boabie

I never knew he was a Rangers fan.

I did a little hunting around Ian and it would appear the chap is not a bear. He penned "The witch-hunt that shamed Scotland" article for the Rangers Standard a while ago.

http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/196-the-witch-hunt-that-shamed-scotland

"No man in the country is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or property as to enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel in his stores. The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the purposes of depleting the taxpayer's pocket. And the taxpayer is in like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue"

 

The words of Lord Clyde, Lord President of the Court of Session in a tax case in 1929.

One of the widest quoted when it came to defending tax avoidance. A very good one too imo. The introduction of GAAR earlier this year sees that statement redundant.

Everyone avoids tax by claiming their annual allowances. Is that morally indefensible?

From the day I started working until the day I retired I never claimed any annual allowance mate. My employer paid me a salary. The government took their cut . I got what was left.

I'm not having a go at you mate, I'm just fed up with all of this pish. We all want to move on but we are not being allowed to when we keep hearing pish from so called journalists.

I couldn't agree more buddy. Apart from those who's single reason for existing is that they hate Rangers, I think everybody wants to move on. If the end game is that Murray made a monumental erse of things and owes HMRC a wad of cash then fair enough. But no sporting advantage was gained and that should be the end of the matter as far as the football authorities are concerned. Therefore the matter is over.

I never knew he was a Rangers fan. I still don't agree this is morally wrong though, a lot of clubs and businesses use the same or similar schemes, and most fans had no idea about these types of schemes at the time,me for one. We keep getting beaten up with all this is all I'm saying,it really only involves oldco now anyway,unless I'm wrong with that as well?.

I apologise. I was trying to point out that in answering MY point you were answering a Rangers fan. I have no idea what fit the author kicks with.

You have to laugh!, we are now morally wrong!...................,oh the irony!the day we take moral lessons of any Scottish fan,media,club or the cabal running our game into the ground is the day I will give up.

You are not being asked to "take moral lessons of any Scottish fan,media,club or the cabal running our game into the ground". You are answering a point made by a fellow Rangers fan.

But the scheme was legal,the way in which it was administered is the problem,admin error!. We have been punished enough and no other club will be punished like we have been,so sorry if I feel the club has no need to apologise for a moral issue.

You are correct. The scheme was legal. But not the way we administered it involving side letters promising bonuses. Had the whole thing worked in the way an ISA or pension fund does do you think for one second that Murray would have offered to pay umpteen millions to settle ?

I did no say the club should apologise for a moral issue. I stated that in my opinion EBTs are morally wrong. I do not earn enough to employ an army of lawyers and accountants to find ways of avoiding paying my taxes. I don't think it's right that those who earn the most have that option. Many years ago as a struggling apprentice I was shocked to find out that Lord Vestey had paid half a pence tax for the year . That's just not right mate.

So using a perfectly legal tax avoidance scheme is morally wrong?. I will need to cancel my ISA's and pension funds.

 

What I think is morally wrong and indefensible is the way our club has been treated by the SFA/SPFL with their attempted blackmail,trying to steal our titles and the whole of Scottish football.

We would not be getting dragged through a series of court cases if we were " using a perfectly legal tax avoidance scheme ". That one remains to be seen. However, an ISA or a pension fund it definitely was not.

As for the actions of the football authorities, that goes without saying.

''Rangers use of EBTs is indefensible''

 

But they were legal,this is the whole problem!.

I think the author means EBTs were MORALLY indefensible. I would agree with him. That is not to say though that I believe we did anything illegal.

I did not want, or expect, this to happen.

From the opening post it would appear that it already has happened mate.

edit - I misread your post as "do not want it to happen". Please accept my apologies.

The guy has the experience to be used to come on as a late sub and no more. If our manager thinks we have the money to pay him a wage for that rather than using the money to pay somebody with prospects then who am I to argue with him ? Whatever pot of money Warburton has to spend next season has just been reduced. I hope he's got it right with this one.

Zut alors!

Or as Frank Zappa would have put it "Zoot Allures".

They were on a permanent holiday..

Yep. I suffered plenty myself watching them mate.

Bit confused by it all as I believed holiday pay was given when a sum was held from pay/salary and given when a person's holiday leave was taken.

If this was the case can understand the situation but if it wasn't why are they due holiday pay?

What they seem to be saying is they were due 35 days holiday per year. In the year up to the end of their contracts they had not received any holidays so feel they're due those days in pay.

It would appear then that once again Ill Phil was talking to imaginary "well placed sources".

Not that long ago he had Park refusing to answer the phone to Rangers directors .

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/celtic-avoid-ebt-probe-because-1323456

"THE SPL have revealed they decided not to investigate Celtic’s EBT payment to Juninho because the Brazilian didn’t receive his cash until AFTER he’d left Glasgow.

While an independent commission has been set up to study Rangers’ EBT payments, the SPL itself ruled that the Parkhead club ‘had no case to answer’ regarding Juninho’s contract in 2004.nd Record Sport can reveal the SPL believe it’s the fact Juninho wasn’t paid until after his Celtic exit – while Gers stars picked up EBTs while playing at Ibrox – that is the key difference in the cases.

An SPL source said: “It’s a simple process of matching it up to our rule book.

“In the case of Celtic’s EBT for Juninho he wasn’t paid while he was kicking a ball for Celtic. He received payment after he’d finished playing for the club.”

Record Sport understands the reason Rangers have a case to answer is that their players were being paid via EBTs while they were still playing in the SPL.

The inquiry set up by the SPL into the EBT schemes used by Rangers between 2001 and 2010 is headed by Lord Nimmo Smith.has set a hearing date of November 13 with an outcome expected by November 21. If found guilty of breaching SPL rules the Ibrox club could be stripped of league titles.

New Rangers owner Charles Green has refused to take any part in the inquiry and called it a “Mickey Mouse event”.

He insists all Rangers’ EBTs were disclosed in the oldco club’s annual accounts.

Gers fans were outraged on Wednesday when the SPL said Celtic were in the clear over Juninho while the Ibrox club were still in the dock.

Juninho received his EBT payment in 2005 and the money was declared in the club’s annual accounts – but not to the SFA or SPL.

In 2008, after becoming aware there was a potential tax liability related to EBTs, Celtic reached an agreement to pay a sum to HMRC. "

The SPL didn't even hold an enquiry into Juninho's contract. Maybe they figured that Celtic just decided to hand him a bundle of money via an EBT out of the goodness of their hearts ?

The SPFL/SPL/SFA are powerless as no rules have been broken and they cannot retrospectively change the rules to punish Rangers as that would show their hatred of all things Rangers, which of course we know to be true, but even they cannot be as brazen!

I wish I shared your confidence mate. Changing the rules will not stop them from going all out to take away our honours. If there is no appeal or we lose the final round of the BTC I for one am in no doubt they WILL strip us of leagues and cups.

It is amazing how brazen Celtic are about something that they also did. Their two defences of this have no integrity whatsoever.

 

1. They did it a lot less. (if you put it into the false perspective that it was actually a crime as they believe, it's a bit like someone vilifying a bank robber who stole 17m from multiple banks, but saying they are completely innocent because they only robbed one bank of 250k, and when arrested, paid it back. The fact that those they vilify also offered to pay it back but were refused and instead demanded 4 times the amount which they couldn't afford is lost on them.)

 

2. They don't care about title stripping because the year they used it, they won nothing. (They can cheat as long as they don't get caught or if they do get caught, it doesn't count if they didn't win anything.)

 

I really hope DK points this out, because it's totally absent in the press for some reason.

I think I'm correct in saying that if they were deducted 3 points for each match Juninho played in Abersheep would've won the league.

Rangers used a tax avoidance scheme ?????

Don't they know tax avoidance is perfectly legal?? It's tax evasion which isn't.

And didn't they use a tax avoidance scheme in the 2000's themselves where parts of their players' salaries were paid into bogus film companies thus avoiding paying tax??

They also used EBT's. However, unlike Rangers they didn't declare that fact to the football authorities. It only came to light 3 years later.

I see our twisted and deluded friends in the east have reissued their old hymn.

"Celtic say it is down to the Scottish football authorities to ensure "sporting integrity" is upheld, in the wake of a court ruling that Rangers' used a tax avoidance scheme."

http://sport.stv.tv/football/1332501-celtic-spfl-must-uphold-sporting-integrity-after-rangers-ebt-ruling/?

Rebuild some bridges ? You must be joking.

For

“Ashley’s aggressive behaviour towards Scottish football is getting completely out of hand. His personal vendetta against Dave King and Rangers was one thing but it’s now spilling over into other areas which could effect (sic)the whole of the game in this country. "

Read

" Ashley’s aggressive behaviour towards Scottish football is getting completely out of hand. His personal vendetta against Dave King and Rangers was one thing and is perfectly acceptable to us. In fact, more power to his elbow with that one. But it’s now spilling over into other areas which could end up costing somebody else outside Rangers money. And we can't have that. "

As much as I admire the big fellow for his ceaseless hard work this is one tome I will be leaving on the shelves of the book sellers. As rbr says, "Why ?"

It was stupid ideas like Browns that led to promising youngsters sitting on benches for entire seasons so clubs could comply with another half-ersed "next great idea"

A pal just told me Reporting Scotland are saying King's statement importantly admitted that some players would not have signed were it not for EBTs. What a pile of c@nts

That was exactly how RS reported it. They made no mention of Kings qualifier that we would simply have gone for another player if someone knocked us back. The spin they put on it was more or less that King admitted we got players by using EBT's . Sub-text, we cheated.

Sorry, but that's not an acceptable excuse for missing the Gersnet Dinner.

A bit longer on here and you may well decide I'm an obnoxious scallywag and not want me to attend anyway mate.

Maybe the next year.

Ffer's remark:

 

 

Never a truer word spoken.