Rangers FC settle £300,000 damages claim with former director Donald McIntyre

[khan 0]

Not solely on their shoulders. I would also suggest that the non-exective directors: Messrs Johnson, Murray, McLelland, et al; all had a fiduciary duty to satisfy themselves as to the veracity of any tax composition.

 

It would appear that there are those who place no blame on those who had a fiduciary duty including those responsible for our financial well being, apparently a big boy with a stick did it and ran away.

[craig 5,199]

It's not a non-exec's responsibility to know a company's tax computation in detail and to ensure it is 100% correct.

 

Beat me to it BD. A non-exec doesnt have the same level of fiduciary duty.

 

The CEO and CFO, even though they may not be tax experts, do have that fiduciary duty, I believe.

[pete 2,499]

I personally doubt that this is something that would have been brought up by Advocaat. Players adviser's, legal counsel etc perhaps - but the manager ? IMO that seems unlikely.

 

More likely is that they (the club) knew that they would be paying higher salaries and they looked in more depth at what they could use to minimise the tax liability.

 

Agree with that one Craig although wee Dick has certainly known how to suck other peoples money into his pocket in his career.

[stewarty 1,923]

It's not a non-exec's responsibility to know a company's tax computation in detail and to ensure it is 100% correct.

 

Agreed. But they have a responsibility to satisfy themselves that an appropriate and diligent process has been followed.

[craig 5,199]

Agree with that one Craig although wee Dick has certainly known how to suck other peoples money into his pocket in his career.

 

I know your feelings on DA pete but with all the best will in the world I doubt that he would have the complex knowledge of EBT's - I have no idea whether he would have made any money from that scheme or not. It IS plausible but we somply dont know.

 

I still would expect it to come from club tax advisers. Could be wrong though.

[pete 2,499]

I know your feelings on DA pete but with all the best will in the world I doubt that he would have the complex knowledge of EBT's - I have no idea whether he would have made any money from that scheme or not. It IS plausible but we somply dont know.

 

I still would expect it to come from club tax advisers. Could be wrong though.

 

That's why I agreed with you. The rest was just an add on.

 

You are right though my opinion of Advocaat is that he is a good coach but can only do it when he has millions to spend a millions to fill his own pockets.

[forlanssister 3,092]

It would appear that there are those who place no blame on those who had a fiduciary duty including those responsible for our financial well being, apparently a big boy with a stick did it and ran away.

 

The short bug eyed stammering boy ain't exactly taking his fiduciary duty to the 26,000 shareholders to seriously is he ?

[khan 0]

The short bug eyed stammering boy ain't exactly taking his fiduciary duty to the 26,000 shareholders to seriously is he ?

 

I take it you are referring to our owner, while I may have my reservations about his business practices I draw the line at ad hominem attacks on his person or appearance, shows a lack of class.

I am only thankful that he stepped up to the plate when no one else would, the outcome of his stepping up is as of yet uncertain, but for myself I am more than hopeful that we will carry the day in the FTTT. Any man who was willing to step up and attempt to clear up the financial carnage left by the previous regime deserves our support until he as with anyone shows that support to be misguided or misplaced.

 

Please do not think that I see your points or views as anything less than valid and of course you are fully entitled to share them, I was a lot closer to your opinions than you may think, but I have accepted that we are where we are now and we must make the best of it we can, I still think the most likely outcome will be a share offer aimed at the fans.

Apologies for my earlier posting, no excuse, a bad show on my part,apologies again.

[forlanssister 3,092]

I take it you are referring to our owner, while I may have my reservations about his business practices I draw the line at ad hominem attacks on his person or appearance, shows a lack of class.

 

Duly chastised....

 

I am only thankful that he stepped up to the plate when no one else would, the outcome of his stepping up is as of yet uncertain, but for myself I am more than hopeful that we will carry the day in the FTTT. Any man who was willing to step up and attempt to clear up the financial carnage left by the previous regime deserves our support until he as with anyone shows that support to be misguided or misplaced.

 

In my wildest dreams I yearn for a positive outcome to the FTT then I awaken back to the real world where Carlsberg don't do Tax Tribunals.

 

Attempting to clear up the financial carnage or taking advantage of the financial carnage for his own financial benefit to the detriment of the club itself the circa 26,000 shareholders and of course the fans, which ever one it is we have yet to discover.

 

I do concede however if we actually win the FTT and his £1 bet pays off then I'll gladly give him kudos, my cap will be well and truly doffed.

 

My ( admittedly extreme) scepticism of Craig Whyte would be drastically tempered if I could see any sign of him successfully running or turning around an ailing business but try as I may I can't find anything remotely positive in his business career only negatives. It would also have been tempered if I saw him abiding by the Shareholder Circular but alas I see no evidence of that either, a set of audited accounts would be a step in the right direction, an AGM where shareholders could have the opportunity to ask pertenant questions would be another (I concede it could be said the previous regime were not exactly fond of pertenant questioning either!)

 

An actual libel writ being served against the BBC wouldn't go amiss either, and one to Private Eye after their latest issue should surely be in the offing too, but then the truth is the ultimate defence in libel actions.

 

Please do not think that I see your points or views as anything less than valid and of course you are fully entitled to share them, I was a lot closer to your opinions than you may think, but I have accepted that we are where we are now and we must make the best of it we can, I still think the most likely outcome will be a share offer aimed at the fans.

Apologies for my earlier posting, no excuse, a bad show on my part,apologies again.

 

One of the reasons I like posting on this site as opposed to a couple of other larger Rangers forums I could mention is that here you can have a grown up adult discussion without an instant banning or accusations of "you're a Taig", "do one Timmy" or "you're just a KDS accountant", if earlier in the thread I have fallen below the standards of the site then I unequivocally apologise for doing so, it's not something I think I'm in the habit of doing.

 

There may well eventually be a share offer of some description somewhere down the line but if comes after the formation of a newco in which only one existing shareholder will hold shares and 26,000 will see their holdings vanish and Bondholders collectively kiss goodbye to over £7m, then I think it may not exactly be a raging success leaving us with an owner who doesn't want to own us any longer alas an all to familiar tune.

[Bluedell 5,482]

Beat me to it BD. A non-exec doesnt have the same level of fiduciary duty.

 

The CEO and CFO, even though they may not be tax experts, do have that fiduciary duty, I believe.

 

Agreed. However presumably Murray took advice when setting up the scheme for the big tax case. I fail to see how McIntyre could come in to the club, review the advice and know that it was wrong when the auditors had accepted it for many years as had the Inland Revenue when reviewing both the tax return and the statutory accounts. It doesn't stop some from throwing around wild accusations though.