Owain 0 Posted April 2, 2012 Share Posted April 2, 2012 Not sure if I posted it in the right place, or indeed if it is relevant to many but I found this.... April 02, 2012 HMRC Launching Rangers Rule Are we about to see the UK tax authorities introduce a â??Rangers Ruleâ??? The question is prompted by a note from UHY Hacker Young, the accountancy firm, relating how struggling UK businesses will be required to pay tax upfront or face criminal charges, says. From April 6 2012 HMRC will be able to ask employers to pay a financial security where it thinks there is serious risk that the business wonâ??t pay over their PAYE tax deductions or National Insurance contributions (NICs) on time. Failure to provide a security to HMRC will constitute a criminal offence, potentially leading to fines of up to £5,000 (as a small businessman, that sends a bit of a shiver down my own spine; in my personal experience, if HMRC has power, it will exercise that power and use it to grind â??ordinaryâ?? people into the dirt, singing loudly and lustily as it does so; â??professionalâ?? football clubs, by some extraordinary perversity of thinking, tend to receive the preferential treatment that they seem to view as their divine right). UHY Hacker Young says that the new rules will pile pressure on businesses already in difficulty as they will be forced to raise more funds to be able to provide the security required by HMRC (see Glasgow Rangers FC for further details). Roy Maugham, tax partner at UHY Hacker Young, comments: â??Requiring employers to pay a portion of the income tax and NIC upfront will be substantial financial burden and could lead to serious cash flow difficulties for some businesses.â? â??Businesses will most likely be forced to increase their working capital in order to comply. Whether this is through capital raising or by trying to obtain a bank loan, this will be difficult to achieve in the current economic conditions.â? â??The more likely HMRC doubts a business will be able to pay PAYE and NIC on time, the greater the deposit it will ask. The reality is that HMRC will only compound the financial problems that businesses already have.â? UHY Hacker Young says that although HMRC has pledged to help businesses in difficulty by providing them with additional time to pay their taxes, it is becoming much stricter with the conditions under which it provides this facility (i.e. the Business Payment Support Service). Comments Maugham: â??As Time to Pay becomes less accessible, many businesses will be tempted to use the tax collected via payroll to buffer their cash flow temporarily.â? â??Most businesses that withhold tax and NIC are merely trying to survive and keep employing people.â? â??The new rules mean that employers might have to choose between criminal sanctions and insolvency, or even laying people off, which seems terribly harsh.â? Adds Maugham: â??Although the new rules are meant to target businesses that deliberately defraud the taxman, the weak economy means that a huge number of â??innocentâ?? businesses that are simply struggling to survive could be caught in the net.â? http://www.brianbollen.com/bbb_brian_bollens_blog/2012/04/hmrc-launching-rangers-rule.html#tpe-action-posted-6a00d83420cafe53ef0168e9924b5b970c It will be harsh on any of us that have small businesses. Whyte has much to answer for. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ergatrude 0 Posted April 2, 2012 Share Posted April 2, 2012 If it was posted a day earlier it would have been a cracking April fools. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 2, 2012 Share Posted April 2, 2012 An article that highlights the ruthlessness of HMRC. I'm certainly not convinced by the claims of the Duff & Phelps people appointed as administrators that HMRC won't oppose a CVA and I hold that view no matter what the outcome of our EBT case is. Having said that, I think there's perhaps more chance of HMRC approving a CVA if we lose the EBT case. If we win it they'll be seriously pissed off and a pissed off HMRC is not a good thing, so I honestly think if we win the EBT case they'll oppose a CVA. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owain 0 Posted April 3, 2012 Author Share Posted April 3, 2012 An article that highlights the ruthlessness of HMRC. I'm certainly not convinced by the claims of the Duff & Phelps people appointed as administrators that HMRC won't oppose a CVA and I hold that view no matter what the outcome of our EBT case is. Having said that, I think there's perhaps more chance of HMRC approving a CVA if we lose the EBT case. If we win it they'll be seriously pissed off and a pissed off HMRC is not a good thing, so I honestly think if we win the EBT case they'll oppose a CVA. I do understand it from HMRC's point of view a little. It's the tax money that pays for hospitals and looks after kids & the elderly. If people don't pay tax, we don't have those facilities. But what I don't quite get is the way all this has happened. It's fans and people that work for the club that are suffering. The one's that have caused this are getting away with it, even making a profit from it. If there is any truth in the article then it's going to be the small businessman and workers that are going to suffer from this legislation. Again, the one's that cause the problems are not going to be penalised, meaning something similar could happen again. HMRC have a job to do, it's an important one and it is something that is fundamental to the social structure of our society. But with the powers they have surely they could find a more efficient way of dealing with the problem. Whyte decided to stop paying the tax. As far as I can tell, he made no effort to try. HMRC have the resources, the creativity and the intelligence to come up with a far more targeted solution that would reduce the sufferring amongst the innocent masses in this. Instead we see Whyte getting away with it, and dragging the name of Rangers through the gutter. There is just no justice. It's beond belief. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 I do understand it from HMRC's point of view a little. It's the tax money that pays for hospitals and looks after kids & the elderly. If people don't pay tax, we don't have those facilities. But what I don't quite get is the way all this has happened. It's fans and people that work for the club that are suffering. The one's that have caused this are getting away with it, even making a profit from it. If there is any truth in the article then it's going to be the small businessman and workers that are going to suffer from this legislation. Again, the one's that cause the problems are not going to be penalised, meaning something similar could happen again. HMRC have a job to do, it's an important one and it is something that is fundamental to the social structure of our society. But with the powers they have surely they could find a more efficient way of dealing with the problem. Whyte decided to stop paying the tax. As far as I can tell, he made no effort to try. HMRC have the resources, the creativity and the intelligence to come up with a far more targeted solution that would reduce the sufferring amongst the innocent masses in this. Instead we see Whyte getting away with it, and dragging the name of Rangers through the gutter. There is just no justice. It's beond belief. HMRC don't give a shit about football clubs or their fans Owain. If they did they wouldn't have been opposing CVAs all over the UK in the past decade and that's exactly what they've been doing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
globespanscott 0 Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 Have to agree with you there Zappa, when you look at the likes of Portsmouth and for that matter several other clubs such as Derby, Kettering, Darlington etc the HMRC have no qualms whatsoever in forcing them into administration and refusing CVA's. Don't get me wrong Taxes and Paye should be paid but at times when there are mitigating circumstances a bit of leeway would not go amiss 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 We really really need a judgement on the Big Tax Case now, this week in fact. As much as D&P have been saying it's a red herring it's far from it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 the in introduction of this rule was announced long before the Rangers situation, and might possibly have been one of the factors that influenced Whyte's timing regarding putting the Company into administration. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted April 3, 2012 Share Posted April 3, 2012 To be perfectly honest I think this shows the absolute shambles that is the tax system more than anything else , slightly off topic but the way we administer Tax in this country is archaic 0 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.