Jump to content

 

 

SoS:- Rangers, HMRC and the man who knocked back £10m


Recommended Posts

RANGERS, HMRC and THE MAN THAT KNOCKED BACK £10m

 

HMRC deals are a hot topic just now due to the sweetheart deal with Google and with the latest episode of the "BTC" against Rangers due to start again at the end of February, its worth sharing details of our offer 5 years ago.

 

HMRC have been touted in the past as an organisation that dont do deals however recent stories regarding Google seem to blow that out the water.

 

Its also worth remembering who agreed a deal with HMRC and Vodafone and when.

 

The ex head of tax, Mr Dave Hartnett, was reported in the Daily Mail of 26th March 2011 as having been "entertained" by Vodafone four times before and after agreeing a "sweetheart" deal with them. a very unusual recipient of corporate hospitality.

 

The deal agreed dated back to 2010 and was subject to a Parliamentary committee as it appeared it was outside HMRC mandate to cost the tax purse "billions of pounds" when they accepted the deal. Mr Hartnett was at the helm of HMRC at this time.

 

The Guardian later published, 27th May 2013, that soon after his retirement Mr Hartnett had been surprisingly hired by Deloitte. Not as surprising is the fact that Vodafone and Starbucks, both recipients of "favourable" tax deals, are among key clients of Deloitte.

 

So the man who accepted a deal with Vodafone that displeased the house of commons was wined and dined by Vodafone and within a few short years was working for the auditors of Vodafone.

 

Great work if you can get it.

 

What does this have to do with Rangers I hear you ask.

 

Back in December 2010, one week before Christmas, Andrew Thornhill made an offer to HMRC of £10m to accept closure of the big tax case against Rangers on behalf of his client Murray Holdings.

 

This offer was not to accept liability but offered on the basis that Rangers were publicly up for sale at the time and the potential case was putting off potential bidders for our club.

 

The offer was refused by Dave Hartnett.

 

Fast forward 5 years and readers do not need reminded of what happened to our club and may guess at the millions lost to the tax purse.

 

Dave Hartnett acts a bit like the Hibs board, we dont do deals with Rangers but we will do deals with others, but only if its sweet enough.................

 

Dave Hartnett has cost the country "billions" and Rangers fans something that cant be valued, years of pain.

 

Maybe if we had offered hospitality against Man Utd, Valencia or Bursaspor, things could have been so much different.

 

 

Craig

 

12552897_1728490534048734_3682523689253974634_n.jpg?oh=44d1c67aa43de0717ded394ba259a060&oe=572C5F37

 

12642554_1728490527382068_1039706924655825951_n.jpg?oh=aeb4957df95f774a2fc2b7d19d24a6f0&oe=57428E9A

 

12631271_1728490574048730_7150820096669844944_n.jpg?oh=bd03551444bc3c51fd7615954480b24f&oe=573C7F17

Edited by ian1964
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When the BTC eventually gets thrown out at the Supreme Court it's vital the club does everything it can to bring these people to account for their actions. Were they influenced? We're they carrying out instructions on behalf of someone or persons? These are questions I've always said need answered

Link to post
Share on other sites

When the BTC eventually gets thrown out at the Supreme Court it's vital the club does everything it can to bring these people to account for their actions. Were they influenced? We're they carrying out instructions on behalf of someone or persons? These are questions I've always said need answered

 

The phrase I heard about the tax office dept that led the witch hunt was Tim to the brim. Call me paranoid but I think it's a conspiracy :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Hartnett is one of Private Eye's favourite targets as well. They have been all over him for years over the sweetheart deal that he cut with Goldman Sachs as well at the stuff with Vodafone. The man is a self-serving piece of shit with not a shred of shame. Conflict of interest, I see no conflict of interest. If there was any justice he should be in the clink.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.