Dave King and OldCo

[RANGERRAB 3,254]

HMRC would not go with the CVA because they wanted to go after Whyte. That was their main reason stated at the time.

 

If they really wanted to go after Whyte why did they wait until he got hold control of Rangers?

Before he got Rangers he already owed HMRC millions.

HMRC's actions throughout have always looked to me as if they were out to damage Rangers in whatever way they could.And use Whyte as their excuse

We need a public enquiry to investigate both HMRC & LBG

[barca72 440]

If they really wanted to go after Whyte why did they wait until he got hold control of Rangers?

Before he got Rangers he already owed HMRC millions.

HMRC's actions throughout have always looked to me as if they were out to damage Rangers in whatever way they could.And use Whyte as their excuse

We need a public enquiry to investigate both HMRC & LBG

 

Rab,

Read these two stories through and it might clarify why HMRC forced a liquidation. ...

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13169479.Liquidation_of_Rangers__was_forced_for_tax_probe_/

Liquidation of Rangers 'was forced for tax probe'

Herald Scotland:

Martin Williams, Senior News Reporter / Thursday 10 July 2014 / News

"HMRC voted against the CVA proposed by the administration. *Liquidation allows a full investigation into the conduct of the owners and financial officers of the company, which would not be possible in a CVA.

"It wouldn't be the case that HMRC would vote down a CVA based on *wanting directors' conduct to be looked as a general rule, as happened with Rangers."

The behaviour of the board in the three years prior to the operating company going into administration in February 2012 was already being looked at by the Insolvency Service's Investigations and Enforcement Directorate.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ex-rangers-owner-craig-whyte-being-3992415

Ex-Rangers owner Craig Whyte was being chased by the taxman for £3.74m BEFORE he started his catastrophic reign at Ibrox

07:30, 5 August 2014

Updated 07:39, 5 August 2014

By Keith Jackson

HMRC had instructed debt enforcers to chase Whyte with a bill for almost £4million and threaten him with bankruptcy in May 2011 - the same month that he bought Rangers.

 

 

If you read both articles it shows you Whyte's history and why HMRC wanted him. Rangers were just collateral damage in their chase of Whyte, and this chase is independent of the BTC.

HMRC needed the deeper investigative powers of the Liquidation laws to nail Whyte. If the ISIED was already probing previous boards why would HMRC require deeper investigative power?

The only thing I don't understand is why they allowed Whyte to miss so many PAYE payments, other than ( without the BTC claim, but including the STC ) it put them in a strong position to control the CVA vote.

I remember reading another article, and I can't find it, where HMRC thought that liquidation was a good thing for Rangers as a company because it would allow them to emerge debt-free and go forward from there to grow strong. ( looking at it through an accountant's eye )

He may not have known about the horrors that were to come from the SPL and SFA.

No doubt we can look at the evidence that will be produced in the upcoming court cases and decide if we still need a public enquiry.

[RANGERRAB 3,254]

Rab,

Read these two stories through and it might clarify why HMRC forced a liquidation. ...

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13169479.Liquidation_of_Rangers__was_forced_for_tax_probe_/

Liquidation of Rangers 'was forced for tax probe'

Herald Scotland:

Martin Williams, Senior News Reporter / Thursday 10 July 2014 / News

"HMRC voted against the CVA proposed by the administration. *Liquidation allows a full investigation into the conduct of the owners and financial officers of the company, which would not be possible in a CVA.

"It wouldn't be the case that HMRC would vote down a CVA based on *wanting directors' conduct to be looked as a general rule, as happened with Rangers."

The behaviour of the board in the three years prior to the operating company going into administration in February 2012 was already being looked at by the Insolvency Service's Investigations and Enforcement Directorate.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ex-rangers-owner-craig-whyte-being-3992415

Ex-Rangers owner Craig Whyte was being chased by the taxman for £3.74m BEFORE he started his catastrophic reign at Ibrox

07:30, 5 August 2014

Updated 07:39, 5 August 2014

By Keith Jackson

HMRC had instructed debt enforcers to chase Whyte with a bill for almost £4million and threaten him with bankruptcy in May 2011 - the same month that he bought Rangers.

 

 

If you read both articles it shows you Whyte's history and why HMRC wanted him. Rangers were just collateral damage in their chase of Whyte, and this chase is independent of the BTC.

HMRC needed the deeper investigative powers of the Liquidation laws to nail Whyte. If the ISIED was already probing previous boards why would HMRC require deeper investigative power?

The only thing I don't understand is why they allowed Whyte to miss so many PAYE payments, other than ( without the BTC claim, but including the STC ) it put them in a strong position to control the CVA vote.

I remember reading another article, and I can't find it, where HMRC thought that liquidation was a good thing for Rangers as a company because it would allow them to emerge debt-free and go forward from there to grow strong. ( looking at it through an accountant's eye )

He may not have known about the horrors that were to come from the SPL and SFA.

No doubt we can look at the evidence that will be produced in the upcoming court cases and decide if we still need a public enquiry.

 

Whyte emerged late 2010 as a prospective buyer of Rangers from SDM. IIRC he was allegedly going thro the books prior to making an offer which we now know to be utter tosh. He got Rangers in May the following year to our cost under circumstances which were investigated and now going to trial in the High Court

But It was widely reported in the media at the time when he emerged as a prospective buyer. Why then did HMRC sit back, do nothing and simply let Whyte acquire Rangers in the six months or so since he appeared on the scene if he already owed them millions?

BDO have HMRC down as a creditor for for around £94m. The vast majority of that is a BTC which they have lost and PAYE/NI arrears they inexplicably allowed Whyte to run up. Can they seriously say a liquidation allowed them better 'investigative powers' ? They only real debt they were owed was their own fault I.e. PAYE/NI arrears by Whyte.

As I said earlier HMRC should be subject to a Public Enquiry for all of this . LBG too.

Edited September 12, 2015 by RANGERRAB

[Mountain Bear 0]

What a relief it is to be discussing liquidators, the BTC and OldCo again, after all the football related posts recently! [emoji38]

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Lol mountain bear

[barca72 440]

What a relief it is to be discussing liquidators, the BTC and OldCo again, after all the football related posts recently! [emoji38]

 

All the football discussions were getting too complicated with so many numbering schemes.

[SteveC 150]

We've got many years of these discussions to go, apparently:

 

http://tinyurl.com/ovpb9hs

 

Dave King warns Rangers fans of five-year wait before truth is known about Whyte and Green eras at Ibrox

07:57, 13 SEPTEMBER 2015 UPDATED 08:25, 13 SEPTEMBER 2015

BY SCOTT MCDERMOTT

GREEN and Whyte have both been charged by Police Scotland in connection to Whyte's purchase of the club in 2012.

 

 

DAVE King fears it could be FIVE YEARS before Rangers fans know the truth about Craig Whyte and Charles Green’s time at Ibrox.

 

The club’s former owner and chief executive have been charged by Police Scotland in connection to Whyte’s purchase of Rangers in 2012.

 

New Ibrox chairman King is eager to find out what really went on as the club were plunged into administration and then liquidation.

 

But he’s warned supporters they face a long wait for answers.

 

King said: “I have some experience of lengthy, complex litigation and I think this will run for quite a few years.

 

 

“When you have the intervention of Police Scotland’s criminal case alleging against Green of conspiracy, it starts to get complicated.

 

“I’d imagine a lot of parties will now be looking at civil litigation. I really see this being tied up for a number of years.

 

“I don’t think it could possibly happen in two – I would say it will be closer to five. We believe that if anything is found to be untoward, they should be held accountable.

 

 

“That period of history with Rangers is clearly something the club and supporters have not been able to put behind it.

 

“But it’s more likely, once the criminal case is aired, we will get some clarity as to what was really going on.

 

“We are as much in the dark about it so it will be interesting to see it unfold when the case is presented in court.”

 

King, who was back in Glasgow this week, has reached a settlement with former boss Ally McCoist , who had been on gardening leave .

 

 

McCoist’s contract has been terminated but ex-caretaker boss Kenny McDowall will be paid until his deal ends in February.

 

King said: “The circumstances are different. I don’t feel he has the alternative opportunities that Ally perhaps has in the marketplace.

 

“He’s earned his gardening leave, the circumstances were out of his control, and it would be improper for us to even suggest we wouldn’t honour his contract in full.”

Edited September 13, 2015 by SteveC

[pete 2,499]

We've got many years of these discussions to go, apparently:

 

http://tinyurl.com/ovpb9hs

 

Dave King warns Rangers fans of five-year wait before truth is known about Whyte and Green eras at Ibrox

07:57, 13 SEPTEMBER 2015 UPDATED 08:25, 13 SEPTEMBER 2015

 

BY SCOTT MCDERMOTT

GREEN and Whyte have both been charged by Police Scotland in connection to Whyte's purchase of the club in 2012.

 

 

DAVE King fears it could be FIVE YEARS before Rangers fans know the truth about Craig Whyte and Charles Green’s time at Ibrox.

 

The club’s former owner and chief executive have been charged by Police Scotland in connection to Whyte’s purchase of Rangers in 2012.

 

New Ibrox chairman King is eager to find out what really went on as the club were plunged into administration and then liquidation.

 

But he’s warned supporters they face a long wait for answers.

 

King said: “I have some experience of lengthy, complex litigation and I think this will run for quite a few years.

 

 

“When you have the intervention of Police Scotland’s criminal case alleging against Green of conspiracy, it starts to get complicated.

 

“I’d imagine a lot of parties will now be looking at civil litigation. I really see this being tied up for a number of years.

 

“I don’t think it could possibly happen in two – I would say it will be closer to five. We believe that if anything is found to be untoward, they should be held accountable.

 

 

“That period of history with Rangers is clearly something the club and supporters have not been able to put behind it.

 

“But it’s more likely, once the criminal case is aired, we will get some clarity as to what was really going on.

 

“We are as much in the dark about it so it will be interesting to see it unfold when the case is presented in court.”

 

King, who was back in Glasgow this week, has reached a settlement with former boss Ally McCoist , who had been on gardening leave .

 

 

McCoist’s contract has been terminated but ex-caretaker boss Kenny McDowall will be paid until his deal ends in February.

 

King said: “The circumstances are different. I don’t feel he has the alternative opportunities that Ally perhaps has in the marketplace.

 

“He’s earned his gardening leave, the circumstances were out of his control, and it would be improper for us to even suggest we wouldn’t honour his contract in full.”

 

 

Sorry I didn't see this. I put it up as a new thread.

[der Berliner 3,231]

A few things to the above discussion re HMRC.

 

They were already chasing Whyte when he acquired Rangers from SDM. Whether that alone would/could have stopped him acquiring us is anyone's guess. YET, what failure of the SFA et al in doing their due diligence on a prospective new owner of Rangers FC? (Or did they only start that after the Whyte fiasco?) Obvioulsy, common sense would suggest that HMRC would tell the SFA a word about Whyte once they get any idea about his plans ... even if it was not exactly their business. (One point in the books of those who say that the relevant HMRC branch (et al) was run by people with certain leniencies. For they did not act, yet Regan and Lawwell knew that something was wrong by November (according to Traynor (back then) ... and who would have told them? Perhaps the same leak that filled certain bloggers' pages later on? A leak that is been vigorously covered by HMRC.)

 

Not paying tax and HMRC letting it happen. Methinks it was said a few times that companies as big as Rangers' get a certain allowance in being late. If they are, they get a notice with a certain period. If that does not help another notice is fired the company's way. Then they start dealing with you with the gloves off. Those saying that also suggested that the time which elapsed between the due tax, the notice letters and the administration date are roughly correct.

[forlanssister 3,050]

A few things to the above discussion re HMRC.

 

They were already chasing Whyte when he acquired Rangers from SDM. Whether that alone would/could have stopped him acquiring us is anyone's guess. YET, what failure of the SFA et al in doing their due diligence on a prospective new owner of Rangers FC? (Or did they only start that after the Whyte fiasco?) Obvioulsy, common sense would suggest that HMRC would tell the SFA a word about Whyte once they get any idea about his plans ... even if it was not exactly their business. (One point in the books of those who say that the relevant HMRC branch (et al) was run by people with certain leniencies. For they did not act, yet Regan and Lawwell knew that something was wrong by November (according to Traynor (back then) ... and who would have told them? Perhaps the same leak that filled certain bloggers' pages later on? A leak that is been vigorously covered by HMRC.)

 

Not paying tax and HMRC letting it happen. Methinks it was said a few times that companies as big as Rangers' get a certain allowance in being late. If they are, they get a notice with a certain period. If that does not help another notice is fired the company's way. Then they start dealing with you with the gloves off. Those saying that also suggested that the time which elapsed between the due tax, the notice letters and the administration date are roughly correct.

 

It's absolutely ludicrous to suggest HMRC could intervene to stop an individual or a company taking over another company simply because of an ongoing tax dispute. There are thousands and thousands of ongoing tax disputes going on at any given time, some can last decades. Should the entire UK baking and confectionery industries have grinded to a halt whilst we awaited the outcome of the Jaffa Cake VAT farce. Should Proctor & Gamble not been allowed to take over any other companies whist the Pringles VAT farce rumbled on?

 

The notion that HMRC could have a word about someone's tax affairs to a third party (without consent) is simply perverse, it's truly bizarre to complain (correctly) about leaks from HMRC then complain about no leak from HMRC

 

Here's the thing, you would have been one of the most vociferous voices condemning HMRC for blocking or attempting to block Whyte's takeover just as you were one of the most vociferous in defending Whyte against anyone who doubted he didn't walk on water, ditto Green.