Virgil Hilts
Well-Known Member
After the revelations over the last 36 hours, did HMRC actually have 25% (+) of Rangers unsecured debt, the amount required to block the administrators’ CVA proposals?
Think they would have with the wee tax case but ticketus would have had a big claim as wellAfter the revelations over the last 36 hours, did HMRC actually have 25% (+) of Rangers unsecured debt, the amount required to block the administrators’ CVA proposals?
After the revelations over the last 36 hours, did HMRC actually have 25% (+) of Rangers unsecured debt, the amount required to block the administrators’ CVA proposals?
It doesn’t matter, you’re looking at it the wrong way, the only reason there was administration was because of the £75m ‘mistake’.
If Hmrc has set the big tax bill at £20M we would’ve traded our way out of it, simply serviced it at a reasonable level or found a credible buyer. The bank forced Murray to get rid of us at all costs as we were toxic due to the £75M liability - they ran the risk of losing the £22M(?) that we owed them.
Bear in mind that we’d significantly reduced the debt In the years leading up to 2012, while painful, we could’ve continued to downsize or sell Jelavic, Davis and Naeshame to continue operations.
I was thinking about this also but don't have the original CVA figures. Many companies voted for the CVA and the total claim voting for it, taking into account the new HMRC estimated claim, may have been more than those claims against it. Not sure if this is the rule but wouldn't mind seeing the figures and getting the rules for a CVA approval.I was just wondering if HMRC had enough unsecured debt to effectively veto a CVA, I know it might not be priority, if they’ve had undue influence on another event that was pivotal in the fate of the company that used to operate Rangers football club it might be worth looking at.
It was loosely reported as £14.5m against approximately £55m (total CVA),, if HMRC are 5% out they might not have had the effective veto.
maybe just clutching at straws, 2012 fućked me, woke up at 4 with sore guts this morning, funny how things like this affect people.
IIRC, and reading some posts confirming the same, only the smaller tax case (the bit Whyte fessed up) was in the CVA pot.I used to have the full result of the CVA vote but have since lost it due to a new computer and thinking it was all in the past.
My memory might be playing tricks on me here but if I recall correctly the CVA proposal bore no relation to reality regarding the debt in terms of what it subsequently became.
Was it not the case that the CVA didn’t include, for example, the Big Tax Case at all? I seem to recall a debt figure of circa £55m, with £21m of that being HMRC and £27m being Ticketus. With a note to the effect that the debt could rise substantially depending on FTT result.
I can’t seem to track down any real detail online either.
IIRC, and reading some posts confirming the same, only the smaller tax case (the bit Whyte fessed up) was in the CVA pot.
However, that’s not really the issue. Whyte should never have been near the club. There should have been no requirement for the bank to force Murray to sell Rangers to Whyte due to the supposed tax penalty liability. HMRC, could have settled as they did elsewhere for the amount offered, which now seems much more reasonable.
Whyte couldn’t have given two fucks what was in the CVA pot. He was always aiming for this.
I'm fairly certain Dave King would have bought Murray out had he known that the potential liability was around 20m.Certain folk in the media are peddling the narrative that we will never know if we would have secured a buyer to take us out of admin even with the reduced tax liability.
The point is that admin would not have happened in the first place.
If the tax bill had been estimated properly, there would have been no Craig Whyte, no admin and no liquidation.
None of the events from 2012 onwards would have happened.
2012-present in Scottish football really are the asterisk years.
Anyone know where this 140mill number all the tim tax experts come up with?
Anyone know where this 140mill number all the tim tax experts come up with?
My piss is f.ucking boiling as all this sinks in.Certain folk in the media are peddling the narrative that we will never know if we would have secured a buyer to take us out of admin even with the reduced tax liability.
The point is that admin would not have happened in the first place.
If the tax bill had been estimated properly, there would have been no Craig Whyte, no admin and no liquidation.
None of the events from 2012 onwards would have happened.
2012-present in Scottish football really are the asterisk years.
the bbc quoting a duff and phelps report
as useful as the hitler diaries
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17628749
Anyone know where this 140mill number all the tim tax experts come up with?
Surely this is out of an abundance of caution and prudence that assumes worst case, losing every court case and no reduction in the tax liabilities?For what it’s worth the figure BDO run with in their Statement of Affairs is more than £168m. That includes absolutely everything that could possibly be included.
Page 7 on the attached, running total of the left-hand column.
Certain folk in the media are peddling the narrative that we will never know if we would have secured a buyer to take us out of admin even with the reduced tax liability.
The point is that admin would not have happened in the first place.
If the tax bill had been estimated properly, there would have been no Craig Whyte, no admin and no liquidation.
None of the events from 2012 onwards would have happened.
2012-present in Scottish football really are the asterisk years.
Surely this is out of an abundance of caution and prudence that assumes worst case, losing every court case and no reduction in the tax liabilities?
The 24m comes from CB ?
Anyone know where this 140mill number all the tim tax experts come up with?
Sevull calculatorAnyone know where this 140mill number all the tim tax experts come up with?
From what I remember HMRC were granted £100 million as the amount we owed them despite the figure being unresolved. Some people on here claimed that it should only have been £1 they were granted as the debt was not established. HMRC had the say over our liquidation, I think they wanted us liquidated to get Whyte who had escaped them before. Well done SFA for fit and proper test.
ISevull calculator
I'm fairly certain Dave King would have bought Murray out had he known that the potential liability was around 20m.
I would really like to hear someone from HMRC come out and detail what was actually achieved for the public purse in this case?
- Take into account the £9m Whyte did not pay
- Small tax case money
- Income lost to them because of Rangers having a much smaller wage bill down the leagues therefore paying much less tax
- The massive legal costs of 4 different tribunals
All that lost just to get back a potential 3p in the pound from the creditors pot?
Oh I forget they will pursue others for EBT use? Well 2 and a half years later and we are still waiting.
Who in HMRC would have made the decision to accept a settlement from Arsenal but not accept an offer from Rangers/Murray ?
That could very well be one of the key questions to be answered.Who in HMRC would have made the decision to accept a settlement from Arsenal but not accept an offer from Rangers/Murray ?
Lets be honest, Duff & Phelps, on behalf of their clients, were never really seeking a CVA
Not that it shoukd ever have come to that...
Lets be honest, Duff & Phelps, on behalf of their clients, were never really seeking a CVA
Not that it shoukd ever have come to that...