Racism in football.
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
My former boss (premium-rate fella) owed the taxman a quarter of a million; somehow it's easier to get away with owing money when you owe a shedload. I don't know how that works...
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
Yep, there trying to shaft me for £1,600 they say I owe from 1999. An overpayment of jobseekers allowance.
I say they are wrong and have asked for evidence, they say it's up to me to provide evidence that I dont.
As you can imagine I dont have records dating back 13 years. I'll fight it 'till my dying breath though.
Paul.
I say they are wrong and have asked for evidence, they say it's up to me to provide evidence that I dont.
As you can imagine I dont have records dating back 13 years. I'll fight it 'till my dying breath though.
Paul.
"We have too many cellphones. We've got too many internets. We have got to get rid of those machines. We have too many machines now." - Ray Bradbury.
-
paint it black
- Black, black, black & even blacker
- Posts: 4966
- Joined: 11 Jul 2002, 01:00
eight Premiership clubs face a similar situation 
Goths have feelings too
-
Johnny Rev 7.0
- Banned
- Posts: 1134
- Joined: 09 Sep 2006, 22:15
- Location: A place I go where no one knows
As much I hate to see any footbal club go to the wall, Rangers deserve it.
Employee Benefit Funds (EBF) - whether you agree with them or not - adopted by football clubs, exist within taxation laws.
In simple terms:
Player X joins a club. £1m signing on fee (tax free straight into the EBF). £100K wages per week. Player X defers £50k (non-taxable) into his EBF. Which means he has to survive on £12.5k a week.
But he doesn't. He can withdraw money anytime from his EBF (as an interest free loan) so doesn't worry about it as he knows his 50k deferred payment from his regular wages are going in on a weekly basis.
HMRC have been trying to crack down on EBFs for a while, but still regard EBF funds exactly the same as 'client funds' held by Solicitors/Lawyers. Non taxable. Non business capital.
Rangers were warned in 2002 by their auditors that using EBFs to fund the business would cause problems. The auditors were dismissed from future Rangers' audits.
It only needs one person with a little knowledge to let loose the HRMC rotweiler.
And shamelessly stolen from people who know more than me about the subject:
This website – http://rangerstaxcase.com/ has it all, from the beginning. A combination of fawning press and masonic bankers allowed them to hide their excesses in a way that wouldn’t be possible in England. So instead of it all blowing up while a recovery was managable, Rangers ended up owing HMRC about 150% of their turnover.
As they will always be able to defeat a CVA, the revenue can (and owing to the decade-long shenanigans, will) put Rangers under.
The interesting bit will be if the SPL allow a new company/club, working out of ibrox, to go straight into the top flight. Effectively allowing them to shed debts, unwanted contracts and employees, and slip back in unpunished.
Employee Benefit Funds (EBF) - whether you agree with them or not - adopted by football clubs, exist within taxation laws.
In simple terms:
Player X joins a club. £1m signing on fee (tax free straight into the EBF). £100K wages per week. Player X defers £50k (non-taxable) into his EBF. Which means he has to survive on £12.5k a week.
But he doesn't. He can withdraw money anytime from his EBF (as an interest free loan) so doesn't worry about it as he knows his 50k deferred payment from his regular wages are going in on a weekly basis.
HMRC have been trying to crack down on EBFs for a while, but still regard EBF funds exactly the same as 'client funds' held by Solicitors/Lawyers. Non taxable. Non business capital.
Rangers were warned in 2002 by their auditors that using EBFs to fund the business would cause problems. The auditors were dismissed from future Rangers' audits.
It only needs one person with a little knowledge to let loose the HRMC rotweiler.
And shamelessly stolen from people who know more than me about the subject:
This website – http://rangerstaxcase.com/ has it all, from the beginning. A combination of fawning press and masonic bankers allowed them to hide their excesses in a way that wouldn’t be possible in England. So instead of it all blowing up while a recovery was managable, Rangers ended up owing HMRC about 150% of their turnover.
As they will always be able to defeat a CVA, the revenue can (and owing to the decade-long shenanigans, will) put Rangers under.
The interesting bit will be if the SPL allow a new company/club, working out of ibrox, to go straight into the top flight. Effectively allowing them to shed debts, unwanted contracts and employees, and slip back in unpunished.
Unless things have changed a great deal, it has to be over 5k for them to prosecute, they need to prove you benefitted from this overpayment, and lead a "criminal lifestyle". Thankfully HMRC still need to go through the courts and prove their cases. Any evidence they have they have to share with you by law if they try and take it any further. I wouldn't worry yourself.I'm surprised HMRC are after you for overpayment of JSA though, I assumed that would be the DWP.zaltys7 wrote:Yep, there trying to shaft me for £1,600 they say I owe from 1999. An overpayment of jobseekers allowance.
I say they are wrong and have asked for evidence, they say it's up to me to provide evidence that I dont.
As you can imagine I dont have records dating back 13 years. I'll fight it 'till my dying breath though.
Paul.
Still exists in any court. HMRC work the same way the BBC do when people don't pay up. Send a threatening letter and let people's fears do the rest. When they send those letters announcing visits people just assume they have the right to enter your home, when they have nothing of the kind.A_H wrote:What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Serious Q.
"Vengeance. Justice. Fire and blood.."
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
TV Licensing can get a warrant if I understand correctly. I always suspected that the "detection vans" were a con job; they simply have a list of all addresses without TV Licenses and repeatedly hassle them. </derail>
I didn't know about this EBF thing; the words "hoist by their own petard" spring to mind...
I didn't know about this EBF thing; the words "hoist by their own petard" spring to mind...
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
-
Johnny Rev 7.0
- Banned
- Posts: 1134
- Joined: 09 Sep 2006, 22:15
- Location: A place I go where no one knows
Indeed. Apart from confusing my EBFs with my EBTs this page explains it a lot more concisely than my slightly abstract and inaccurate waffling on my previous post.markfiend wrote:I didn't know about this EBF thing; the words "hoist by their own petard" spring to mind...
Bottom line is that the players were getting the immediate benefit (reduced tax) as an incentive to sign. Rangers were getting the secondary benefit (reduced payments to HMRC) and increased working capital. HMRC weren't getting their pound of flesh. Rangers got it wrong. Rangers got caught.
And I'll unreservedly withdrawn my comment that "Rangers deserve it". It's just been piss-poor management at executive level. I don't think any true football fan would want to see any footie club go under, wherever your loyalties lie.
I guess every club struggling financially hopes for a takeover by an Abramovich, or a Fenway Sports Group etc., who can afford to invest up to £1bn to get it right in the long term, and then rightly expect a return on their investment.
Unfortunately, there's a bunch of 'local', 'succesful', 'lifetime supporter', 'businessmen' who takeover clubs, invest the minimum £xxm to make the bank happy, and then legally rearrange the secured creditors list to put themselves top. Asset stripping for a quick buck at its finest.
Anyway, apologises for the derail. We were talking about Suarez being a racist c**t.
Yeah, sorry, it is the DWP.DeWinter wrote:Unless things have changed a great deal, it has to be over 5k for them to prosecute, they need to prove you benefitted from this overpayment, and lead a "criminal lifestyle". Thankfully HMRC still need to go through the courts and prove their cases. Any evidence they have they have to share with you by law if they try and take it any further. I wouldn't worry yourself.I'm surprised HMRC are after you for overpayment of JSA though, I assumed that would be the DWP.zaltys7 wrote:Yep, there trying to shaft me for £1,600 they say I owe from 1999. An overpayment of jobseekers allowance.
I say they are wrong and have asked for evidence, they say it's up to me to provide evidence that I dont.
As you can imagine I dont have records dating back 13 years. I'll fight it 'till my dying breath though.
Paul.
Still exists in any court. HMRC work the same way the BBC do when people don't pay up. Send a threatening letter and let people's fears do the rest. When they send those letters announcing visits people just assume they have the right to enter your home, when they have nothing of the kind.A_H wrote:What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Serious Q.
First I heard about this was last year, they said it took that long to trace me, even they I have been paying my taxes for the past 13 years and I'm on the electoral register.
My apologies too, for the derail.
Paul.
"We have too many cellphones. We've got too many internets. We have got to get rid of those machines. We have too many machines now." - Ray Bradbury.
-
Norman Hunter
- Slight Overbomber
- Posts: 1870
- Joined: 29 Sep 2004, 12:41
- Location: Leeds
- Contact:
Glad we cause you such mirth. Must be fun supporting your own team if you're always looking at Leeds.abridged wrote:We need Leeds though if only to laugh at and wonder how long before our Ken destroys them!
Four strings good, six strings bad
Oh it is. 9 managers in 9 years. Or close enough.Norman Hunter wrote:Glad we cause you such mirth. Must be fun supporting your own team if you're always looking at Leeds.abridged wrote:We need Leeds though if only to laugh at and wonder how long before our Ken destroys them!
The Chancer Corporation