EBTs - JP Morgan

millar2318

Well-Known Member
https://news.efinancialcareers.com/us-en/3000560/deutsche-bank-share-sale-ban

Here's a story I read today about JP Morgan bankers being chased for their EBT contributions over the past 20 years.

It's an interesting read with a couple of notables:

1. JP Morgan were able to half their staffs liabilities through negotiation with HMRC (wtaf!!)

2. HMRC didn't pursue JP Morgan til the ends of the earth at the time despite no doubt knowing the schemes existence

Yet more evidence at our complete shafting, I'll try post the text below
 
If ever there were a parable about saving money and not splurging your bonus on the first car or watch that crosses your path, the sorry tale of JPMorgan's employee benefit trust (EBT) would seem to be it. Well over a decade since bonuses were allocated, some JPMorgan recipients are being asked to pay money back - to the taxman.

Back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, JPMorgan's employee benefit trust was a major perk of working for the bank in London. After paying their bonuses into the offshore trust, JPMorgan's bankers received loans in return. These loans were subject to neither income tax nor national insurance, which should have accounted for around 50% of the total. It wasn't very ethical, but these were the go-go years and ethics were not front of mind.

Newsletter sign up
Get the latest career advice and insight from eFinancialCareers straight to your inbox

Your email address
"Historically, a lot of the MDs at JPMorgan were paid their bonuses through the employee benefit trust," one headhunter told us in 2012. "The idea was that they could borrow against the trust, tax free, and that if they went to live offshore they could access all their past bonuses without paying tax on them." Thanks to this arrangement, senior people rarely left JPM: no one wanted a huge tax-induced pay cut to work elsewhere.

Estimates of the amount of money paid into the JPM trust vary, with some saying £2bn and some saying as much as £9bn. The money was transferred from at least 1998, with the bulk paid in after 2005/6.

As with all good morality tales, the perpetrators in JPMorgan's story received karmic retribution, in this case at the hands of the British taxman, whose revenge has been eked out over years.

The demands for restitution were first made around 2012, when it was calculated that individual bankers each owed around £400k ($527k) to the British state, although JPM negotiated concessions to halve this. Now, it seems that the taxman is back for another bite. The Sunday Times reported at the weekend that some of JPM's ex-bankers are being asked to pay tax, national insurance contributions and (presumably fines) totalling 60% of bonuses that were paid into the trust. JPM bankers who were happily retired suddenly face financial wipeout.

“These were bonuses that were paid nearly 20 years ago and some people will just not be able to pay,” one former banker told the paper. “Some people were earning huge amounts, but they were also spending huge amounts. Some are now likely to declare bankruptcy.” Save your money - particularly if it has come to you through a nefarious-sounding scheme focused only on personal gain.

Separately, Deutsche bankers have paid tax on their bonuses, but they can't seem to get at them. The Financial Times says that when Deutsche's senior staff attempted to sell their stock from historic bonuses as it vested last week, they found that they couldn't. While the merger with Commerzbank is being discussed, DB stock has been added to an 'internal conflict list' and employees paid in stock can't sell it. This will continue until the merger discussions have been resolved. At the very least, it's a cheap way for DB to retain its staff.
 
https://news.efinancialcareers.com/us-en/3000560/deutsche-bank-share-sale-ban

Here's a story I read today about JP Morgan bankers being chased for their EBT contributions over the past 20 years.

It's an interesting read with a couple of notables:

1. JP Morgan were able to half their staffs liabilities through negotiation with HMRC (wtaf!!)

2. HMRC didn't pursue JP Morgan til the ends of the earth at the time despite no doubt knowing the schemes existence

Yet more evidence at our complete shafting, I'll try post the text below
We were shafted and picked carefully! A non EPL club with nowhere to go and at that time it may have been deemed the means to pay. JP Morgan turns to HMRC and says we’re pulling operations in the UK due to this and the loss of existing revenue would have been far worse. We were shafted all right by a calculating HMRC that opened us up to the likes of Lloyd’s and Wyhte!
 
Don’t forget Dr Death,the guy who stood up at a ceptic agm and stated “we will never be treated as second class citizens again”.He is behind everything that happened to us in 2012, calling in favours from political 19th Century Terrorist minded allies.Hopefully the truth comes out one day,but sadly I doubt it.
That’s the penalty for voting in people who have only one aim in this rancid wee country we now live in and that’s to down Rangers at every opportunity they can seize.As the best and biggest team in Scotland I wish our support would wake up and realise the power we have and start to use it against those who tried to kill our club and with it our support.I know it’s not a popular idea on here with some ,but the sooner our support stop funding our enemies by taking tickets to their crappy wee stadiums the sooner wee will have them on their knees begging.
Till then they will continue to mock and deride us with impunity.
 
Don’t forget Dr Death,the guy who stood up at a ceptic agm and stated “we will never be treated as second class citizens again”.He is behind everything that happened to us in 2012, calling in favours from political 19th Century Terrorist minded allies.Hopefully the truth comes out one day,but sadly I doubt it.
That’s the penalty for voting in people who have only one aim in this rancid wee country we now live in and that’s to down Rangers at every opportunity they can seize.As the best and biggest team in Scotland I wish our support would wake up and realise the power we have and start to use it against those who tried to kill our club and with it our support.I know it’s not a popular idea on here with some ,but the sooner our support stop funding our enemies by taking tickets to their crappy wee stadiums the sooner wee will have them on their knees begging.
Till then they will continue to mock and deride us with impunity.
Deaths grubby little hands were manipulating HMRC,never will I be convinced otherwise.
 
When the Court of Session in Edinburgh overruled on the law itself but ruled on " common sense " instead regarding our EBT's, we were fooked. That one of the Panel was Lord Carloway, who before tried and failed to enforce an illegal transfer ban on our club, said it all.
that bitter auld scrote was in on it, no doubt about it.
 
I think the main problem HMRC had with us was that they desperately wanted to win the case. So they kept pursuing us till eventually they won. Oh of course lets not forget they had also seemed to have a hidden agenda.
Yeah and his fat arse was sitting in the cabinet
 
We were an easy target, ripped the arse out of it and treated HMRC with contempt during the whole process. You just need to read the FTT decision to see Murray’s approach to this.

For what it’s worth there are still many being pursued to the ends for their EBT liabilities with no chance of deals that were being done 5 or more years ago.

There is only one person to blame - a ‘custodian’ who was happy to gamble with our club.
 
Don’t forget Dr Death,the guy who stood up at a ceptic agm and stated “we will never be treated as second class citizens again”.He is behind everything that happened to us in 2012, calling in favours from political 19th Century Terrorist minded allies.Hopefully the truth comes out one day,but sadly I doubt it.
That’s the penalty for voting in people who have only one aim in this rancid wee country we now live in and that’s to down Rangers at every opportunity they can seize.As the best and biggest team in Scotland I wish our support would wake up and realise the power we have and start to use it against those who tried to kill our club and with it our support.I know it’s not a popular idea on here with some ,but the sooner our support stop funding our enemies by taking tickets to their crappy wee stadiums the sooner wee will have them on their knees begging.
Till then they will continue to mock and deride us with impunity.

I’ve been saying this for years mate. His closing speech at the same AGM included him saying we have sorted the SFA/SPL out
 
It was always suggested that they wanted to go after Rangers as a 'test case', which if they won they'd then go after many other teams.

Has this ever happened or are we the only one?
 
It was always suggested that they wanted to go after Rangers as a 'test case', which if they won they'd then go after many other teams.

Has this ever happened or are we the only one?

People still aren't getting this.

It wasn't just about other teams it was about an entire industry created to avoid paying tax, disguised remuneration.

They now have a ruling that all of it is taxable. From the highest Court in the UK.

That's what it was about, from the start. David Murray just gave them an ideal case to win the ruling with.
 
People still aren't getting this.

It wasn't just about other teams it was about an entire industry created to avoid paying tax, disguised remuneration.

They now have a ruling that all of it is taxable. From the highest Court in the UK.

That's what it was about, from the start. David Murray just gave them an ideal case to win the ruling with.

Has any other companies had to pay out after they won? Not heard anything.
 
I think the main problem HMRC had with us was that they desperately wanted to win the case. So they kept pursuing us till eventually they won. Oh of course lets not forget they had also seemed to have a hidden agenda.

Rangers were their chosen victims. There was a shed load of English clubs who used EBT's but they chose to come after us. My opinion has been that if we had had a reputable owner (and not Whyte) a deal could have been done to reach an agreed settlement with them after we had won either the first or second tax tribunal. After Murray put us into 'Whyte's hands we were doomed.
 
Don’t forget Dr Death,the guy who stood up at a ceptic agm and stated “we will never be treated as second class citizens again”.He is behind everything that happened to us in 2012, calling in favours from political 19th Century Terrorist minded allies.Hopefully the truth comes out one day,but sadly I doubt it.
That’s the penalty for voting in people who have only one aim in this rancid wee country we now live in and that’s to down Rangers at every opportunity they can seize.As the best and biggest team in Scotland I wish our support would wake up and realise the power we have and start to use it against those who tried to kill our club and with it our support.I know it’s not a popular idea on here with some ,but the sooner our support stop funding our enemies by taking tickets to their crappy wee stadiums the sooner wee will have them on their knees begging.
Till then they will continue to mock and deride us with impunity.
They are trying to kill our excistance and our heritage


FENNIAN Bastards
 
Rangers were their chosen victims. There was a shed load of English clubs who used EBT's but they chose to come after us. My opinion has been that if we had had a reputable owner (and not Whyte) a deal could have been done to reach an agreed settlement with them after we had won either the first or second tax tribunal. After Murray put us into 'Whyte's hands we were doomed.

Sorry I am confused, why would anyone try to reach an agreed settlement after having won at tribunal.
 
People still aren't getting this.

It wasn't just about other teams it was about an entire industry created to avoid paying tax, disguised remuneration.

They now have a ruling that all of it is taxable. From the highest Court in the UK.

That's what it was about, from the start. David Murray just gave them an ideal case to win the ruling with.
 
I have a little inside knowledge. EBTs were encouraged by the UK government as a means of employers providing small benefits to their staff such as low interest repayable loans. The problems occurred when major institutions took advantage of the system to convert large bonuses to loans using EBTs as the vehicle. Many small, family businesses started to do this too on a massive scale, describing money taken from the business as loans instead of salary etc., thus paying no PAYE or Corporation Tax. There was no legislation to prevent this and the loss of tax to the Treasury was enormous. Legislation was enacted by the government in 2009 that effectively outlawed these schemes. But legislation is not retrospective so to recover tax lost HMRC decided to pursue the matter via the Court system and looked for a high profile organisation or institution that would maximise publicity without antagonising the worst offenders in the City of London. If successful, the Tax Case could then be used to force payment from all users of the scheme. And that is what is now taking place. It is no coincidence that tax receipts in January were at a record level. Rangers were just a means to an end. Collateral damage!
 
I have a little inside knowledge. EBTs were encouraged by the UK government as a means of employers providing small benefits to their staff such as low interest repayable loans. The problems occurred when major institutions took advantage of the system to convert large bonuses to loans using EBTs as the vehicle. Many small, family businesses started to do this too on a massive scale, describing money taken from the business as loans instead of salary etc., thus paying no PAYE or Corporation Tax. There was no legislation to prevent this and the loss of tax to the Treasury was enormous. Legislation was enacted by the government in 2009 that effectively outlawed these schemes. But legislation is not retrospective so to recover tax lost HMRC decided to pursue the matter via the Court system and looked for a high profile organisation or institution that would maximise publicity without antagonising the worst offenders in the City of London. If successful, the Tax Case could then be used to force payment from all users of the scheme. And that is what is now taking place. It is no coincidence that tax receipts in January were at a record level. Rangers were just a means to an end. Collateral damage!

I slightly disagree with the last part, Murray gave HMRC a bit of an open goal (sorry about the pun) with the existence of the side letters. The EBTs were supposed to be non-contractual and at the discretion of the trustee, not the settlor. The side letters showed that they weren't, taking them outside the scope of an EBT. Promises were made and the wrong people were in control.

In the end it didn't matter because of the width of the Supreme Court ruling, however I believe it was what attracted HMRC to the Rangers case in the first place, to attack EBTs specifically and not just all disguised remuneration.
 
Last edited:
It’s almost like modern day neoliberalism makes questionable dealings legitimate so long as you have enough power....

Rangers mobilised less power than they faced. For a myriad of reasons. That’s why we’re facing what we’re facing.
 
Sorry I am confused, why would anyone try to reach an agreed settlement after having won at tribunal.

Murray reportedly offered to settle for the actual tax that was due, minus the penalty charges but HMRC knocked him back. After HMRC lost the first tribunal the ground shifted away from them and it is my opinion that any responsible owner (knowing that HMRC intended to appeal) would have seized the initiative at that point to avoid the danger of us losing an appeal (and the potential repercussions from that) by going back to HMRC to resolve the matter. I think HMRC would have been quite amenable to doing a deal at that stage,
 
Murray reportedly offered to settle for the actual tax that was due, minus the penalty charges but HMRC knocked him back. After HMRC lost the first tribunal the ground shifted away from them and it is my opinion that any responsible owner (knowing that HMRC intended to appeal) would have seized the initiative at that point to avoid the danger of us losing an appeal (and the potential repercussions from that) by going back to HMRC to resolve the matter. I think HMRC would have been quite amenable to doing a deal at that stage,

With the greatest of respect, that still makes no sense to me.

Someone gets a tax bill. They appeal it to a tribunal. The tribunal decides that no tax is due. They then go back to HMRC and say "can we pay tax we don't owe please".

They then win at the second tribunal and do the same again, offer to pay millions in tax.

What right thinking business would do that.
 
The sex pest's wandering hands were all over HMRC's involvement, I have no doubt.
Then that cu:cool:nt Desmond got his pikey pal Ashley into us.

55 on its way though :))
 
With the greatest of respect, that still makes no sense to me.

Someone gets a tax bill. They appeal it to a tribunal. The tribunal decides that no tax is due. They then go back to HMRC and say "can we pay tax we don't owe please".

They then win at the second tribunal and do the same again, offer to pay millions in tax.

What right thinking business would do that.

My own view is that any sensible business person who knows that they are in a potentially perilous situation, as we would have been (and subsequently were) in the event if a successful appeal by HMRC, would have taken all necessary steps to avoid that risk. My opinion is based on the same principle as insurance, especially when the stakes were so extremeIy high. I appreciate that you disagree with my opinion.
 
Murray reportedly offered to settle for the actual tax that was due, minus the penalty charges but HMRC knocked him back. After HMRC lost the first tribunal the ground shifted away from them and it is my opinion that any responsible owner (knowing that HMRC intended to appeal) would have seized the initiative at that point to avoid the danger of us losing an appeal (and the potential repercussions from that) by going back to HMRC to resolve the matter. I think HMRC would have been quite amenable to doing a deal at that stage,

There's no evidence that Murray made any such offer. Post-2008, I doubt he had the means to make any such offer anyway. The tide had went out and exposed him.

My impression of Rangers at this time was that Murray was largely an absentee owner and the board were dealing with the day to day running of the club.
 
EBT's were not and still not illegal.

The one ran by MIH was considered not entirely credible at the Third Tier Tribunal....hence the final result
 
I think the main problem HMRC had with us was that they desperately wanted to win the case. So they kept pursuing us till eventually they won. Oh of course lets not forget they had also seemed to have a hidden agenda.

It was HMRC's unwillingness to settle that cost us the most, by not settling (which HMRC did with everyone else including Chelsea) it meant there was a large, unquantifiable liability, which meant no one would invest in Rangers coz no one knew if the company would have to be liquidated, therefore any money invested could (very likely) be money wasted.

It was this uncertainty that was our biggest issue. Even if we'd settled for a large number and agreed some payment schedule, that would have been something and we could have factored it in and modeled accordingly. And HMRC knew that by not settling they would likely get nothing - but for Timmy in HMRC that was irrelevant, it wasnt his money and Timmy had an agenda more important to him than the recovery of taxes.

For mentally challengeds it is total war and they fight it everywhere they can, every way they can. Some of our support think our only issue is the final ball in the last third.
 
Totally agree with you as this was THE big problem for us as no one but no one would invest in us with the possibility of a £84million tax bill hanging over our heads. As has been said in earlier comments there was definitely something afoot in HMRC's offices with the amount of info becoming available to the mhedia.
 
My own view is that any sensible business person who knows that they are in a potentially perilous situation, as we would have been (and subsequently were) in the event if a successful appeal by HMRC, would have taken all necessary steps to avoid that risk. My opinion is based on the same principle as insurance, especially when the stakes were so extremeIy high. I appreciate that you disagree with my opinion.

Rangers had tax advisors telling them they had a strong chance of success. They won not once but twice. Why the hell would they think they were in a perilous situation? Rangers and their advisors thought they had a rock solid case.

HMRC presented a new argument (redirection of earnings) at the Supreme Court. It was that new argument which subsequently changed the direction of the case.

You won’t last long in business if you just put your hand in your pocket anytime someone claims you owe them money.

Yours is exactly the type of business acumen I’d expect from a Nat.
 
EBT's were not and still not illegal.

The one ran by MIH was considered not entirely credible at the Third Tier Tribunal....hence the final result

By third tier tribunal do you mean the Court of Session. They effectively said the same thing that was re-iterated by the Supreme Court.

https://www.accountancyage.com/aa/n...x-case-ruled-illegal-as-hmrc-declares-victory

"Delivering the opinion of the court, Lord Drummond Young said: “That accords with common sense. If the law were otherwise, an employee could readily avoid tax by redirecting income to members of his family to meet outgoings that he would normally pay: for example to a trust for his wife…or to trustees to pay for his children’s education or the outgoings on the family home… The funds are ultimately derived as consideration for the employee’s services, and on that basis they are properly to be considered emoluments or earnings.”

The difference being their ruling could be appealed to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court's ruling is final. However as I said they ruled pretty much the same way.

https://www.ogier.com/publications/glasgow-rangers-the-big-tax-case

"Thus, if an employee enters into a contract or contracts with an employer which provide that he will receive a salary of £X and that as part of his remuneration the employer will also pay £Y to the employee’s spouse or aunt Agatha, I can ascertain no statutory purpose for taxing the former but not the latter."
 
The supposed offer to settle was made before the tribunal either that or before the result was known

I was replying to the person who said

"... a deal could have been done to reach an agreed settlement with them after we had won either the first or second tax tribunal."

Why would someone try to reach a "settlement" when there wasn't any tax due. It makes no sense.
 
Rangers had tax advisors telling them they had a strong chance of succes. They won not once but twice. Why the hell would they think they were in a perilous situation? Rangers and their advisors thought they had a rock solid case.

HMRC presented a new argument (redirection of earnings) at the Supreme Court. It was that new argument which subsequently changed the direction of the case.

You won’t last long in business if you just put your hand in your pocket anytime someone claims you owe them money.

Yours is exactly the type of business acumen I’d expect from a Nat.

Aye, and it was the business acumen of the knight of the realm (Sir David), who is probably of the same political persuasion as you, that landed our club in one perilous financial mess.
 
I was replying to the person who said

"... a deal could have been done to reach an agreed settlement with them after we had won either the first or second tax tribunal."

Why would someone try to reach a "settlement" when there wasn't any tax due. It makes no sense.
They were hellbent on pursuing Rangers. Money for lawyers was not an issue, at a time the public sector was making cuts all over the place. One needs to ask why.
 
Back
Top