StuGers 477 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 "former teacher has been fined after it was discovered that he bought football season tickets using money reserved for school kids. Anthony Russell was principal teacher at the Glasgow Celtic Football Club Learning Centre when he committed the fraud. The centre – a project between Glasgow City Council and the club – work with primary and secondary pupils. Russell bought two season tickets using council funds for the 2012-13 season and four for the following season. They cost the council £1039." http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/teacher-fined-buying-celtic-season-10738125 Not something that will remotely help us in our dire state, indicative though it be of so many things in Glasgow. Why am not surprised? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,747 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 will BDO now pursue SDM ? Well, BDO talking to HMRC and Murray for a compromise ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted July 5, 2017 Author Share Posted July 5, 2017 Rangers oldco fined £250,000 by SPL but club keeps titles • Former Rangers club made undisclosed payments to players • Ibrox club to retain five SPL titles won between 2000-2011 Thursday 28 February 2013 13.11*GMT Rangers oldco have been fined £250,000 following an investigation into undisclosed payments to players but the club will not be stripped of any titles. An independent commission appointed by the Scottish Premier League and chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith imposed the fine after finding Rangers guilty of failing to make proper disclosure of side-letter arrangements during 2000-2011. Rangers avoided the most severe sanction of losing up to five SPL titles won during the period investigated after the commission ruled Rangers "did not gain any unfair competitive advantage". The three-man commission, which also comprised the QCs Nicholas Stewart and Charles Flint, were unanimous in their decision. They found that Rangers, under Sir David Murray's stewardship, entered into side-letter arrangements with a large number of players, with the club making payments to an offshore Employee Benefit Trust and payments made to players in the form of loans. The commission found that those arrangements, which were required to be disclosed under the rules of the SPL and the Scottish Football Association, were not disclosed to the football authorities. The commission statement said: "Although the payments in this case were not themselves irregular and were not in breach of SPL or SFA rules, the scale and extent of the proven contraventions of the disclosure rules require a substantial penalty to be imposed. "Rangers FC did not gain any unfair competitive advantage from the contraventions of the SPL rules in failing to make proper disclosure of the side-letter arrangements, nor did the non-disclosure have the effect that any of the registered players were ineligible to play, and for this and other reasons no sporting sanction or penalty should be imposed on Rangers." The commision confirmed its earlier decision that newco Rangers could not be held responsible for any breach of rules by the oldco. They added: "In all the circumstances the commission has imposed a fine of £250,000 on Oldco." https://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/feb/28/rangers-fine-spl-titles 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted July 5, 2017 Author Share Posted July 5, 2017 [tweet]882523722875367425[/tweet] 09 November 2015 An idiot's guide to Lord Nimmo Smith's 2013 ruling by Scott Ferguson | Guest Contributor http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2015/11/an-idiots-guide-to-lord-nimmo-smiths.html?m=1 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,747 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 As I said above, the old stuff, reports and rulings are fine. Yet, it depends on whether the SFA and SPFL stand to their provious stance. What exactly stops them from whipping up another commission "based on recent findings"? IMHO, tax was due and there is no-one on this planet who can rightly claim that we would not have paid it at the time if we knew it was due. It has to be paid now and will be - to an extend. Which should be the end of the matter. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted July 5, 2017 Author Share Posted July 5, 2017 Is it not the former players who used this system that should be worried?, can they be chased for the tax due? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
onevision 1,571 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 So basically this ruling just means the tax man gets a bigger cut from the money pot held then yes? end off. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 (edited) As I said above, the old stuff, reports and rulings are fine. Yet, it depends on whether the SFA and SPFL stand to their provious stance. What exactly stops them from whipping up another commission "based on recent findings"? IMHO, tax was due and there is no-one on this planet who can rightly claim that we would not have paid it at the time if we knew it was due. It has to be paid now and will be - to an extend. Which should be the end of the matter. Scotland. 21st Century. Think again. (Or at least qualify "should" with "nae f@cking chance".) Edited July 5, 2017 by SteveC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 (edited) Is it not the former players who used this system that should be worried?, can they be chased for the tax due? I would imagine so, yes. Bankruptcy looms for many, I suspect. Perhaps then they will finally stop lauding SDM. Edited July 5, 2017 by SteveC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascender 352 Posted July 5, 2017 Share Posted July 5, 2017 Is it not the former players who used this system that should be worried?, can they be chased for the tax due? Yes, that's as I understood it all along - as much as the sensationalist headlines focused on the club, ultimately the players were liable for the tax due. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.