HMRC Granted Leave to Appeal UTT Decision

[Hildy 0]

Maybe I am mistaken, but this is essentially about HMRC vs MIH employees and Murray family stuff now, rather than with the "big tax case" that they chased initially? Does that now go to a tribunal/judge outwith Scotland?

This is what Nimmo said:

 

"The Tax Tribunal has held (subject to appeal) that Oldco was

acting within the law in setting up and operating the EBT scheme. The SPL presented no argument to challenge the decision of the majority of the Tax Tribunal and Mr McKenzie stated expressly that for all purposes of this Commission's Inquiry and Determination the SPL accepted that decision as it stood, without regard to any possible appeal by HMRC. "

 

If HMRC wins, and let's face it, it is going to appeal again and again until there are no more places left to appeal to, on the face of it, it would seem that there are no further grounds to re-open the title-stripping issue.

 

That said, the football authorities seem to make it up as they go along, so nothing can be taken for granted. If HMRC wins the appeal, the usual suspects will most definitely start complaining again in the hope that the issue is revisited.

[amms 0]

I was speaking with a journalist at the weekend who has asked HMRC under Freedom of Information to provide details of the costs incurred of pursuing this case. They refused stating confidentiality issues (I know, ironic). He's asked again pointing out he's not asking for any individual's information, simply the costs HMRC have incurred. He'll keep asking until he gets something.

[RANGERRAB 3,674]

Is this not the last chance for HMRC ? If this appeal fails at the Court of Session that's it all over for them.

[forlanssister 3,114]

Is this not the last chance for HMRC ? If this appeal fails at the Court of Session that's it all over for them.

 

Nope, Supreme Courts and European Court yet iirc.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Forgive my ignorance but do you not need to present new evidence to appeal?

 

On the contrary, I believe you can only appeal on a point of law i.e. that the Upper Tribunal erred in law (presumably on the essential point either that the loans were not loans at all or that that if they were then they were ineffective in avoiding tax because their primary purpose was not for Rangers to lend the Trusts money but to pay the players half their salaries or some combination of these or related points).

 

That'll be £20,000 please PM me your address so I can send my bill.

[Anchorman 0]

Anyone know who is paying our legal team in this saga? Is it MIH?

[Frankie 8,562]

I was speaking with a journalist at the weekend who has asked HMRC under Freedom of Information to provide details of the costs incurred of pursuing this case. They refused stating confidentiality issues (I know, ironic). He's asked again pointing out he's not asking for any individual's information, simply the costs HMRC have incurred. He'll keep asking until he gets something.

 

I think there are a few people pursuing this line of enquiry.

[26th of foot 6,082]

I think there are a few people pursuing this line of enquiry.

 

I was speaking with a non-Rangers supporting, recently retired Solicitor 3-4 weeks past and this subject arose. He reckoned the personal motivation among most behind the continuing appeals, is to preserve confidentiality. If HMRC accept the rulings at any point, then the layers of confidentiality can begin to be stripped away. Keep it active, keep it safe.

 

Again, if the current(and previous Boards) were remotely interested, they would build a raft of political support.

[der Berliner 3,744]

Anyone know who is paying our legal team in this saga? Is it MIH?

 

Maybe I am wrong here, but isn't this essentially a case between HMRC and MIH anyway, as the latter were handling the EBTs?

 

Generally, it would be great if someone could give a short summary of how this appeal stuff works and under which premisses.

 

As in, once Lord Nimmo Smith ruled on it, what would be HMRC's gain and aim to appeal this. What aim and gain would be appealing the rule of Lord Doherty. Is it only for specifics or is it about the whole case against us and "our" use of EBTs?

[compo 7,044]

old politicians pulling strings that's all