why did they attempt this? I heard vague stuff about it years ago. In reality, it was not just the Angus sides. The likes of East Stirling, Stenhouse muir and a few others were affected. Rangers lodged a complaint that these sides were draining the resources , hindering Rangers success . They wanted these teams put in a regional league , well away from the top level.........Much the same as Doncaster is trying now !!! The vote went disasterously wrong for Rangers and they were forced to put up with us diddies for the foreseeable future !!! 0 Quote Link to comment 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.