Mountain Bear 0 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Actually in reading that statement from HMRC, if HMRC are only allowed to appeal the termination payments, and that those only relate to Murray (and family), then that is only the Murray Group employees that are being appealed, and not the RFC employees. Am I reading that right? No, it's saying that he agreed with the FFT's decision to reject HMRC's view re termination payments etc. It's that element they are trying to appeal again. No surprise to me at all. HMRC have already sunk so much time and effort into this, that even a remote chance of winning another appeal will seem worth the (relatively) small additional outlay. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Actually in reading that statement from HMRC, if HMRC are only allowed to appeal the termination payments, and that those only relate to Murray (and family), then that is only the Murray Group employees that are being appealed, and not the RFC employees. Am I reading that right? In other words (ii) relates to the players and not the Murray family. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,219 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 FFer marty101 answered the question with regard to whom HMRC are asking: It's the UTTT which has to consider whether to grant leave - although if they refuse, I believe that HMRC can apply directly to the CoS and ask them to allow them the appeal anyway... The UTTT will probably grant leave to appeal, I'm afraid. The only thing that gives me a little bit of hope is that HMRC had to try to get the UTTT to overturn the FTTT's findings in fact in the appeal to the UTTT. That's quite an extreme position, usually the facts found by the lower tribunal will bind the later tribunals, and if they're having to try that again in this subsequent appeal, it's just possible that the UTTT might think that their argument is hopeless and shouldn't proceed further. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,384 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Fans accuse the taxman of witch hunt against Rangers Martin Williams Senior News Reporter Friday 8 August 2014 RANGERS fans have accused the taxman of prolonging a witch hunt against the club over the so-called Big Tax Case on the day it emerged one director is being paid £1000-a-day plus expenses. A leading supporters' group has accused Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) of wasting public money after it said yesterday it would make a fresh appeal over the case. It is to contest a decision by a First-Tier Tax Tribunal over the Ibrox club's controversial use of Employment Benefit Trusts (EBTs). It is insisting Rangers are liable for a £46.2 million bill over the use of the loans to pay players, managers and other staff. It has also emerged that Rangers' part-time financial consultant Philip Nash is being paid £1000 a day, plus expenses. Mr Nash works a maximum of 16 days a month from England. The former Arsenal and Liverpool administator's pay is £200,000 a year, comparable to that of controversial former finance officer Brian Stockbridge. Mr Nash sits on the board but does not take a director's fee. Chris Graham of the Union of Fans said the "witch hunt" pursuit of the "phantom tax debt" by HMRC was a waste of public money at a time when HMRC will not discuss whether a public inquiry should be held into allegations the club's tax affairs were leaked. He said: "HMRC have had two goes at this. How many times do they have to be told they don't have a case here? A line should be drawn under this now and they should just give it a rest." Mr Graham added: "It's interesting they are spending so much time and money attempting to win the Big Tax Case but when asked by shareholders, fans, even MPs about even an internal inquiry into where the Rangers tax information came from, HMRC completely blank them. "They are spending an awful lot of taxpayers' money on lawyers in pursuing this but yet won't answer questions about where [the leaks] came from." On Mr Nash's wages, he said: "Ibrox is crumbling, Murray Park is crumbling, almost every area of the club, on and off the pitch, needs investment, revenues are down and yet we are seeing a part-time consultant take home at least £200,000 a year and our CEO, Graham Wallace, earn a possible £630,000. It's ridiculous." "It's in keeping with what we've seen over the past two years with executives taking huge payments out the club for … no tangible benefit." The HMRC appeal follows a decision on July 9 by Upper-Tier Tax Tribunal judge Lord Doherty. He dismissed its appeal against a First-Tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) decision in the Big Tax Case. HMRC has sought leave to appeal to the Inner House of the Court of Session, as the cost of pursuing the case runs into millions of pounds. HMRC claimed the EBT payments should be taxable but Sir David Murray's Murray International Holdings (MIH), which used to own Rangers, has now twice successfully argued they were loans and therefore exempt. Many believe the case led to Lloyds Banking Group insisting the club debts were cleared, resulting in a disastrous sale to disgraced venture capitalist Craig Whyte, the subsequent liquidation, and the decision to put Rangers in the Third Division as punishment. An HMRC spokesman said it "continues to believe that schemes using Employee Benefit Trusts to avoid tax do not work. Around 700 users of EBT schemes have already settled with us resulting in around £800m of tax and National Insurance contributions being paid. We expect more to settle." It has been alleged 63 Rangers players and 24 other staff got EBT payments. Rangers would not comment on the tax case, but said Mr Nash was a "highly respected football administrator" who made a valuable contribution to building a successful Rangers. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/fans-accuse-the-taxman-of-witch-hunt-against-rangers.24987451 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Chris Graham should fully focus on the current shenanigans. The result of the HMRC appeal won't change anything. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,253 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Chris Graham should fully focus on the current shenanigans. The result of the HMRC appeal won't change anything. Won't change anything? Just wait and see what would happen if HMRC were to win their appeal.Title-stripping would be back on the agenda 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Won't change anything? Just wait and see what would happen if HMRC were to win their appeal.Title-stripping would be back on the agenda Which part of 'no sporting advantage' are you struggling with? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,253 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Which part of 'no sporting advantage' are you struggling with? Which part of the fact we're dealing with Liewell, Rhegan,Thompson, Petrie etc, are you struggling with? They will find some other means to do this 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Which part of the fact we're dealing with Liewell, Rhegan,Thompson, Petrie etc, are you struggling with?They will find some other means to do this With the Llhoyds Bhank Bhoys in on it too, no doubt. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,078 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 after their shambles on Wednesday the good doctor was hurting bad is it any surprise this has come up again 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.