D'Art's latest

[barca72 440]

All That Glitters...

 

Written by: D'Artagnan

 

Saturday, 19th of July 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After penning my recent articles for WATP magazine, I didn't expect to be writing about HMRC again so soon. But of course as Rangers fans, if the last few years has taught us anything, is to always expect the unexpected. Except of course where BBC Scotland is concerned.

 

Their decision to feature Angela Haggerty in a programme discussing Rangers and the big tax case was, disappointingly, completely in character for an organisation which appears to be unable to exercise any of the standards of journalistic integrity, it was once renowned for.

 

Ms Haggerty's apparent inability to understand the anger of Rangers fans towards HMRC is an illuminating reflection of a wider journalistic community in Scotland who have comprehensively failed to grasp some of the golden nuggets the Rangers Tax Case has unearthed, and instead, for a variety of reasons, their attention has been drawn to that which may very well glitter, but alas, is not gold.

 

Firstly though allow me to separate some of the wheat from the chaff, and attempt to qualify the anger of the Rangers support towards HMRC. It does not stem from their investigation and attempts to close the tax loophole which are EBT's, I think most Bears realise the blame for our club finding itself on the wrong side of an HMRC investigation lies with Sir David Murray and his willingness to involve our club in a scheme which had all the hallmarks of risqué, written all over it. Perhaps many, myself included, would be interested in the decision making process which caused HMRC to single out Rangers as the "test case" for EBT's, but that in itself is more about curiosity than anger.

 

Furthermore HMRC's action over Whyte's failure with regards PAYE is perfectly understandable, the only caveat to that being why it took them so long to take action?

 

The anger of the Rangers support stems from conduct by HMRC which suggests they have been negligent during the course of this enquiry, that they have deliberately prevaricated in their responses to concerns about breaches of confidentiality and have failed on a number of professional levels to both safeguard and implement the standards they set for themselves during the course of an investigation.

 

Section 98 of Lord Nimmo Smith's SPL Commission Report makes reference to the confidential information obtained by BBC Scotland. The phraseology used in the report "which we understand were the productions before the tax tribunal" suggests that evidence from the tax tribunal has somehow been removed from its safe storage and passed onto a media organisation. Responsibility for the safe storage and handling of productions normally lies with the prosecuting authority.

 

We therefore have the possible scenario of a professional investigative body seizing evidence in the course of their investigation, failing to secure that evidence properly thus allowing it to be removed and subsequently used by others to infer a presumption of guilt against the accused party whilst meanwhile, that same investigative body dismiss concerns reported to them about such leaks with the phrase "HMRC don't respond to speculation about alleged breaches of confidentiality". Perhaps the question needs to be asked of HMRC – "What exactly do you respond to?"

 

But of course, none of the above offer any insight as to the source of the leaks which allowed another award winner, The Rangers Tax Case Blog, to captivate readers and the wider journalistic community with its regular exposures of sensitive and confidential information. Was the security of the tax tribunal evidence, for which HMRC were responsible, breached on a number of occasions or in one "grand heist" which subsequently fed this web blog with the information it so regularly shared? Or did the material come from another, as yet unknown source?

 

Like many Rangers supporters I am struggling to understand why award winning documentaries broadcast on national television by national media organisations and award winning web blogs, both featuring appropriated confidential information concerning the Rangers Tax was met with the following response when concerned Rangers fans and shareholders highlighted them to HMRC: "HMRC don't respond to speculation about alleged breaches of confidentiality". Speculation and allegation? Quite simply this is totally unacceptable and it is incumbent on our politicians to seek an explanation from HMRC on what is increasingly looking like gross negligence by them concerning this episode.

 

Furthermore it is not only those of us within the Rangers community who are struggling with this concept. At some point in the future, probably at the conclusion of the Police investigation into this matter, HMRC are going to have to provide answers to people who they cannot dismiss in the manner and with the contempt they showed for the Rangers support. This is where we must channel our anger - towards ensuring that a full and thorough investigation is undertaken and that answers are provided which explain the apparent failings of HMRC and makes those responsible accountable for their actions; or lack of action as the case may be.

 

Do not let the Ms Haggerty's of this world tell you that your anger and moral indignation towards HMRC is somehow "unjustified" let us instead use that anger to press for a full government investigation into this matter. When the unknown becomes known, then and only then will we decide if our anger is justified or not.

[RANGERRAB 3,254]

Another well-written article by D'Art. FWIW I don't think we'll see results from the police investigation until HMRC finally admit defeat in all of this meaning they don't take this to the third and final stage i.e. to the Court of Session. Unfortunately I think they will meaning this drags on even longer.

For me the biggest question of all is why HMRC went after Rangers for use of EBT's in the first place. Criticise SDM all you like but thousands of UK companies used EBT's as a perfectly legal means of tax avoidance including MIH as has been shown. so why did HMRC pursue Rangers? What was their case? It doesn't exactly look like much of a case when it has failed not one but two of HMRC's own internal appeals.I've long suspected this was initiated by rangers-hating parasites from the political world who used this to destabilise Rangers and deter reputable buyers. I believe two two individuals were involved both with links to the east end.

[Scott7 5,130]

A tax scheme with the hallmarks of "risqué". Hmmm. Wouldn't mind seeing that.

[TheWee BlueDevil 0]

Or as young Bill Shakespeare (The Merchant Of Venice) worded it - "All that glisters is not gold".

The fact that Haggerty was invited at all tells anyone with an ounce of wit everything they need to know about BBC Scotland's true motives, standards and ongoing leanings.

They are about as subtle as a brick..........

Utterly shameless and they DEMAND I pay a licence fee so that I can be force fed their anti-Rangers poison.