Debian Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 All the arguments about RFC cheating the league and stealing titles using financial doping were all shelved when RFC 'won'. Well now justice has finally been done and they have rightfully lost. So all those previous arguments are back on, big time. No need to go that far. Just add an * next to their name on all the trophies won for the offending spell and a footnote down the bottom *Cheated Your digit must be red raw Mod man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Weren't the Rangers accounts out today as well, some good news at least i'm sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giblet Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Any chance we can find a way for it to mean Hibs won the Scottish cup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Q Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Take Rangers out of it, I ceased caring about all this cheating stuff ages ago, at last some degree of sanity from the courts. How anyone could ever believe that this was anything other than tax evasion is beyond me, and anyone moronic or dishonest enough to use them deserves everything that is coming to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 the judge made mention of it Furthermore, so far as the footballers are concerned, at least, it seems to us that if bonuses had not been paid they might well have taken their services elsewhere. Thats pure speculation. The crux of the matter is rangers paid money that it has now been found they couldn't afford to pay. Same as any other insolvency event in football. You can't wind the clock back and say when that happened. If man city's owners pack up their bags tomorrow and man city can't pay transfer fees owing should we go back to when they signed these players and take back all their trophies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgowmancity Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Thats pure speculation. The crux of the matter is rangers paid money that it has now been found they couldn't afford to pay. Same as any other insolvency event in football. You can't wind the clock back and say when that happened. If man city's owners pack up their bags tomorrow and man city can't pay transfer fees owing should we go back to when they signed these players and take back all their trophies? If Man City's owners pack up tomorrow, City are still a profit making entity in their own right so that wouldn't be an issue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Your digit must be red raw Mod man Says the guy with 7 posts on page 405 alone. Funny how you are not so chatty now. Should you not be bumping your whore thread round about now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 If Man City's owners pack up tomorrow, City are still a profit making entity in their own right so that wouldn't be an issue And if the owners withdraw their sponsorship deal that was inflated to get round the UEFA fair play rules? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Says the guy with 7 posts on page 405 alone. Funny how you are not so chatty now. Should you not be bumping your whore thread round about now? Aww, so now post stalking plinthy? I am never far aware, and don't shy away when things are good or bad. Ah I would, but you deleted the 4 of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Thats pure speculation. The crux of the matter is rangers paid money that it has now been found they couldn't afford to pay. Same as any other insolvency event in football. You can't wind the clock back and say when that happened. If man city's owners pack up their bags tomorrow and man city can't pay transfer fees owing should we go back to when they signed these players and take back all their trophies? That is not the crux though is it. You could afford to pay it as you paid it. The crux is that you evaded the income tax that was due to HMRC that RFC was obliged to deduct. Instead you (the club) concocted an absurd scheme on the advice of a porn star so they could pay more money as wages with no tax deducted. The more you pay the better the talent you can attract. Look at the sums involved in unpaid taxes, this was a huge advantage for a decade. Edited November 4, 2015 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wembley67lisbon Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Strip the titles now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoonTheSlope Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Any chance we can find a way for it to mean Hibs won the Scottish cup? Sadly they were run by crooks and con men not magicians Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Thats pure speculation. The crux of the matter is rangers paid money that it has now been found they couldn't afford to pay. Same as any other insolvency event in football. You can't wind the clock back and say when that happened. If man city's owners pack up their bags tomorrow and man city can't pay transfer fees owing should we go back to when they signed these players and take back all their trophies? Living beyond your means is different from tax avoidance... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Sadly they were run by crooks and con men not magicians Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 That is not the crux though is it. You could afford to pay it as you paid it. The crux is that you evaded the income tax that was due to HMRC that RFC was obliged to deduct. Instead you (the club) concocted an absurd scheme on the advice of a porn star so they could pay more money as wages with no tax deducted. The more you pay the better the talent you can attract. Look at the sums involved in unpaid taxes, this was a huge advantage for a decade. I wouldn't use the word absurd given it has taken until the inner house of the court of session for it to be found that way. It will likely be determined by the Supreme Court of the uk now. Who knows what they will decide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TartanJon Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Dirty tax cheating kents.Phil was right all along. I can't believe normal tax paying Rangers fans are trying to defend this,if it was Aberdeen I'd slap Milnes baldy heid until my hand bled. Murray killed your club troops.Hunt the kent down ffs and stop blaming everybody else. Btw it won't be hard he canny run fast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgowmancity Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 And if the owners withdraw their sponsorship deal that was inflated to get round the UEFA fair play rules? Ah, but UEFA reassessed that figure down so we wouldn't get by their rules. Anyway, that's not the owners with the sponsorships, that's their brothers & pals Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Isn't it up to BDO to appeal to supreme court that doesn't seem likely to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Living beyond your means is different from tax avoidance...Tax evasion you mean? I accept there is a difference but I'm not sure why one should lead to a different treatment to other debts? Debts to hmrc are treated equally to debts owed to everyone else by liquidators. You go down a slippery slope when you start trying to draw distinctions between the causes of insolvency. The fact remains that if rangers had £50m in their bank account today and paid hmrc the money, there would be no issue. The issue is that rangers can't pay that money. It has taken until today for that debt to crystallise in the form of an enforceable judgment. Prior to today, old co did not have the tax liability for tax evasion so I'm not sure what old co was supposed to have done before this judgment was known. That's before you even take into account the fact that there is nothing in the rule book about this so any further action would be made up on the spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Isn't it up to BDO to appeal to supreme court that doesn't seem likely to me.Hmmm they seemed reluctant to defend it so you might be right. However in the grand scheme of this case an appeal to the Supreme Court would not be expensive and is in the interests of creditors since it could avoid £50m+ plus hmrc costs (most likely) being added to the creditors pot.It also gives BDO an opportunity to rack up more fees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Isn't it up to BDO to appeal to supreme court that doesn't seem likely to me. That would be my guess also. Maybe less sure they will not appeal for some reason but good chance they will not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macy37 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Are you sure this news is correct? It's just that BBC Radio Scotland has just had its sports news on and focused on Hibs v Utd with not a mention of the tax case finding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TartanJon Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Interesting to see HMRC have already collected £1.3B in taxes related to schemes like the one used by Murray,kinda makes a mockery of the "Test Case" bullshit myth peddled by the msm in Scotland. This ruling is off the radar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TartanJon Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-34118126 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Tax evasion you mean? I accept there is a difference but I'm not sure why one should lead to a different treatment to other debts? Debts to hmrc are treated equally to debts owed to everyone else by liquidators. You go down a slippery slope when you start trying to draw distinctions between the causes of insolvency. The fact remains that if rangers had £50m in their bank account today and paid hmrc the money, there would be no issue. The issue is that rangers can't pay that money. It has taken until today for that debt to crystallise in the form of an enforceable judgment. Prior to today, old co did not have the tax liability for tax evasion so I'm not sure what old co was supposed to have done before this judgment was known. That's before you even take into account the fact that there is nothing in the rule book about this so any further action would be made up on the spot. Maybe they could've not got involved in blatant tax evasion in the first place? It surely doesn't matter now anyway, the Rangers that owed the money is long gone. Quote Link to comment 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.