Rangers appointing an Administrator.

[AtW]

HMRC asks court to put Rangers into administration

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) is asking the Court of Session to put Rangers Football Club into administration.

The legal move counters the club's bid on Monday to file for protection against its creditors.

The papers served on behalf of Rangers directors would give the club 10 days to resolve its differences with HMRC

BBC News - HMRC asks court to put Rangers into administration

HMRC is not amused at attempts to shaft them out of money.

[SimonMac]

Interesting to see that Whyte is a secured creditor while HMRC is not

[BrilloPad]

[QUOTE=AtW;1482387HMRC is not amused at attempts to shaft them out of money.[/QUOTE]

HMRC believe guilty until proven innocent.

In this case I think Rangers had a point. And why aren't HMRC chasing those who were in receipt of the EBTs?

[SimonMac]

HMRC believe guilty until proven innocent.

In this case I think Rangers had a point. And why aren't HMRC chasing those who were in receipt of the EBTs?

I would imagine they are, but its a companies obligation to may Employers National Insurance contributions which is the crux of what Hector are chaing them for.

[BrilloPad]

I would imagine they are, but its a companies obligation to may Employers National Insurance contributions which is the crux of what Hector are chaing them for.

Interesting. I wonder whether HMRC will go after Montpelier(BN66) for similar?

[AtW]

And why aren't HMRC chasing those who were in receipt of the EBTs?

Don't know, but that's the matter for the individuals - I believe soon decision will be made on that tax issue with Rangers and looks like it won't be in their favour.

[AtW]

Interesting. I wonder whether HMRC will go after Montpelier(BN66) for similar?

Surely if Montpelier is offshore they would not have responsibility to deduct employer NIC.

[russell]

Interesting to see that Whyte is a secured creditor while HMRC is not

Yeah, why would a businessman look out for his own interest, it's totally unheard of!!!

[jmo21]

HMRC believe guilty until proven innocent.

In this case I think Rangers had a point. And why aren't HMRC chasing those who were in receipt of the EBTs?

The story is that Rangers gave the players assurances in the form of a letter/contract they would not have to pay the EBT loans back, essentially rendering the EBT's incorrectly used, and effectively illegal.

They have charged Rangers with avoiding the tax/ni on what is then considered salary, eith fines etc on top.

[geoff from contracta IOM]

The story is that Rangers gave the players assurances in the form of a letter/contract they would not have to pay the EBT loans back, essentially rendering the EBT's incorrectly used, and effectively illegal.

They have charged Rangers with avoiding the tax/ni on what is then considered salary, eith fines etc on top.

Its not so much assurances about the loans it's that the payments were contractural rather than discretionary thus negating the use of the trust.