Rangers and Follower Notices - Good news?

[WalterWhite]

The final paragraph in this article https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45322276 says

HMRC said: "Follower notice (FN) legislation says that HMRC has 12 months to issue FNs following a final decision. The final decision in Rangers was on 5 July 2017. We have looked at a range of schemes where the principles at stake were similar, and follower notices have been issued where appropriate."

Please correct me if I am wrong (Webberg, Phil?), but this means that if you have yet to receive a Follower Notice from HMRC then they don't feel they can apply the Rangers judgement to your scheme.

(Unless of course they change this ruling retrospectively as well?)

[ScottW]

I was under the impression that the 'Rangers Decision' did NOT allow HMRC to transfer the 'debt' to the individual Employee but that it was still the responsibility of the Employer to pay any Income Tax and NI.

And as the Club is dead and liquidated HMRC weren't getting anything (apart possibly from the Clubs liquidators).

Is this HMRC moving the goal posts again or just trying it on or have I misread this?

[dammit chloe]

I was under the impression that the 'Rangers Decision' did NOT allow HMRC to transfer the 'debt' to the individual Employee but that it was still the responsibility of the Employer to pay any Income Tax and NI.

And as the Club is dead and liquidated HMRC weren't getting anything (apart possibly from the Clubs liquidators).

Is this HMRC moving the goal posts again or just trying it on or have I misread this?

I believe this is the Loan Charge effect. SC court gives its decision. HMRC don't like it and get the Government to agree new retrospective laws to override/bypass the SC decision they don't like, Loan Charge 2019. Rangers employees are now back in play. If there was ever any doubt that this is retrospective then surely this silences it.

With the Loan Charge, HMRC will make a largely for appearances only chase of the employers, before attempting to take money from the easier sources, the employees who were the target all along.

[phil@pmtc]

HMRC only ever have 12 months to issue a follower notice. There's a number of reasons this hasn't occurred one of which is that HMRCs nonsense argument about the loan charge not being retrospective would crumble instantly. 'Rangers' clearly stated the loan was actually an emolument of employment at the time of payment to the trust - therefore taxable at that point. I see nothing in Rangers which states the money was taxable on a random date in the future on a transaction that only exists in HMRCs ever increasingly bizarre mind.

[webberg]

The article conflates the Rangers decision with the liability of the employer and the ability to transfer that to an employee, with the loan charge rules where a liability transfer is specifically allowed.

Aside from keeping open the running sore that those Glasgow football supporters feel and attracting click bait, I'd be wary of accepting that the BBC journalist is sufficiently expert to draw distinctions.