der Berliner 3,245 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Maybe those receiving the EBTs should write a letter stating their intent to pay the loans back (some day)? :devil: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
onevision 1,442 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I would wait to see the result of this appeal to be sure of that. It would not surprise me if the result is turned around that they will make another attack. I'm sure that's the whole idea of this hunt. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Well they weren't exactly under-the-counter payments being given to Rangers employees as yahoos would have you believe. They were above board and a perfectly legal form of tax avoidance via a loophole later closed by George Osborne I'm not disputing that mate - but the way you posted previously suggested that simply by including something in your accounts makes it legal, it doesn't. Just ask Bernie Madoff The very crux of what you say here is the use of the word "avoidance" - avoidance is perfectly legal and any corporation should be using efficient tax practices to avoid tax. We can complain about the big companies and high net worth individuals avoiding tax all we like - but if HMRC have legislation which provides loopholes the responsibility is on them to close the loopholes, not those avoiding tax to simply not avoid it. What is disappointing to me is that, at the time we used EBT's they were very much legal but most of the narrative around our use of them was that they were illegal, which is nonsense. And nobody from any quarter really challenged it. HMRC, it seemed, were trying to retrospectively apply updated legislation - that is what annoys with this. Thankfully we largely won the case on the legislation and only lost small pieces on administrative errors. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Thankfully we largely won the case on the legislation and only lost small pieces on administrative errors. I have heard that quite often, yet what exactly does the CoS now preside over? Or in what way can they turn previous ruling on its respective heads? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Snatched from FF ... what a shame: Gary Allan QC, who has represented some of the country's most notorious criminals, was declared insolvent after failing to settle large bills. The 56-year-old advocate has more than 30 years' experience as a lawyer and is regarded as one of Scotland's finest legal minds. In 2012, he was subjected to death threats after sitting on an SFA disciplinary panel which punished Rangers for bringing Scottish football into disrepute. His clients have included wife killer Malcolm Webster and Ashok Kalyanjee, who murdered his two young sons. It has now emerged that Mr Allan applied for his own bankruptcy after running up debts of £206,374 and it was approved by the Accountant In Bankruptcy, Scotland's insolvency service, earlier this month. Bryan Jackson, of insolvency specialists BDO, has been appointed to take control of his assets and try to recover money owed to creditors. Mr Allan, who received more than £109,000 in legal aid payments last year, has declared assets of just £9,964. It is understood that the bankruptcy will not affect his ability to continue to carry out legal work and appear in court. The Faculty of Advocates, which regulates the conduct of its members, said it does not class bankruptcy as a disciplinary issue. It has not been disclosed who Mr Allan owes the cash to as his bankruptcy did not go through the courts. In October 2012, Mr Allan told how he had been given advice from Special Branch and anti-terrorist officers after police found evidence of various threats being made against him by groups with links to Rangers. He sat on the three-man SFA panel which handed Rangers a 12-month transfer embargo and a £160,000 fine. He also criticised Rangers manager Ally McCoist who, when the punishments were announced, publicly called for the names of the panel which were supposed to remain anonymous, to be made known. He said then: "I wasn't ready for my family to be exposed to that and that caused me a lot of anxiety. We were given a full briefing on mail handling. I was told there would be certain items which I should under no circumstances open if they were not from a familiar source. "I was told I should take mail into the smallest secure room with the fewest windows and have the family somewhere else in the house whilst I opened the mail. "I was astonished when I saw a recording of Mr McCoist demanding the names be disclosed and declaring he did not know who they were, and felt he ought to know." Mr Allan has been a solicitor for 34 years and was appointed a QC in 2007. He was involved in the fatal accident inquiry into the Lockerbie air crash and last year represented Philip Wade, who was convicted of abducting, torturing and murdering Lynda Spence. He served as a Senior Advocate Depute in the Crown Office between 2007 and 2011, prosecuting cases in the High Court. He also acts as a professional mentor to 32 advocates and is also one of the founding directors of Casus Omissus, a pro bono legal advice service established and run by the law students of the University of Aberdeen A spokesman for the Faculty of Advocates said: "Sequestration in itself is not a disciplinary matter for the Faculty." Mr Allan said: "I have no comment to make." http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?t=1056918 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 5,156 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I have heard that quite often, yet what exactly does the CoS now preside over? Or in what way can they turn previous ruling on its respective heads? They can say that Heidi Hoop was right and the other three were wrong so they can't overturn the whole thing or any part of it or they can say let's all laugh at HMRC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Wonder if he would find it just if he was now fined and Barred from taking new cases for 12 months? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Are the ebts not repaid on death? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Are the ebts not repaid on death? The loans are not repaid on death. They are to be repaid somewhere like the year 2150 whereby the trustee will be long dead before then & the loan never gets repaid. 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.