Member Since: 10th Apr 2000
9th Nov 2015
You're not suggesting Sir David Murray lied under oath are you? Now that is a smear.
9th Nov 2015
I'm sure players, managers and club officials et al will tell all kinds of fantastic tales when looking for a favourable write up in the Daily Record. I would too.
However, this is what Mr Black (who I believe to be David Murray - happy to be corrected on this) said in evidence to the FTT: As for Mr Black, he denied that the scheme was for tax avoidance in cross-examination, though he went on to describe the scheme as ‘a method of us acquiring, especially football wise, better players in a more cost effective manner than we would be able to do so’; that the club had been ‘very ambitious at that time’; and ‘it was seen as a correct and proper way for us to proceed’; that Rangers ‘have been very successful, because we’ve been able to attract players of a certain standard that, perhaps, we may not have been able to otherwise’
As I've already said, they didn't do this with the intention of lowering their competitive chances.
5th Nov 2015
I completely agree that we cannot ascertain what advantage Rangers gained on the pitch from the additional funds available to them. That's by the by.
However, I think we can be fairly confident they didn't abuse the EBT rules by pretending contractual emoluments were loans in the hope of lowering their competitive chances.
5th Nov 2015
Squandering an advantage by mis-spending it does not negate the fact that the an advantage existed in the first place. Had they not had the financial advantage over their rivals they may have won even less in the period they operated the scheme.
The latest judgement largely echoes the dissenting opinion of Dr Heidi Poon in the first tier tribunal. Ultimately, the reason Rangers Oldco lost this case is because they failed to operate the EBT scheme within the rules as they stood.
Are most of the Taxation World incredulous at this decision? Or are many just fearful at the consequences for their own business? I certainly wasn't surprised this time around - I was never in any doubt that these were emoluments masquerading as "loans." And the fact that many of the recipients also had side letters guaranteeing their payments suggests that they too were of that opinion.
24th Mar 2010
ex Mrs CEO
I'd imagine the possibility of dying probably gives the poor woman a bit more to think about than how her company will be run in the future.
8th Feb 2010
How can you be sure she doesn't read it? I know I would!
[edited to add. Hi AM! Keep up the good work.]
13th Nov 2009
Not the prettiest
I hope they're better at spreadsheets than they are at web design! That's a shockingly bad website layout.