der Berliner 3,231 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Probably the most logical post yet. From "nonsense" to "most logical" within two posts, when the latter essentially agrees with mine and adds a bit more? People blame Murray and or Whyte "directly" all the time, just look at the replies above. I blame a number of things that contributed to our fall because a number of things did it. It is essentially, and I quote you, "nonsense" to e.g. say that SDM was the prime perpetrator when it is clear that he wasn't. It's like saying the pilot who released the atom bomb on Hiroshima is alone to blame for the massacre that unfolded afterwards. Murray did what thousands of British companies did at the time, and as of now, only a handful of those EBT deals were "wrongly listed". To this day, the EBTs we used where not against the law. After the credit crunch, HRBoS and Lloyds (after receiving billions of taxpayers' money to steady their own ailing mess) went after Murray after his "empire" crumbled and their best opportunity to get some "cash" back from him was forcing him to sell us ... as much of the rest of his empire was toxic or unsellable. Was it a coincidence that HMRC used us to get their EBT cases going? Maybe so. Then tell me why it took them and/or the judges ages to come to a decision. An age long enough at least to make our club toxic too, but an open hunting ground for folk like Whyte. Would SDM have sold the club to the charlatan had he known what he was up to? There's no doubt what certain people think about this, never mind what SDM himself said. But we can go on and ask why HMRC, still chasing us for the EBTs, where oh-so silent about any non-payment of PAYE and VAT by Whyte? Likewise - according to James Traynor - were Lawwell and Regan. Whereas all those bloggers knew which kind of colour his handkerchief had and had to tell the world about it ... after disaster struck? When all the world and HMRC too where chasing Hearts for any unpaid bill as soon as they started to be in any sort of financial bother? A long list of events up there and people will obviously make up their own minds up about this. I for one would refrain to call fellow posters' opinions "nonsense" when they clearly are not. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 For me the biggest and most crucial factor that led to administration and the devastating consequences thereof was the BTC. Secondly, the BTC had absolutely no foundation in fair thinking, never mind law. It was a crock of shit. You cannot in any fair minded society make vague rules, allow people to flirt on the edge of the line of the ambiguities of those rules and then decide to tighten them, up punish them 11 years later, backdate the infringements for that time, add on interest and penalties that not only triple the claim but reach a point that kills the company, and then lose the case. Governments should fall for this kind of perversion of governance. Whyte was just a small time con man compared to a massive constitutional failure that should send shock waves through our tax system. Whyte is just another criminal of which there are many in society, but the BTC means I no longer Trust one of the bastions of society. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 For me the biggest and most crucial factor that led to administration and the devastating consequences thereof was the BTC. Secondly, the BTC had absolutely no foundation in fair thinking, never mind law. It was a crock of shit. You cannot in any fair minded society make vague rules, allow people to flirt on the edge of the line of the ambiguities of those rules and then decide to tighten them, up punish them 11 years later, backdate the infringements for that time, add on interest and penalties that not only triple the claim but reach a point that kills the company, and then lose the case. Governments should fall for this kind of perversion of governance. The BTC DID have foundation. If the rules were not properly applied then we would have been found guilty. HMRC can't possibly look at every tax avoidance scheme that appears each year and it's perfectly correct for them to examine them for years gone past to ensure that people are not evading tax. The case was complex and the result was never a given for either side. If you take advantage of a tax avoidance scheme that sails close to the wind, which ours undoubtedly did, then you can't complain if it gets examined in future years. There is plenty to criticise about the way that the case was handled but it's wrong to say that it had no foundation. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Sir David Murray is responsible for where we are now. Yes there are other players and various coincidences which are part of the overall farce but SDM ultimately made the crucial decisions so he's to blame. SDM wasn't 'duped' by anyone. His only interest was saving his own financial and reputational bacon - as has always been the case. Rather than being remembered as the man who helped return Rangers to the dominant role in Scottish football, history WILL show him as the cowardly custodian who played fast and loose with the club's finances before capitulating to his creditors and handing the club to the wolves. Yes, Whyte, HMRC, LBG, RTC, the Scottish media and D&P may all feature in the reckoning to differing degrees but one man has the most blood on his hands. Or maybe it's just red wine... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Yet again the tribunal appears to be taking forever to deliver it's verdict. Three to four months after the case was heard and still nothing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little General 80 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 appeal apparently dismissed http://www.tribunals.gov.uk/financeandtax/Decisions.htm#top https://twitter.com/STVGrant 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,409 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Decisions Tax | Charity | Financial Services | Northern Rock | Bradford & Bingley |Pensions | Former Tribunal decisions Tax Name: The Commisioners for HMRC v (1) Murray Group Holdings Ltd,(2) Murray Group Management Ltd,(3) The Premier Property Group Ltd, 4) G M Mining Ltd, (5) RFC 2012 PLC (in liquidation) (formerly The Rangers Football Club plc)pdf document download icon (160kb) "Income Tax and NIC – emoluments/earnings – tax avoidance scheme - remuneration trust – employees’ individual sub-trusts – “protectors” - (1) whether payments into sub-trusts were emoluments/earnings subject to PAYE and NIC; -No (2) whether loans from sub-trusts were emoluments/earnings subject to PAYE and NIC; -No (3) “Ramsay” principle - whether FTT erred in law; - No - Case remitted to FTT to determine certain matters, but otherwise appeal dismissed." http://www.tribunals.gov.uk/financeandtax/Decisions.htm 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannochsidebear 2,306 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 I feckin knew it all along. I just couldn't believe that Murray, for all his many, many faults, would not have the correct procedures in place to ensure the EBT's followed the law to the letter to make them legal. Having seen presentations on these type of EBT's in my job with clients of mine, it is a thoroughly exhaustive process but perfectly legal if carried out correctly, which given the number of top professionals Murray was paying would have been fairly certain they would have done so. I told everyone who would listen, including Mark Daly at BBC, that he was wrong in his "award-winning" documentary, and that the BTC would ultimately fail. Then they came back with the old, ah but HMRC are going to appeal so we cant say you are innocent yet. Well F**K the lot of you scumbags who have been giving us it tight for the last 5 years or so, I feckin told you so. Absolutely disgusted that this was allowed to be played out the way it was. There was never the innocent until proven guilty chance afforded to us as scumbag after scumbag, including many in authority and positions of power, rose to say how bad we were. Have absolutely no doubt, without this BTC, we would never have been able to have the pressure put on us by LBG that they did, never have sold to Whyte, and therefore never have had to go thorugh what we went thorugh, and are still going through with another season of inferior tosh ahead, and no European prestige or chance of National success. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 surely this along with the £24 million should be enough to pay off all creditors. Is it possible the old holding company may not after all be liquidated ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,231 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 surely this along with the £24 million should be enough to pay off all creditors. Is it possible the old holding company may not after all be liquidated ? Interesting question indeed. Not that it owns that much, but simply to have it still around would be nice. 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.