ibroxbound
Well-Known Member
Does their Twitter page comment on any other dispute or case?
HMRC's Chief Executive responds to Times article with letter
- Thread starter YoungGer97
- Start date
Their inaccurate penalties raised the clubs liabilities to a level that triggered everything else afterwards.
Their point-blank refusal to deal with Murray yet accept cut price deals with other companies was unfair.
They didn’t want to give us a chance, either by choice or instruction from others.
Their point-blank refusal to deal with Murray yet accept cut price deals with other companies was unfair.
They didn’t want to give us a chance, either by choice or instruction from others.
CinnamonSwally
Well-Known Member
It’s an incredibly vague public response when challenging a national newspaper for inaccurate reporting. Evening times will take an accusation of inaccurate reporting very seriously so I’d expect a comprehensive breakdown of the irregularities to now be published in full (within legal allowances).
It just seems like a bizarre way for HMRC to challenge what’s came out so far. Surely ET’s scrutinised the content of their articles so is not to leave themselves open to accusations like these.
It will be interesting to see how this develops.
It just seems like a bizarre way for HMRC to challenge what’s came out so far. Surely ET’s scrutinised the content of their articles so is not to leave themselves open to accusations like these.
It will be interesting to see how this develops.
Sounds amateurish alright
StirlingGer
Well-Known Member
There is absolutely no way a ‘deliberate’ penalty would stick against rangers for a tax scheme that was backed by QC advice and went all the way to the Supreme Court. In no other case would a penalty be charged. There is no way they could argue rangers did not take reasonable care when they had QC advice.
Jim Harra the chief exec is Scottish. Probably a mentally challenged no doubt.
Jim Harra the chief exec is Scottish. Probably a mentally challenged no doubt.
RFC1964
Active Member
Your right The Times will have moved on, but tomorrow the HMRC response will be in rags everywhere and the General public will take that on board.
chosen few
Well-Known Member
White man speak with forked tongue kimo saby, politician type talk, no one is denying they got the result they wanted at the 3rd attempt, but without lying he has deliberately missed the point.
In my experience HMRC feel they are above such "codes". They hold the purse-strings and as such they are the government, as far as they are concerned.
Purplestar
Well-Known Member
A non statement from a would be politicain basically.
muttley
Well-Known Member
A FORMER senior HM Revenue and Customs inspector believes his former employer made an error in using a ‘grossing up’ method to calculate a huge £74million Rangers’ tax bill – that is being blamed for the club’s financial implosion.
BDO, the liquidator of the old Rangers business believes those calculations are wrong and if their challenge is successful would bring down HMRC’s £94m tax claim to just £43m.
The taxman said around £74m was owed for the club’s use of EBTs from 2001 to 2010 to pay players and staff as part of the overall tax claim. But if BDO’s challenge is successful it could drop to just £23m – with £24m penalties already wiped out by agreement and interest payments also cut.
Stephen Outhwaite, a former senior tax inspector, said that ‘grossing up’ should not have been applied to staff and players and should only apply to directors if they are unable to make good the income tax paid by the company.
Mr Outhwaite, now a tax dispute resolution expert said that under the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions Act) of 2003, while ‘grossing up’ is a common feature in many HMRC Employee Benefit Trust settlements, it is “not appropriate where the payments were to an employee or the director who has no material interest in the company”.
In April 2010, HMRC began an investigation into Rangers’ use of EBTs to players from 2001 onwards. A total of 111 sub-trusts were said to have been set up between 2001-2010 for Rangers directors, players and other staff – along with employees of Murray International Holdings and its subsidiary companies.
A total of 53 Rangers players and staff received side contracts giving undertakings to fund their sub-trusts with cash.
Mr Outhwaite added: “Thinking about the Rangers case, then any payments made via EBT to non-directors should not fall within the Section 223 charge, and so ‘grossing up’ would be inappropriate in the case of the non-directors and if HMRC’s claim included grossing up for them it would have been incorrect.”
Executives within the board overseen by owner Sir David Murray said confusion over the tax burden had deterred potential investors when Rangers was put up for sale in 2011.
Rangers went into administration in February 2012 over outstanding PAYE and national insurance payments, and subsequently entered liquidation in June 2012.
Ex taxman on 'why HMRC got it wrong in Rangers case'
A FORMER senior HM Revenue and Customs inspector believes his former employer made an error in using a ‘grossing up’ method to calculate a huge…
www.eveningtimes.co.uk
Greenisland Bear
Well-Known Member
In fairness this whole episode over the last few days has made us a right laughing stock.
All we need is some serious clarity.
All we need is some serious clarity.
borderbluenose
Well-Known Member
Thought the story was in the London Times
There is only one thing that needs to be agreed and that's what the final payment to HMRC. The semantics of who won what or if the tax was calculated right has never been the Times point in this story but how much we needed to pay and if this ends up around £20M heads need to roll!
CinnamonSwally
Well-Known Member
Oh right, i could be wrong mate. Still, I’d imagine the same logic would apply.
Disco Deejay
Well-Known Member
"HMRC won against Rangers".
If that is the language of the HMRC Chief Executive, heaven help us.
If that is the language of the HMRC Chief Executive, heaven help us.
Laudrup1
Well-Known Member
Yeah, they'd have been better just keeping schtum at this point.
Anything now is just digging a bigger hole giving The Times a chance to show them up further
Southpaws
Well-Known Member
He is northern Irish mate.
Sandbear
Well-Known Member
Us? A laughing stock, I’m not seeing it, that letter and the tweet sent out at 11pm last night are laughable. That is thedepartment charged with the collection of taxes they are coming across like petty children not a professional organisation.
RFC1964
Active Member
Who’s head?
That is all it is Bluenose1979 wordplay because that is the only way they can defend themselves.
Midfield General
Well-Known Member
Mate there is a lot of misunderstanding around the use of Ebts.It was never the case that they were either legal or illegal,they were perfectly legal,the dispute was over if they were taxable or not.The same Jim Harra that has been on record saying EBT's are legal?
SFA/SPFL appear to be hiding discussions with HMRC on Marketed Film Tax Avoidance schemes.
In researching how HMRC is starting to handle footballer Image Rights I came across this oral testimony from an HMRC employee at the UK Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee hearing into Hig…footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com
Del
Well-Known Member
No one is disputing that HMRC won the final battle. The tax due is a straight forward calculation X% of Y so no one is saying they made a mistake there so this arse is technically correct on those two points.
Strangely enough he has completely omitted the fact that £50m has been wiped off the bill due to him and his rebel band making a James Hunt of the totting up process. The real crux of the story.
Anyone else think Jim's arse is making buttons.
Strangely enough he has completely omitted the fact that £50m has been wiped off the bill due to him and his rebel band making a James Hunt of the totting up process. The real crux of the story.
Anyone else think Jim's arse is making buttons.
GodStruth
Well-Known Member
Brother Crockett
Well-Known Member
No, but I think he paid a Polish Plumber to write that statement. FFS, was it written in crayon?
Nope.Ulsterman from County Down!
Del
Well-Known Member
A statement at twenty to five on a Friday tells he has fecked off for the weekend. This is the last he is saying on it. Hopefully the Times have a response for Jhim. Smoke the cant out before Monday.
muttley
Well-Known Member
Neilstonger
Well-Known Member
Having spent too many years in the Civil Service drafting statement for Ministers and public consumption I would guess that statement is correct. They will dissemble and play with words because that is what they do. I suspect their tax calculations to be correct and whatever penalties they calculated were based in the legal advice available at that time. The papers, on the other hand, will sensationalise because that is what they do.
I hold out no hope that we will get compensation or even justice from this. When it comes to being complete and utter kunts the Civil Service leaves even Sepco standing at the gate.
I hold out no hope that we will get compensation or even justice from this. When it comes to being complete and utter kunts the Civil Service leaves even Sepco standing at the gate.
ecossebear
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure we ever will mate, sadly. HMRC will likely drop the penalties and reduce the interest, knowing they are not getting it back and would be throwing good money after bad. Therefore the final bill may be an awful lot lower than the original bill, but that wouldn’t be the case were the old company still active. HMRC would have carried on the witch hunt and gone after us for every single penny - whether the penalties were fair or not. Someone in HMRC (and I actually dont believe it is ‘one of them’) has had it in for us from the start because they wanted a big scalp on their CV and we were unfortunately the easy target.
Carlton The Bear
Well-Known Member
No, he’s from Northern Ireland and went to state (Protestant) schools.
Rt. Hon. Bearman
Well-Known Member
HMRC are clearly rattled about something.
To comment about a specific case - when they have previously stated that they have a policy of not doing so - and using the kind of language that we have seen on Twitter is completely inappropriate, unprofessional and reeks of them being flustered.
The question is - what have they got to hide?
To comment about a specific case - when they have previously stated that they have a policy of not doing so - and using the kind of language that we have seen on Twitter is completely inappropriate, unprofessional and reeks of them being flustered.
The question is - what have they got to hide?
Lenzie Loyal
Well-Known Member
I detect more than a little panic in that reply.
I suspect Hector's arse is twitching.
I suspect Hector's arse is twitching.
Bang on, they are shitting themselves
Stuart_WATP
Well-Known Member
Why is that twitter account putting out such strange tweets and statements? They don't even seem remotely professional, and they are HMRC ffs!
Sutton_Blows_goats
Well-Known Member
Is that right HMRC guy
www.telegraph.co.uk
www.telegraph.co.uk
Taxman accused of letting Vodafone off £8 billion
www.telegraph.co.uk
HMRC faces court challenge over Goldman Sachs tax deal
www.telegraph.co.uk
Lenzie Loyal
Well-Known Member
Strange behaviour indeed.
The Times article certainly has them rattled.
There's something reeking in Hector's House.
HenningBerg
Well-Known Member
Codswallop .
Rt. Hon. Bearman
Well-Known Member
Arrogance.
This was about hurting Rangers. Recovering tax was merely a cover story.
Episodes like this are just one of the many reasons why winning our 55th title is going to be so sweet.
Over the past seven years we have seen people inside and outside of Scottish football taking pleasure in our troubles, trying to kid themselves on that we are a new club (because they can't handle the fact that we survived) and trying to put us down at every turn.
Well, we're still here, we're still fighting and we're going to win the title this season.
We won. You lost.
Get it right up every single one of you.
Whoever was in charge of the case at the time
Lenzie Loyal
Well-Known Member
In what way?
Norskger
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure how to post a screenshot but the editor of the Times Scotland put this reply on a few minutes ago:
"Many thanks Jim. I would have been able to respond to this sooner but your team spelled my deputy's name wrong so he did not get the email, as promised."
HMRC couldn't even get the name right in an email to the editorial team!
"Many thanks Jim. I would have been able to respond to this sooner but your team spelled my deputy's name wrong so he did not get the email, as promised."
HMRC couldn't even get the name right in an email to the editorial team!
Nerf Herder
Well-Known Member
There appears to be some absolute f*ckwits running that HMRC twitter page.
Head is burst over all this ONCE again.
Head is burst over all this ONCE again.
