Now official: HMRC appeal dismissed

[craig 5,195]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28239070?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

The events that led to the financial collapse of Rangers Football Club plc cannot be undone, but they are still under challenge.

The decision of the High Court judge Lord Doherty to dismiss Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs' appeal against the verdict of what became widely known as the "Big Tax Case" is important in terms of perception, but also of grievance.

The use of Employee Benefit Trusts by Murray International Holdings was a means to reduce tax liabilities.

It could be argued that the inherent riskiness of the scheme - which was used by Rangers, as the club was part of MIH at the time, but also several other football teams in England - meant that the group might have had cause to set aside funds in case of future challenges by the authorities.

Nonetheless, riskiness alone is not a reason for prosecution. The potential liability of the big tax case - £24m before any additional interest and penalties - was a burden to Rangers, because it put off potential buyers of the club and it influenced wider opinion.

The latter is a particular cause of anger amongst the Rangers fans, who feel the club was vilified.

Some potential buyers wanted to take control of Rangers as long as MIH retained liability for any potential tax bill, but no agreement could be reached. This, in turn, eventually left the opening for Craig Whyte to appear on the scene and buy the majority shareholding from Sir David Murray for £1.

A chain of events ensued, but the potential liability of the tax case remained a central issue.

HMRC could yet appeal the Upper Tier Tribunal decision of Lord Doherty, and the revenue intend to take time to digest the judgement in full before deciding how to proceed.

The Murray Group is taking a similar stance, although they did release a statement which recorded their satisfaction at the result, their wish for the relevant authorities to pursue individuals, and their sense that some coverage of the issue contained "fundamental misunderstandings".

The Big Tax Case became shorthand for portraying a culture of arrogant disregard at Ibrox.

The risk of the scheme cannot be discounted, and Rangers ultimately suffered because of the potential liability of that risk, but unless the UTT judgement is overturned then the tax scheme has been ruled legal.

Other questions are valid, such as how tax documents relating to the case were leaked, and why HMRC allowed Whyte to avoid paying PAYE for nine months before eventually prompting him to put Rangers Football Club plc into administration in February 2012.

Clubs in England used EBTs, but Rangers were the first to be pursued through the courts in this way.

Even without the potential big tax case liability, HMRC held a high enough percentage of the overall debt to reject the Company Voluntary Arrangement offer made to creditors in May 2012.

Other challenges are currently being made, though, and if BDO, the liquidators of RFCplc, are successful in their court action against the law firm Collyer Bristow, there might yet be a further change of perception.

Collyer Bristow were the firm of the lawyer Gary Withey who worked on Whyte's takeover, which turned out to have been funded by money borrowed from Ticketus against the future sales of Rangers season tickets. Collyer Bristow are being pursued for £24m, which would be added to the creditors' pot, but a victory for BDO would cast further light on the events of Whyte's takeover.

Police investigations are ongoing, and widely considered to be approaching an outcome.

The mood of Rangers fans, amongst others, is that the club has been the victim of a potentially fraudulent transaction. Shareholders of RFCplc could then, in theory, launch claims of their own to try to recoup funds. Ticketus, meanwhile, continue to pursue Whyte through the courts for £17m, with the former owner having lost his final route of appeal.

There is no impact on Rangers International Football club, the plc that owns the football team, but for supporters, and shareholders in RFCplc, the nature of the events that led to Whyte owning the club and then sending it into administration because of the non-payment of PAYE is critical.

Lord Doherty's verdict emphasises that while the risk of the EBT scheme cannot be discounted as a contributory factor, it should not have been so widely assumed that HMRC's view would be upheld. Even now, the decision is not final, unless the revenue choose not to pursue it further.

Ultimately, so much of the detail of the events that led to the collapse of RFCplc are still unknown. The story has not, yet, fully been told or understood. More will inevitably be revealed in the coming months.

 

Given the appeal being dismissed this has now been proven to be factually incorrect. It was the UTT potential liability which allowed them to reject the CVA. Were it just the PAYE/NIC that was taken into account then they didn't have enough to reject the CVA. And the other creditors also suggested they would approve a CVA.

 

We were definitely shafted from all sides.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Without the potential liability what did we owe and how much of it was made up by the PAYE?

[Darthter 542]

Without the potential liability what did we owe and how much of it was made up by the PAYE?

 

was it not around £20-25m...£14m of that being unpaid tax.

[craig 5,195]

was it not around £20-25m...£14m of that being unpaid tax.

 

I cant honestly remember, but thought it was more than that - I cant be bothered checking the CVA voting sheet either, which detailed all the liabilities.

 

What I do recall (and my memory may be failing me to be fair) was that in order that HMRC could force a rejection of the CVA vote, they needed the EBT "potential liability" included in the mix. There was considerable debate at the time as to whether this "debt" should be included in the CVA calculation.

[craig 5,195]

was it not around £20-25m...£14m of that being unpaid tax.

 

In thinking about this a little more.... this cant be correct.

 

Ticketus were at about 27 million alone. Include unpaid tax of 15 mill and you have 42 million - without any football debts included (we still owed money on Jelavic IIRC).

 

Funny.... to get a TRUE reflection of what SHOULD have been included in the CVA vote for %age voting terms you would have to exclude both the HMRC EBT monies as well as the Ticketus monies, the two largest debts we had on the books. That could very well have considerably changed any voting.

 

With HMRC, it would have been a political nightmare to reject a CVA over 15 mill of PAYE rather than their much vaunted >100 million number. At 100 million it is a much easier sell to push for liquidation than over a debt of 15 mill to a national institution.

[ian1964 10,415]

Spiers on Sport: an endless blame-game over the demise of Rangers

 

Spiers on Sport

 

Graham Spiers (the discredited journalist)

.

Thursday 10 July 2014

 

There is a wearyingly familiar outrage doing the rounds at Rangers after the UTT ruling which upheld the club's appeal against HMRC over its controversial use of EBTs.

 

 

This was an important judgement because it ruled that, despite the distaste many have for EBTs and their perceived manipulation for tax-avoidance, Rangers nonetheless had stayed on the right side of the law.

 

What the ruling shouldn't do - and I know this only too well - is forbid anyone among us from decrying the use of EBTs, at Rangers or anywhere else, as a crude means of abusing the law and, in effect, avoiding paying tax.

 

 

Not for nothing were EBTs, when used in this way, widely referred to as "a tax loophole". Everybody and their granny came to know what was going on.

 

My own view on EBTs hasn't changed. There have been different outcomes at various HMRC pursuits -such as at Aberdeen Asset Management and at the pre-2012 Rangers FC - but I viewed EBTs, when used as a vehicle for disguised remuneration, as a form of cheating.

 

Evidently the British government felt likewise: they decided to put an end to the racket in 2010/11. At that point Rangers were force to write letters to various players saying they would no longer be able to compensate them in this manner.

 

The tragedy that engulfed Rangers, springing from Sir David Murray's policies, to the wretched arrival of Craig Whyte, to HMRC's rejection of the CVA in the summer of 2012, has now spawned an industry of blame and witchhunt-calling.

 

Some Rangers supporters remain upset - rightly - but phlegmatic about it all. Others, though, seek blame everywhere - at HMRC, at the SFA, at the (former) SPL, the media, at the BBC - everywhere except at the former Rangers itself.

 

The truth of the matter is that the now dissolved Rangers FC plc was done-in by the very people who were charged with safe-guarding the club. Murray, Whyte and many of the old club's directors bore a very heavy responsibility.

 

In June 2012 it was also HMRC who, at the crucial CVA vote, drove the stake through the Ibrox heart. A combination of accrued, unpaid debts by Rangers to the tax authorities totalling £21 million - it excluded any projected EBT bills - meant that HMRC in effect dealt the fatal blow.

 

This was no witch-hunt. HMRC had the mere temerity of wanting its taxes paid. On the contrary, this was dire recklessness by those charged with safe-guarding Rangers. This was self-destruction.

 

When I look back now to April, 2012, the words of Paul Murray, a former director of the club who tried to beat Charles Green to the rescue act, seem particularly honest.

 

Murray and I crossed swords on a number of occasions over the Rangers saga but he always struck me as honest and conscientious in wanting to resolve a dire situation.

 

Just weeks prior to the Rangers CVA being rejected, Paul Murray said: "In my view we have got to try to save the club. The CVA is the only thing that the Rangers supporters want. Speaking as a supporter, I do not want a situation where the club's history - the timeline - is broken. We are trying to save this club.

 

"I am very clear: the club has had a number of misdemeanours over the years, and these have to be faced up to. The club has to be punished: I am 100% in agreement on that. We have done things wrong. But any penalties we face must be fair and they must be transparent."

 

These days you very rarely hear such openness and clarity about the Rangers case from a Rangers principal. On the contrary, cyber lynch-mobs set after you if you dare to address the Rangers collapse as Murray did in these words.

 

All this said, yes, there is absolutely redress that needs to be secured over the Rangers collapse. BDO, the liquidators, should ruthlessly investigate alleged fraud around the club over this period.

 

So should the police who, to the best of my knowledge, still have an open book on the case. Pursuit of criminality in the destruction of the former Rangers should be relentless.

 

But at some point, the re-writing of history will have to stop. No vendettas did for Rangers FC in 2012. On the contrary, this was a spectacular and tragic self-immolation.

[Darthter 542]

In thinking about this a little more.... this cant be correct.

 

Ticketus were at about 27 million alone. Include unpaid tax of 15 mill and you have 42 million - without any football debts included (we still owed money on Jelavic IIRC).

 

Funny.... to get a TRUE reflection of what SHOULD have been included in the CVA vote for %age voting terms you would have to exclude both the HMRC EBT monies as well as the Ticketus monies.

 

did ticketus not opt to pursue Whyte's personal guarantee's for the full amount, rather than accept a reduced payment via CVA????

If they had gone along the CVA route, they had no recourse through the guarantees.

[ian1964 10,415]

Union Of Fans Statement on Tax Case Result

"It is now clear from the result of the latest, failed HMRC tax case appeal that Rangers Football Club and its fans have been the victims of a witch-hunt by HMRC followed a systematic fraud by Craig Whyte and others which has done huge damage to a proud Scottish and British institution. This damage has been compounded by the leaking of confidential information relating to the case, dishonest reporting of that information and the malicious and cowardly acts of those in power in the Scottish football authorities.

 

The reasons for the pursuit of a phantom tax debt by HMRC, which it is now proven had no foundation, should be investigated at the highest levels of government. Why did HMRC continue with this spurious claim when they were offered settlement? HMRC must also now answer how Mark Daly at the BBC came to be in receipt of confidential tax documents? The person or people who illegally leaked these documents to Daly must be identified and prosecuted.

 

It also appears that Collyer Bristow have settled out of court, in relation to their part in the fraudulent purchase of the club by Craig Whyte. This vindicates the position of the fans over the past few years. We are aware that the police have been investigating the activities of Mr Whyte and Mr Gary Withey, amongst others, and we now call on all those responsible to be formally charged for their part in defrauding Rangers, its fans and shareholders.

 

It was made very clear at the time to the Scottish football authorities, and their legal advisers at Harper MacLeod, that the club was being punished for being the victim of a fraud, but various vested interests were determined to take advantage of the situation and do as much damage to the club as possible. In particular we will be examining the actions of Stewart Regan, Neil Doncaster, Stephen Thomson, Rod Petrie, Rod McKenzie and Peter Lawwell in the disgraceful treatment handed out to Rangers.

 

In the absence of any apparent appetite from the current board or owners of the club to hold various parties to account for the wrongs done to the Rangers, we will be liaising with OldCo shareholders and all other interested parties to see what civil action can be taken against HMRC and the SFA in particular.

 

We also expect BBC Scotland to explain why they produced such a one sided documentary, using illegally leaked information, which coloured public opinion and led to further damage to the club. We will be contacting the BBC Trust to take this up with them and it is our hope that Sir David Murray will also take action against those commentators and journalists who defamed the club and him personally. Several journalists, including Graham Spiers (the discredited journalist) and Alex Thomson, now have their reputations, such as they are, left in tatters due to their biased and inaccurate reporting on the failed HMRC case.

 

HMRCÂ’s baseless witch hunt kicked off a chain of events which has done huge damage to Rangers and which the club has done well to survive. Various parties have since taken advantage of that witch hunt to benefit personally or to further twist the knife due to their own bigotry and jealousy of our club. RangersÂ’ fans have suffered greatly over the past 4 years. We deserve answers on why this was done to our club, we deserve the most robust action possible to be taken against the perpetrators and we deserve every assistance in returning our club to its hard and honestly earned position as the pre-eminent club in Scottish football."

[Doc 280]

Spiers on Sport: an endless blame-game over the demise of Rangers

 

Spiers on Sport

 

Graham Spiers (the discredited journalist)

.

Thursday 10 July 2014

 

 

But at some point, the re-writing of history will have to stop. No vendettas did for Rangers FC in 2012. On the contrary, this was a spectacular and tragic self-immolation.

 

 

Shocking but hardly surprising stuff from Spiers. He happily picks a few quotes from Paul Murray that were given at a time of trauma when nobody (expect perhaps Craig Whyte) knew what was going on and was in full possession of the facts and ignores everything else that has gone on before and since. It's hard to read this trash without being sick. The only one rewriting the facts to suit themselves now is you Graham.

 

You got it catastrophically wrong here. Is "sorry" such a hard word to say Graham?

 

I wouldn't wipe my arse with The Herald while they continue to employ such an ignorant and utterly unrepentant dickhead.

[ian1964 10,415]

A good time to relaunch the Follow We Will book!

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Follow-We-Will-Fall-Rangers/dp/1908373687