Tax decision due in October

we need to see the so called side contracts / letters / dual contracts that have been the whole basis of the SPL case.
------------------------------------------
Ally won't need proof because his club will have it but will ask that:

- the names, addresses and contact details for those involved in the judgement are made public and sent by mail to every rangers supporter

- full details of the family members of these people are also published, including a list of what schools they attended

- all connections with these people and Celtic FC are made public (i.e. have they visited Celtic Park, have they seen Celtic Park, have they heard of Celtic Park)

All in the interests of transparency

I keep hearing this line that the tax case decision matters not.

I fail to see how it doesnt when this SPL investigation is going on??

The whole thing about EBTs and the tax case is that if the payments to this trust were used to top-up wages, that then makes those payments taxable......if any guilty verdict is returned from the tax case, the payments made via EBTs were taxable, and hence not tax free loans but effectively salaries.

If the decision from the tax case goes in Rangers favour, then the EBT payments can be nothing other than tax free loans, because thats how EBTs work and thats how, under any circumstances, the use of an EBT scheme can be legit.

SO if we are guilty....we paid salaries via EBT
If we are not....we gave out loans via EBT

Can someone please tell me how on earth that cannot have an impact on the SFA/SPL investigation???

If we paid salaries, how they were declared is then the issue for the SPL/SFA investigation.

If we gave out loans.....loans are not payments for footballing duties, they are not wage top-ups, they are not taxable income and to fall under the rules of the appropriate use of EBTs, which we will have been doing if we are found to be operating them legally, they cannot be contractual, so there's no side contracts, no undisclosed payments....merely tax free loans given out to employees as a benefit

I seriously do not understand how anyone can say one has nothing to do with the other.

The rule is, all payments for footballing duties must be declared.

If Rangers lose the tax case, the EBT payments were wages for footbaling duties and how they were declared is the issue the SPL/SFA have to sort out.

If Rangers win the tax case, the EBT payments were clearly not footballing duty payments, they were tax free loans given out by the club, non-contractually, under the rules and law of the land for companies operating EBTs

Makes perfect sense to me that, dont see how anyone can say the tax case has sod all to do with the whole affair I really dont

If we win it also shows this 150 million debt is a load of krap.

Just another thing that I dont quite get

I knew this was the case but just to put it into perspctive, this is a wee quote from the BBC story abot the forthcoming hearing

"the SPL's investigation, which was launched on 5 March, is seeking to determine whether all payments made to players in respect of their earnings from football were declared, as required by Scottish Football Association rules."

Why are the SPL leading an investigation into something that is a requirment set by the SFA, not the SPL, the SFA???

If its the SFA's rules we have broken, but they have still granted us a licence and are not launching any investigation, isnt that it, shut up shop, case closed, move on??

Its all a bit strange this so it is....definately seems like the SPL with some sort of agenda agasint the club....when it should be the SFA investigating a breach of the rules they set out, not the SPL...what SPL rules have we potentially broken here???

stevie..I think the BEEB are bang on the money so I expect RFC to lose the case

If we win the appeal does that mean that we liquidated due to 6 months of Craig Whyte?

Also wouldn't that mean that HMRC may no longer have represented over 25% of creditors meaning they would not have been able to stop the CVA?

That the SPL clubs basis for voting no to Rangers was based on Craig Whytes tenure and nothing more?

If we win the appeal the can of worms opened would not be worth the hassle.

HMRC are only interested in the taxable status of EBTs. They, SPL, SFA etc have already said in the past that EBTs are loans.

HMRC continue to say that they are loans. Whether they are taxable or not is the question - taxable in a similar fashion to benefits in kind etc.

So the HMRC decision really has little bearing on the SPL.

SPL are only interested in whether the EBTs were loans or not - they care nothing for the tax status.

So the SPL enquiry has little bearing on the HMRC case.

Any combination of Rangers win / win; win / lose; lose / win; lose / lose is possible.

Ebt dessision in November....

http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/189905-spl-inquiry-into-rangers-use-of-ebts-to-continue-in-november/

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator