Tax Officials Blamed For Rangers Downfall – HMRC Mistake Wipes Millions From Ibrox Bill (The Times)

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
To be fair, until its confirmed otherwise, the story is mostly speculation. Yes, for sure, HMRC have reduced their bill for penalties by a whopping £26m - but that's a year old story. The reduction in the actual tax calculation that takes the overall bill down to circa £20m has not been confirmed, quite the opposite in fact. Even BDO say they don't expect a decision on that until next year.

I remain puzzled by The Times running this story without either a follow-up angle or imminent confirmation of the error in the 'grossing up' calculation. It would appear neither is about to happen - so why has this year-old story gone to print? What has prompted it?
 

Vote For Pedro

Well-Known Member
To be fair, until its confirmed otherwise, the story is mostly speculation. Yes, for sure, HMRC have reduced their bill for penalties by a whopping £26m - but that's a year old story. The reduction in the actual tax calculation that takes the overall bill down to circa £20m has not been confirmed, quite the opposite in fact. Even BDO say they don't expect a decision on that until next year.

I remain puzzled by The Times running this story without either a follow-up angle or imminent confirmation of the error in the 'grossing up' calculation. It would appear neither is about to happen - so why has this year-old story gone to print? What has prompted it?
There remains more unanswered questions due to it, and why did it go to print is one. But maybe some in the press are pissed off at their profession making them look like an embarrassment given their constant need to batter us in their shit publications!
 

1690

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
EJ1GF4KW4AEGhgs

Saw this posted by a Bear on twitter.
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
EJ1GF4KW4AEGhgs

Saw this posted by a Bear on twitter.

Simply confirms - from last year - that HMRC had backed down on the penalties to the tune of £26m. Looks like they had threatened pursuing the beneficiaries (players) individually for the tax arrears, penalties and interest due and this letter will reduce the sum they are pursuing them for by the appropriate penalty. No doubt they will still be pursued for the tax and interest. Though there is the ongoing discussion on the ‘grossing up’ process so the figure may be reduced further.

That’s my understanding at least.
 

Grant K

Well-Known Member
Simply confirms - from last year - that HMRC had backed down on the penalties to the tune of £26m. Looks like they had threatened pursuing the beneficiaries (players) individually for the tax arrears, penalties and interest due and this letter will reduce the sum they are pursuing them for by the appropriate penalty. No doubt they will still be pursued for the tax and interest. Though there is the ongoing discussion on the ‘grossing up’ process so the figure may be reduced further.

That’s my understanding at least.

So, would interest have been charged on the penalties and if so presumably this would have been a part of the initial claim. If interest was chargeable would it be included in this value.
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
So, would interest have been charged on the penalties and if so presumably this would have been a part of the initial claim. If interest was chargeable would it be included in this value.

I‘m only guessing here but I’d say there would be three elements making up the ‘debt’: the unpaid tax, the interest due on the unpaid tax and a penalty for the non-payment of the tax. So, if I’m correct, I don’t think there would be interest on the (now abandoned) penalty.

Just a guess, I stress.
 

Grant K

Well-Known Member
I‘m only guessing here but I’d say there would be three elements making up the ‘debt’: the unpaid tax, the interest due on the unpaid tax and a penalty for the non-payment of the tax. So, if I’m correct, I don’t think there would be interest on the (now abandoned) penalty.

Just a guess, I stress.

Pretty much my guess as well. It’s mibee me and semantics but the letter only refers to penalties and not penalties plus interest pertaining to them! I suppose the question should be is interest due on unpaid penalties.
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
Pretty much my guess as well. It’s mibee me and semantics but the letter only refers to penalties and not penalties plus interest pertaining to them! I suppose the question should be is interest due on unpaid penalties.

My assumption is that their initial assessment listed the 3 elements of the ‘debt’. The revised figure appended to these letters will simply drop the penalty bit and leave the other two elements in.
 

Laudrup1

Well-Known Member
The big thing for me in it all is that the penalties were waved but still somehow formed part of any discussion about the total and were seemingly included when a CVA was being attempted
 

Greebo

Well-Known Member
The big thing for me in it all is that the penalties were waved but still somehow formed part of any discussion about the total and were seemingly included when a CVA was being attempted

The HMRC vote on the CVA did not include the EBT figures. It was the tax and VAT Whyte hadn't paid, plus the "wee tax case" which was accepted as due.

That gave HMRC way over the 25% they needed to block a CVA taking place, which is their normal position for football clubs.
 

Laudrup1

Well-Known Member
The HMRC vote on the CVA did not include the EBT figures. It was the tax and VAT Whyte hadn't paid, plus the "wee tax case" which was accepted as due.

That gave HMRC way over the 25% they needed to block a CVA taking place, which is their normal position for football clubs.

Ah, gotcha.

So Whyte not paying tax for no particular reason in November which the authorities kept quiet is still a bigger issue than any news from the last week then?
 

baystatebear

Well-Known Member
I think this is where the Ticketus verdict shows what went on.
On the 09/05/2011 instead of providing funds (£18M) to Bidco for the acquisition of the shares in Rangers, Whyte bought the shares for £1 and the funds were provided direct to Rangers

I am in no way able to explain this situation in legal terms but for me this needs to be explained by Murray why the terms of sale were suddenly amended allowing Whyte to purchase the shares for the £1
???????????

Actually, I was thinking exactly that myself.

Whether or not Murray knew what the ramifications of his actions would ultimately mean for Rangers, he owes it to the club and the fans to explain how this whole debacle came about. Knowing full well what the history, the institution of Rangers FC, has meant for Scottish football, and the passion felt for the club by so many people around the world, a statement from his perspective, clarifying what exactly led to the disaster is the very least Murray should be expected to do.
 

jicrw

Well-Known Member
Actually, I was thinking exactly that myself.

Whether or not Murray knew what the ramifications of his actions would ultimately mean for Rangers, he owes it to the club and the fans to explain how this whole debacle came about. Knowing full well what the history, the institution of Rangers FC, has meant for Scottish football, and the passion felt for the club by so many people around the world, a statement from his perspective, clarifying what exactly led to the disaster is the very least Murray should be expected to do.

Totally agree but IMO there is no chance, that there will be any Statement, from the individual who once said, "Rangers is bigger, than the Church!

Oh Yes, Sir Him, That Must Never Be Mentioned, was "Hoodwinked" but "Knew", what Rangers meant, to many!
 

jicrw

Well-Known Member
It's theft.

It is the Employees responsibility to make sure Tax is paid, not the Employers even though he has deducted it from your wages. I know this, because it happened to me.

Logic would say you are right though, that its Theft but Logic does not seem to apply, to US!
 

AnglianBear

Well-Known Member
It is the Employees responsibility to make sure Tax is paid, not the Employers even though he has deducted it from your wages. I know this, because it happened to me.

Logic would say you are right though, that its Theft but Logic does not seem to apply, to US!

It's def the Employers responsibility, hence the utter raft of penalties against Employers for non payment of tax.

If there is ever a circumstance where an employee has had tax & ni deducted and this has not been paid over to HMRC by the Employer, the Employee will still get the credit for it in their tax & ni accounts.
 

jicrw

Well-Known Member
It's def the Employers responsibility, hence the utter raft of penalties against Employers for non payment of tax.

If there is ever a circumstance where an employee has had tax & ni deducted and this has not been paid over to HMRC by the Employer, the Employee will still get the credit for it in their tax & ni accounts.

That is not what I was told in Kirkcaldy Tax Office a few years ago, where in one hand I had the Payslip showing my Employer had deducted the Tax and in the other hand, the Bill that, Kirkcaldy Tax Office, had sent me.

PS; Why was the Tax man chasing the Players (Employees), when Whyte (Employer) took the Tax, and did not pay it?

PPS; And not for the first time LOL.
 
Last edited:

AnglianBear

Well-Known Member
That is not what I was to;d in Kirkcaldy Tax Office a few years ago, where in one hand I had the Payslip showing my Employer had deducted the Tax and in the other hand, the Bill that, Kirkcaldy Tax Office, had sent me.

I'd go back to them mate if you didn't get credit for the tax on that payslip. You may well have just come up against an unknowledgeable member of HMRC staff which isn't unusual.

 

jicrw

Well-Known Member
I'd go back to them mate if you didn't get credit for the tax on that payslip. You may well have just come up against an unknowledgeable member of HMRC staff which isn't unusual.



The "Players" can now ignore the Tax Demands.
 

pepsimax73

Well-Known Member
As 99.9% of bears on here have said SDM needs to explain wtf went on back in the background for him to offload the club like it was a shit stained rag, did LBG get a tipoff that HMRC where after Rangers for tax issues and also HMRC using the club as a test case before going after the big guns in the EPL (brother-in-law works in the tax office said back then there was a lot happening in the background he couldn't say) because have any if the EPL clubs been told they've not been paying tax because of EBT's best person to ask is Eeyore cause he'll tell you the answer hee-haw
 

AnglianBear

Well-Known Member
The "Players" can now ignore the Tax Demands.

Not sure I know what you mean, but I think your talking about HMRC chasing players for tax that should have been paid over by Whyte - that isn't what they are chasing the players for. The players are being chased for tax relating to the EBTs.

Without getting overly technical,lets say Player A was paid £100,000 under an EBT when had it been done under PAYE he would have received £65,000 say with Whyte sending the £35,000 to HMRC. As the EBTs didnt work, they now want that tax. As it was never deducted by the Employer in the first place, it is not the Employers responsibilty, it is the employees.
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
The "Players" can now ignore the Tax Demands.

I don’t think that is correct either. See the copy of the letter on the previous page and discussion thereon. Looks like they’ve had new letters discounting the penalty element. The tax due, and the interest thereon, still applies.

This, of course, is in relation to their benefits from EBTs.
 

jicrw

Well-Known Member
Not sure I know what you mean, but I think your talking about HMRC chasing players for tax that should have been paid over by Whyte - that isn't what they are chasing the players for. The players are being chased for tax relating to the EBTs.

Without getting overly technical,lets say Player A was paid £100,000 under an EBT when had it been done under PAYE he would have received £65,000 say with Whyte sending the £35,000 to HMRC. As the EBTs didnt work, they now want that tax. As it was never deducted by the Employer in the first place, it is not the Employers responsibilty, it is the employees.

Am I correct that Whyte did take Tax of the Players (PAYE) and did not pay it to the Taxman and not for the first time.
 

StirlingBear

Well-Known Member
I don’t think that is correct either. See the copy of the letter on the previous page and discussion thereon. Looks like they’ve had new letters discounting the penalty element. The tax due, and the interest thereon, still applies.

This, of course, is in relation to their benefits from EBTs.

So hows does it work then with them claiming tax off the club if they are also claiming it off the players? Surely its one or the other?
 

Walters80

Well-Known Member
Another question that’s not been answered is why did HMRC allow Whyte to run up a tax bill over 9 months when at nearly the same period they slapped Hearts with 3 winding up orders over several months for non payment after 30 days?

Considering the amount HMRC leaked about other issues at Rangers I find it incredible that barley a sniff of what was really going on made it into the press over such a long period.

If they had stepped in around September/October time I suspect the outcome would have been drastically different. Almost like they wanted to sit back and do nothing to give them more debt and a bigger percentage of any CVA vote.
 

GersyBoy

Well-Known Member
Another question that’s not been answered is why did HMRC allow Whyte to run up a tax bill over 9 months when at nearly the same period they slapped Hearts with 3 winding up orders over several months for non payment after 30 days?

Considering the amount HMRC leaked about other issues at Rangers I find it incredible that barley a sniff of what was really going on made it into the press over such a long period.

If they had stepped in around September/October time I suspect the outcome would have been drastically different. Almost like they wanted to sit back and do nothing to give them more debt and a bigger percentage of any CVA vote.
Exactly this. Who took the decision to force Rangers into Liquidation and thereby accepting that no tax would be recovered rather than doing a deal that would benefit all tax payers.
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
So hows does it work then with them claiming tax off the club if they are also claiming it off the players? Surely its one or the other?

I have absolutely no idea mate. However, it would appear they can go down both routes. As a further example of this, Ticketus were (still are?) pursuing Whyte for their £27m. They are also a creditor of the oldco and will be getting their pennies in the pound from BDO. Go figure.

Sounds crazy, sounds unfair - but it seems to be how it works.
 

Vote For Pedro

Well-Known Member
That is not what I was told in Kirkcaldy Tax Office a few years ago, where in one hand I had the Payslip showing my Employer had deducted the Tax and in the other hand, the Bill that, Kirkcaldy Tax Office, had sent me.

PS; Why was the Tax man chasing the Players (Employees), when Whyte (Employer) took the Tax, and did not pay it?

PPS; And not for the first time LOL.
It’s everyone’s responsibility individual or limited company. But in this case the employee did not know they hadn't paid tax, their payslip showed the deduction, it was the company that did not pay it.

HMRC chases the beneficiaries of EBTs, I’m not aware of them chasing employees who’s tax was not paid on their behalf. They would have been under the impression everything was paid and up to date.
 

AzorIbrox

Well-Known Member
The Man The Beasts Can't Tame has another blog up, no idea how credible his information is but this stuff involving McLaughlin, McBride and other slime balls wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

Tougherthanbullets

Well-Known Member
The Man The Beasts Can't Tame has another blog up, no idea how credible his information is but this stuff involving McLaughlin, McBride and other slime balls wouldn't surprise me at all.

FFS....none the wiser after trying to follow that !
 

THEGOVANFRONT

Well-Known Member
I simply cannot understand why TMTBCT writes in that fashion as whilst he "seems" to "know stuff" he is not really getting this information across properly to anyone.

I thought it was maybe just me but from the couple of posts above I dont seem to be the only one
 

BlueHaze

Well-Known Member
I had no idea what was happening at the time it was way beyond my limited capabilities,The problem I had at the time was the lack of help from any of our politicians and even the football authorities,The fact a Scottish sporting institution which had contributed financially to the game and community for over a century was being hated our of existence was disgraceful,
Unlike the tax and financial experts who attend the cesspit and pump out their propaganda in the smsm I sill can't understand .
 
Last edited:
Top