Slightly Longer Thoughts on the Rangers Tax Victory

Over at Scotzine.

Click on this link here.

More detailed analysis to come – and undoubtedly more magnanimity from the delighted supporters of a team presently below Albion Rovers in the league structure!


However the headline treatment of the decision means that it will not be a distraction from the massively over-subscribed flotation of the company which owns the club, or the company which owns the company which owns the club or the company …

Oh, I should say that the school musical evening last night was fantastic, and a credit to the school and to every one of the singers and musicians who took part.

Posted by Paul McConville



Filed under HMRC v Rangers, Me at Scotzine

349 responses to “Slightly Longer Thoughts on the Rangers Tax Victory

  1. Chas W

    As far as I can see the situation is as follows:
    Rangers had in place a tax avoidance scheme, not unusual or illegal. Hector investigated and thought he had a good case for disputing it. Rangers tax specialist would have advised rangers not to contest specific payments which they had not administered properly – if there were any. Hector still wanted to go after the rest as it sets a precedent for other such TA schemes. Given the split decision they very nearly pulled it off. As far as a victory for rangers, if they did admit that some payments were subject to taxation then, to use an analogy, it’s a bit like a criminal who admits to several offences but pleads not guilty to others and when the court finds him not guilty, claims his innocence.
    As far as the side letters are concerned spl have to establish who issued them and if they were contractural. If it was rangers and they were contractual they should have been lodged with the spl.

    • MrNice


      paragraph about 210 on page 140 of the FTT.. is this Dr Poon outlining a potential legal flaw/weakness, that 2-1 decision relies heavily on Sempra – which she feels does not apply?

      commetn reply welcom.e

      • ecojon

        @ MrNice

        Obviously not speaking for Paul but is this not exactly part of the heart of the matter which an Appeal decision would address and give a decision on? If it is then you will need to be patient and not rush your fences because all that matters for the moment, in legal terms, is the current decision although that might well be altered in future by an Appeal Decision or, indeed, confirmed.

        • ecojon

          @ MrNice

          Just had the chance to read relevant section:

          The Sempra Decision
          210. The Special Commissioners’ decision on Sempra is heavily relied upon by the Appellants and extensively cited in the majority Decision. I have not relied on Sempra as it is a decision from a court of first instance and is not binding on this Tribunal;

          I have focused instead on the relevant binding authorities from the House of Lords and the Court of Appeal. In respect of Ramsay, I do not consider that Sempra has been adequately tested for the application of the Ramsay principle to be of any assistance in the present case. The appeal by the Revenue in Sempra was not heard because the parties concluded with a settlement before its progress to an appellate court.

          Lastly, the Special Commissioners made a finding of fact that the trustees had a continuing discretion and were not a mere cipher, and that is not a fact replicated in my findings of fact in respect of the trustees in the present case to allow a like-for-like comparison with Sempra.
          So do you think that HMRC might see this as an opportunity to actually get a definitive decision on Sempra by taking the matter to appeal?

          I should have said this earlier but it’s interesting, although I don’t know if significant, that the majority decision comes from the two legal eagles whereas the minority dissent decision is from the accountancy camp.

          • cam

            mmmm,riveting,,,if you hadn’t lost three goals in each half and had 2 players sent off and if the ref had given that hotly disputed throw in near the corner flag in your own half,or if the floodlights had failed or it snowed or if an asteroid struck the centre circle then maybe, just maybe your mob might have won 4-0!

            • Mike

              Hi Cam

              Don’t you think that many people reading this blog are interested in the musings on law and the dissection of public statements?

              I know I am! The football side of it is what brought me here, but the fascination of many people analysing these statements is what kept me coming back.

              The FTTT decision is even more interesting now that’s it’s come back as a majority decision and the minority decision is so wildly opposing the majority.

              The queries of any good journalist are who, what, where, why, when – my query is simple re the FTTT decision: why?

              I’m sorry if it is upsetting to Bears to this is really intriguing stuff!

          • MrNice

            @ecojon – an honoured and humbled you replied.

            It seems while the FTT provides an answer to “is appeal allowed?” – answer Yes , the split decision means both are valid opinions, lower courts and cases can chose either as they see fit or have thier own FTT – and are not restricted to the majority (it only wins in this specific case).

            Both HRMC and Rangers could appeal, HRMC to set a precedent as the next stage is legally binding on future cases, where the FTT is not. Struggle to see why Rangers would appeal the FTT.

            Should HMRC seek to appeal (50 odd days to consider) its not on fact, but points of law only . So there is a debate to be had. Also would think points of law are more precise that tax law.

            will wait as you say, time will tell.

            • ecojon

              @ MrNice

              No need to feel honoured and humble I reply to everyone except the idiots 🙂

              But in reply to your post I would only see Rangers appealing further if HMRC was successful at the Upper Tribunal but perhaps not. I think so much depends on what other cases HMRC has riding on Sempra and I have no way of knowing that.

              But agree with you that no matter the mouth music Murray Group will accept things as they are and keep spinning the success story. As usual time will tell. Obviously there is a potential to go after players for the loan interest by HMRC and that would cause all hell to break loose IMHO and a very different story might be told.

              Have posted @ November 22, 2012 at 9:27 pm which might be of interest.

      • Sir Reginald Loudpants

        Dr Poon?

        fnaar fnaar!

    • ecojon

      @ Chas W

      I think you’ve more or less got it right except I would disagree slightly over the the term ‘contractual’ aspect of the side letters. Obviously this will come down to a legal decision by the SPL Commission but it is wider than contractual payments and includes ‘all financial, contractual and other arrangements’ between clubs and players. See [1] at:

      Click to access SPL%20Commission%20reasons%20for%20decision%20of%2012%20September%202012.pdf

      But the charges faced go beyond the actual payments into delay in responding and lack of co-operation and I’m sure you will find the exact wording on the above link

      Personally I think that Rangers are hoist a bit by their own petard on this one because for months the great and the good have been assuring us that the EBT payment notifications were clearly made to the SPL. So if they aren’t ‘contractual’ or connected with a player’s footballing activities why were they declared?

      It also seems a bit odd that Rangers should apparently be so free with the info to the SPL/SFA when the dissenting opinion as stated in the Tom English piece reveals: The impasse was broken only when the City of London Police consulted with HMRC’s Criminal Investigation Section and seized documents from Ibrox. It was, according to Poon, only in May 2009 that the Murray Group finally provided the documents that were requested. That was, says Poon, fully five and a half years after the HMRC enquiry had begun.

      She adds: “The conduct of the Murray Group in general, and Mr Red in particular, in the course of HMRC’s enquiry went beyond the [Mure and Rae] description of ‘a lack of candour’… There is evidence of active concealment of documents.’

      For full piece see:

  2. cam

    The lovely lass at the Orwell prize organisation isn’t taking calls at the moment.I hope Arty C kept the original packaging.

  3. TonyMc

    Really lazy here, but seeing different analyses of the verdict and having made no attempt to read much of the findings, I have a question I am hoping someone can answer.
    The 30 or so cases that were accepted by oldco, were these surrounding ebt payments? Are the other cases that were in the main rejected, similar cases that re not proven?

    • MrNice

      Spin is clearly on a rangers win, and just two words ‘reduced substantially’ which has been spun as “substantially reduced” bill….

      But looks like HRMC presented 80 ebt cases, and oldco only choose to fight 50 of these in the FTT, accepting fault in the 30.

      So HRMC spends £3 million in chasing this, were offered £10 million to settle, so could be they still in profit….., we await the amount of the final bill.

      If Murrary had accepted liability for this FTT bill then oldco could have been sold, this is the rub.

      • Carl 31

        “107. In addition to the Definitive Deed dated 20 April 2001 by MGML creating the Remuneration Trust there were 108 sub-trusts, five of which were for MGML’s employees. Of the other 103, 22 were for employees of other companies in the Group, and 81 for players in Rangers.” TC02372 pg26.

        MGML employees 5
        other co employees 22
        Gers players 81
        total 108

        …looks like 108 were contested overall.

        • Adam

          Stop presenting facts Carl. There was 35, i mean 34, i mean 31, well what i mean is 30 cases that Rangers are due to pay tax on.

          • MrNice

            Facts are hard when one party withholds info and need police to raid to get requested details…..

            Appears 30 not contested, and the FTT states most in the appeal succeed (most not a number) but that limited set (again not a number) are subject to tax.

            So results is more 80-(some) to Rangers, 30+(some) to HRMC. But spin say this a Rangers win, feel its most ranger could win in this case.

  4. cam

    Looks like the incubator man has shut up shop as well! Don’t tell me they are all up in Charlotte Sq. squealing on each other.
    Another bottle of Merlot please!!

  5. ecojon

    Good read at:

    This par is very interesting:

    Paul Murray, of the Blue Knights, said he made a late bid to buy the club from Murray just as Whyte was about to seal the deal but the Knights wanted Murray to take responsibility for whatever tax bill came down the line – and Sir David wouldn’t do it. Where was his confidence in the fight with HMRC? He opted instead to give the club to Whyte.

  6. redetin

    The case for a further HMRC appeal seems to me to be:
    1. An authoritative dissenting judge who provided supporting argument and comment should not be ignored.
    2. A higher authority needs to comment upon the significant differences between the views of the judges and whether they have come to the correct conclusion in this case.

  7. Andy

    Can I pleae point our that there are 2 Andys, and whilst we both appear to be from the good side (not the darkside as alluded to by some on here) 😉 we do have entirely different opinions…

    Following on from this, the initial calls have been that HMRC will appeal! Yet, they themselves are now subject to parliamentary committee investigations and as Paul Murray has suggested will likely be investigated and potentially sued by BDO over their handling of this case. There is all sorts of talk about Police investigations in to blatant breaches of confidentiality requiremnts at HMRC and there has even been talk of indivduals who wrongly accused Rangers and publicly could be culpable for damages caused by their work, this I see as unlikely though.

    Calls have quite rightly been made by the public for an enquiry into why the taxman wasted so much of the taxpayers money chasing a bill that should never have existed….a bill that ultimately forced the sale of the club and lost taxpaeyers money rightfully due and also caused a lot of other creditors to lose out on funds due to them, which again would have helped towards the profits of those companies which is taxable and therefore further lost tax for us taxpayers.

    Personally, I have little interest in all such action as my focus is primarily being able to watch my football team, however there are people within HMRC who should now resign out of gross incompetence, they have been found guilty of costing the taxpayer millions of pounds chasing a ‘made-up’ bill when there job role is to COLLECT money due to the government.

    The question all should be asking, is why did they get it so wrong? Why was information released, was this a deliberate attempt to influence the case? Why did they turn down the optimum return for the taxpayer when £10m was offered for a bill that was not due? Why did the reject a CVA safe in the knowledge that Rangers as an ongoing concern in the top league would reap far greater rewards for the taxman? , Not even from Rangers greater income but also the potential that they could have cost hundreds maybe thousands of jobs by doing this? We all know that despite any information they released to the public domain, that the judges were always going to be honourable to only consider the facts in front of them and not be influenced by any outside opinion, so in this knowledge that they must have been advised that the case was not a dead cert, did they take such a gamble with our money??

    These answers are what is needed now to bring this to end. I am 100% sure this is not how David Cameron expects the country to reduce its debt burden, his vision of helping businesses grow is sadly being hampered by the actions of his incompetent HMRC team.

    I would prefer that the legal action on both sides avoided to save further costs to the taxpayers, and that HMRC would be big enough to step forward apologise and provide confirmation that those involved have resigned (If this can be done without revealing the names then that would be better for their lives). I would forgive and forget the money of mine they have wasted alongside the impact they have had on my club and move on should this happen.

    Will it happen…..unlikely!

    • ecojon

      @ Andy

      Well that’s a relief that there are two of you as I had always thought you were just a split personality and tended to treat both separate personalities as aff their heid (singular you will note).

      However, in keeping with the new reality I will reply over two posts just to keep everything right,

      Firstly, you miss the obvious thing which in reality destroys a major part of your argument. The majority decision doesn’t state that HMRC was wrong to take the case and if they thought there was no case to answer then they almost certainly would have and invariably do so.

      It is being stated that a number of cases were accepted by Murray Group prior to commencement of the hearing although I am unclear as to the source of that but the hearing has found liability. I have written a separate piece on the HMRC wider position but it seems to have been caught-up in moderation but I’m sure it will appear.

      You ignore the fact that Murray Group offered to pay £10 million to make it go away and the taxman refused – so even Murray Group accepts that substantial sums of tax had been unpaid or was the £10 million just a hand-out to the Treasury in difficult times 🙂

      You state: ‘Calls have quite rightly been made by the public for an enquiry into why the taxman wasted so much of the taxpayers money chasing a bill that should never have existed’.

      Well I accept that those close to Murray and Rangers are also entitled to be termed members of the public – but a tad partial don’t you think. I haven’t seen any widespread public disorder or marching in the street – or is that delight still to come no doubt accompanied with calls for a boycott on paying taxes 🙂

      The major expense was caused by delay created, according to Dr Poon’s minority findings, which state the impasse was broken only when the City of London Police consulted with HMRC’s Criminal Investigation Section and seized documents from Ibrox. It was, according to Poon, only in May 2009 that the Murray Group finally provided the documents that were requested. That was, says Poon, fully five and a half years after the HMRC enquiry had begun.

      She added: “The conduct of the Murray Group in general, and Mr Red in particular, in the course of HMRC’s enquiry went beyond the [Mure and Rae] description of ‘a lack of candour’… There is evidence of active concealment of documents. Equally, to describe Mr Red as ‘somewhat defensive’ [Mure and Rae’s description] in giving his sworn testimony would be an understatement. On more than one occasion, Mr Red had attempted to mislead the Tribunal.”

      Btw, in case you haven’t read the judgement, Mr Red was the key man in the tax affairs of the Murray Group and the person who operated the EBT scheme within the group.

    • ecojon

      @ Andy

      You state: ‘a bill that ultimately forced the sale of the club and lost taxpaeyers money rightfully due and also caused a lot of other creditors to lose out on funds due to them’ and it’s all the fault of Hector according to your PR spin.

      As I mentioned in the first part if the necessary documentation had been made available years before and the actual tax payabale worked out and paid then this whole affair would never have been made public.

      You must ask the Murray Group why they reportedly were so tardy in their dealings with the taxman and indeed the dissenting opinion states that Mr Red “refused any meetings with HMRC in the course of the enquiry”. Let’s remind ourself who Mr Red is – the key man in the tax affairs of the Murray Group and the person who operated the EBT scheme within the group.

      Now it may well be asked who was giving him his orders and I think that is a question that should be asked but you will need to direct it at the Murray Group. Seems to me the real problem here was the delay by the Murray Group for whatever reason – wonder what the reason was – answers on the back of a fag packet will be accepted 🙂

      You make what on the face of it seems like a valid point when stating: ‘Rangers as an ongoing concern in the top league would reap far greater rewards for the taxman’.

      The only problem is that for the whole period covered by the EBT investigation I believe that Rangers didn’t makje any profit and therefore didn’t pay a penny in Corporation Tax. So perhaps Hector was clever enough to factor that in when doing his sums. You obviously haven’t.

      You also fall into this terrible bear-trap about thinking this is only about Rangers as far as HMRC is concerned – it isn’t and I explain that in my post awaiting moderation.

      I doubt that Mr Cameron has the slightest interest in the Rangers FTT at the moment – possibly being tied-up with slightly more important issues – although George might. I note the strenuous efforts of the HoC Rangers Club in support but that is merely to be expected.

      You plead: ‘These answers are what is needed now to bring this to end’. Commendable, but this is a long and twisted road and I see no light at the end of the tunnel as yet with many side road, cul-de-sacs and lanes still to be negotiated.

      But you certainly save the biggest laugh till the end and it is pure comedy gold especially with the panto season so close when you oh so pompously declare that HMRC should be: ‘Big enough to step forward apologise and provide confirmation that those involved have resigned’.

      I would suggest that you make that demand of the enemy within Ibrox who trashed your club because they wouldn’t sit down and deal with HMRC in a businesslike manner. If they had this whole sad farce would never have happened. That is the reality and all the PR spin in the world won’t hide it and only the deluded will actually believe it.

      • Andy


        unsuprisingly you have chosen the comments of the minority in the judgements findings to try and make are another point, and completely ignore the findings of ours…..usual from you to be awfully selective with your opinions.

        Fact this bill is not due to be paid.

        Fact is those that Rangers DID admit to as due, even if it was £10m (and its probably a fair assumption that it was those cases) the taxpayer would have received the money, had they not embarked on a pointless pursuit of cases not due!

        Fact, Rangers turned a profit the 2 previous years before whyte, taxable profit!! Rangers in the top league would have higher ticket prices, corporate prices, pay higher wages, therefore more tax in VAT and paye.

        Fact, The HMRC played devils advocate with peoples livelyhood with their pointless quest!!

        Fact, complete arrogance and incompetence at HMRC led them on a crusade against Rangers for which they have failed and cost us the taxpayers a lot of money, when they could have accepted the £10m and would have not had the trouble of whyte not paying paye. Future revenues through a much smaller scale Rangesr operation have also been vastly reduced….albeit indirect taxes!!

        The fact that they appear to have been acting with an agenda against the club, as they appear to have felt mistreated by Rangers initally, only highlights their incompetence, when they lost sight of facts for vengence!!

        Perhaps as a taxpayer you are happy the HMRC wasted so much money on a fruitless chase, but that is your perogative!!

        • ecojon

          @ Andy No 2

          You state: Fact, Rangers turned a profit the 2 previous years before whyte, taxable profit

          How much Corporation Tax was paid – please cite cource.

          • Andy


            I have no idea of whether the actual corp tax was paid, but it should have been roughly £850k 09/10 and then roughly £480k due 10/11, based on 20% corp tax on profits, based on profit of £4.2m and £2.4m respectively.

            • ecojon

              @ Andy

              So in other words you have no actual citation for the amount payable and further you don’t know, in any case, if it was paid – och well I suppose that’s the Rangers Way when it comes to tax affairs 🙂

        • ecojon

          @ Andy No 1

          Keep spinning as it’s quite amusing.

          I’m quite surprised since you put so much faith in it that you didn’t quote the majority decision regarding Mr Red.

          This is taken from Scotsman piece: Mr Red caused HMRC and the tribunal some problems. Of the three person panel, Kenneth Mure and Scott Rae were the two members who went with Rangers, but even Mure and Rae had issues with Mr Red, the key man in the tax affairs of the Murray Group and the person who operated the EBT scheme within the group. They called his evidence “somewhat defensive” and referred to a “culture of defensiveness” from the Murray Group both in their testimony and in their dealings with HMRC. Mure and Rae admitted to be being “disturbed” by part of Mr Red’s evidence.

          Two eminent jurists say they are ‘Disturbed’ by part of Mr Red’s evidence – and that reassures you? All I can say is whatever Andy 2 Heid’s is suffering from it really is a serious condition and tunnel vision just doesn’t begin to describe it whether there’s a bright light at the end of the tunnel or not.

          Keep on digging – you’re about to beat the World Productivity Record 🙂

          • Andy


            What has been amusing is the amount of effort you have put into lambasting Rangers over the past year or so, only for the big tax case decision to go almost entirely everything you beleived would happen!!

            Tunnel vision has been at the forefront of almost all your posts, with an anti Rangers twinge on every post….the last one was actually just a hilarious rant about Green under the heading of Rangers appointing a new director. brilliant stuff!! 🙂

            • ecojon

              @ Andy

              As usual Andy you are spouting rubbish. I think you would really struggle to find much that I have written about the BTC but in case my memory is as faulty as your’s just let me have the citation and I will respond. I await your comments.

              As to the piece on Rangers and its links to Harper MacLeod I’m glad you enjoyed it and I too thought, if not brilliant, it had a certain amusement value given the paranoia that the name seems to spark in Blue Hearts even with more tenuous links than the ones I mentioned.

              I see you make no comment about Rangers Football PLC and which company holds the 22+ shares already paid for and issued to the original consortium. As you are obviously an authority on Rangers perhaps you could confirm who these shareholders actually are. If there’s no response I will take it that you haven’t a clue who owns your club.

        • @Andy

          “they could have accepted the £10m and would have not had the trouble of whyte not paying paye”

          So HMRC are to blame for Craigie Bhoy? Bit of a stretch don’cha think?

  8. ecojon

    Another piece from the Tom English story which talks of Mr Red: ‘A chartered tax advisor, a qualified tax inspector and is, or was, a senior member of the Murray Group’s tax function. His name features throughout the 145 pages. When critics slam HMRC for pursuing this case so vehemently and slam the FTT for taking an age to rule on it, they reckon without the presence of Mr Red, one of Murray’s own people’.

    The article adds: ‘Dr Heidi Poon, goes after Mr Red in a coruscating way and perhaps illustrates part of the reasons why this affair took so long. “The protracted and chequered course of the enquiry was largely due to a lack of candour and co-operation from Mr Red, who was the chief operating officer dealing with the enquiry,” writes Poon. She talks about documents not being disclosed despite repeated requests and statutory demands for information. She talks about Mr Red’s “hostility” and the fact that he “refused any meetings with HMRC in the course of the enquiry”.’

    The impasse was broken only when the City of London Police consulted with HMRC’s Criminal Investigation Section and seized documents from Ibrox. It was, according to Poon, only in May 2009 that the Murray Group finally provided the documents that were requested. That was, says Poon, fully five and a half years after the HMRC enquiry had begun.

    She adds: “The conduct of the Murray Group in general, and Mr Red in particular, in the course of HMRC’s enquiry went beyond the [Mure and Rae] description of ‘a lack of candour’… There is evidence of active concealment of documents. Equally, to describe Mr Red as ‘somewhat defensive’ [Mure and Rae’s description] in giving his sworn testimony would be an understatement. On more than one occasion, Mr Red had attempted to mislead the Tribunal.”

    Dr Poon was the dissenting opinion but the Mure and Rae majority opinion was also critical of Mr Red and called his evidence “somewhat defensive” and referred to a “culture of defensiveness” from the Murray Group both in their testimony and in their dealings with HMRC. Mure and Rae admitted to being “disturbed” by part of the evidence given by Mr Red – the key man in the tax affairs of the Murray Group and the person who operated the EBT scheme within the group.

    • Andy

      Uhoh…..have you been reading MSM again….but but I thought they….ach never mind!! LOL

    • cam

      Eco old son,when you are being mentally pumped as much as Andy is doing to you,then its ok to just surrender,,we understand,,just lie doon!

      • charliedon

        I’m reading these posts as a neutral and I actually think eco is well ahead on points in his exchanges with whichever andy it is. I think you’re trying to get the fight stopped before one of the andys gets knocked out. There’s no danger of eco lying down.

        • ecojon

          @ charliedon

          None at all 🙂

          • Andy


            There you are with your selective memory again…..sigh sigh sigh!!!

            I spouted rubbish….eh nope I spouted facts my friend!! I do find it highly amusing and very odd that someone who clearly has a high opinion of his own intelligence appears to be happy for the HMRC to piss his money against a wall!!

            Im not paranoid…what on earth do I have to be paranoid about…..was it not Celtics board that were paranoid that the SFA and their referees had an agenda against them and started a witch hunt that resulted in people losing their jobs….as for paranoia, I think we all know where that begins and ends in this country….were the minority and people are prejudice against catholics…blah blah blah…ehhh no there not, most people in this country couldnt give a hoot what religion you are…more paranoia…

            Even when its proven by judges much more well versed in the laws of this land than you that Rangers, in most cases, were innocent of the crime, you are still so arrogant to admit, hey guys I was wrong…your lack of humility knows no boundaries, which is a shame as as it means it is impossible to engage in a proper debate with you. Thankfully, there are many other posters on here that are great to interact with.

            Ehhhhh, on the CG 22M shares issue….there you are again with that selective memory again….Are you old by any chance, feels like you are somwhat forgetful…thought it might just be your age??

            I actually wrote a guest post at the invitation of Paul, detailing my views and concerns of a Rangers fan at Charles Green, and yes I do agree with you, I have no idea who owns my club, what the structure is, what the financial position is right now, who owns ibrox and murray park….I wrote a fairly substantial article detailing all this…..and this is a far bigger issue than that of the result of the BTC…..I have huge concerns and will not invest until I see it all proven in black and white, I have e-mailed Rangers on numerous occasions and had no response!!

            Your turn.

            • MrNice

              lol andy “that Rangers, in most cases, were innocent of the crime” ,

              and what about the other cases, why stop …
              in the other cases there is tax not paid – this is the job of HRMC to find tax not paid and prove it – they have.

              You do accept that by not contesting some cases, guilt has been admitted. Tax required to be paid was not paid, this can be criminal, it depends on the ammount.

              If HRMC submitted a bill and it was completely rejected then thats a complete loss, but to get 30% at FTT stage is far from nothing.

              Spin is one thing, HRMC boss on telly saying they will fight and fight as 41,000 cases to go thru, and setting precedent makes it easier to fight these other cases. They say £10 billion outstanding, so thier upside is important.

            • ecojon

              I merely repeat my post which I still await an answer to

              November 22, 2012 at 5:02 pm

              @ Andy

              As usual Andy you are spouting rubbish. I think you would really struggle to find much that I have written about the BTC but in case my memory is as faulty as your’s just let me have the citation and I will respond. I await your comments.

            • Andy


              haha, cat got your tongue….game, set and match!!

              If your ageing mind cannot remember, do not expect me to trail through your old rubbish, just to help jog your memory…

            • @Andy

              “Rangers, in most cases, were innocent of the crime,”

              As I mentioned on an earlier comment the use of the phrases “in most cases” “for the most part” “in the vast majority of cases” totally torpedoes any argument you advance.

              “By thy words thou shalt be condemned.”
              (Matthew 12:37)

        • cam

          A Don? neutral? thinking?,,,,,nah!

  9. Adam

    Just wanted to state for the record and contrary to an opinion above that i thought Fergus McCann was a breath of fresh air for Celtic and whilst the fans put a lot of money in, they did so as supporters of their club.

    I personally dont think McCann fleeced the Celtic fans and i think as others have stated, his legacy exists in the East End to this day with the new Celtic Park which allegiances aside is clearly one of the best stadiums in the UK. Alongside Ibrox may i add.

    The Bunnett was brilliant in my book.

    • ecojon

      @ Adam

      I totally agree with you and over the years even the McCann doubters now see how Celtic could have ended-up without the Wee Man – grumpy bugger that he is 🙂

      • berniebhoy

        I have bought and read the mcCann takeover written by David low. It is an insightful read into what went on behind the scene’s back then. McCann put in millions of his own cash as did others in the back ground. As he stated he could have let the club go bust which would have saved him millions but he wanted to keep the timeline intact, that was more important to him than saving a few million.

        • ecojon

          @ berniebhoy

          Much-maligned by many at the time but as sometimes happen history and the passage of time has shown the scale of his achievements. Many were orchestrated against him as not being a real Celtic Man and if the club had landed-up in the hands of their choice then Celtic may well have died.

          I think seeing what has befallen Rangers has actually helped many Celts to understand how lucky we were not only to have the business skills and vision of Fergus but most importantly to get an honest man who was up-front about what he would do, what he would earn and when he would leave.

          As I have said to those from the Darkside on here who attack him (because he saved Celtic and they can’t abide that) – let’s just wait and see what state Rangers are in after chico’s stewardship is over and he has departed. I have no doubt it will be interesting.

          • Andy

            If memory serves me correctly the legions of Celtic fans booed Fergus McCann off the pitch when he unveiled the clubs first championship flag in 10 years…..what a strange thing to do….

  10. Adam

    I have now asked 3 times but my question may be getting lost in the middle of others (confusing layout). Can anyone link me to the details behind the 35, i mean 34, sorry 31 cases that Rangers admitted liability to and are now waiting on a tax liability.

    Thanks in advance.

    • Rangers did not admit liability to anything, that would be for the administrators of MIH trusts to do through their QC Andrew Thornhill, which they alluded to, they do not involve any employees of Rangers FC present or past.

      Hard for the sour grapes aficionados to palate but nevertheless as it is, life is good and getting better by the game.

      • mick

        elgin this week lol

      • ecojon

        still cooking I see – you really are the most popular rank badyin oan ra site 🙂

        • mick

          what a week after months of debate with cam and andy all of a sudden pauls site been hijacked with a score of them what a good week its been for both sided views although it must be a nightmare for paul to moderate what have we learned here this week they only post comments when they feel there winning lol 6 times

          • ecojon

            @ mick

            Sadly, as usual, they bring nothing to the discussion but hey why change the habits of a lifetime 🙂

          • cam

            Very soon we will leave you lot of total fruit loops to your wee site and you can all get back to spreading mince and listening to the gospel of St Paul,,,,meantime,like a boxer on the ropes,suck it up and come out fighting.We have taken your best shots and now your gonna feel the hammer!!

    • ecojon

      @ Adam

      Send an email to Mr Red – that’s if he’s still with the organisation. If not try the top man Mr Murray himself – I’m sure he’ll be happy to oblige 🙂

    • Carl 31

      from another blog…(TSFM@23:07 on 21st Nov)
      “The appeal that Rangers launched didn’t actually cover the whole tax bill – what Rangers actually ‘won’ was the majority of the individual assessments on the EBT’s that they contested. They didn’t contest 30+ occurrences (I think it was 35, but I’m sure someone will correct if this figure is wrong), and of the ones that they did contest, they found to be liable for 5 of them.

      I’m sure I’ve put that in very vague terms, and some of it could probably do with some factual tidying, but I think that sums it up!”

      … and this is indicated by the sentences from the majority opinion in TC02372:
      “It was conceded that advances in favour of certain players are taxable and liable to NIC, and we have found that in certain other limited instances, there may be a similar liability. To that extent the assessments should stand.” 232, pg58. my emphasis

      That’s where I get it from, but I cant speak for any others. My follow on points are not on the number specifically, but instead look towards the existence of any examples of possible evasion/illegality/breach of rules.


      On the numbers…
      I still remain puzzled by the difference between the debt noted in the final D&P report of around £94m, of which some £75m -ish doesnt come from the CW period, and the contested amount of “believed to be in the region of £49m.”
      ” £46.2m bill it faced from their tax case “,
      ” £47.65m in payments to players and staff ”

      Some penalties may have been included in the £75m -ish figure but the uncontested cases might just be more likely to explain the gap.

      On another note, I’m still wading slowly through the judgement on and off between important stuff like RL. Its tough going and I have to read many sentences a number of times since its much written in legalese, but I think its generally worth it. Some interesting bits pop up now and again. 🙂

  11. Sir Nicholas Fairbairn

    Hector will have few problems having leave to appeal granted – its almost a given in split decisions and they will appeal of that there is no doubt, Decisions of the 2nd tier are binding in law on all other first tier tribunals where the facts are similar, We cant allow as a society people (very rich people) to dodge tax on their earnings by way of these scams. I really couldnt care less about Rangers in any of their variants .They committed hari kari by their own follies .I do care about justice and justice will prevail . You can be sure about that..

    • Andy

      cough cough….Neil Lennon and his own bung being included in those we cant allow to dodge tax via his own scam!!….glass houses and bricks yet again!!

  12. mick

    It’s also confirmed in the FTT decision that the dead club included the cost of funding the EBTs when calculting the insurance that covered each player in the event of an injury. I think it was Stefan Klos that they gave as an example. The insurance company covered the cost of both Klos’ wages and payments into his EBT while he was out injured. The insurance would have been to cover his earnings as a football player, so there’s no way they can argue that they weren’t contractual (actually if the EBT payments were to be ruled non-contracual there’s a possibility that the insurers would have a case against them too for fraudulent claims, or at least they would have if the oldco were still in business). so theres more crime uncovered insurane fruad lies about pay when injuried is a crime it gos on and on and they see this as a victory

  13. mick

    Andrew Thornhill QC, representing the Murray Group, admitted that the side letters were contractual but that they were not disclosed to the SFA.
    I know that this is one side of the argument, but it’s pretty damning and shows that the players saw the side letters as part of their net income.
    also remember that the SFA/SPL would need full sight of income in the case that they dished out any fines which are usually fined X amount of weeks wages. If a player had £5K on their main contract and the equivalent to £5K thru the ‘loan’. the resultant fine would be based on the main contract.

    Page 38 , Para 159

    The side-letters,
    while not disclosed to the SFA, were in reality part of the player’s contract with the
    Club. The players expected to receive the monies paid into trust.

    However, according to
    Mr Thomson, given that the burden of proof rested on the Appellants, it had not been
    shown that the side-letter benefits were other than part of the contract of employment
    of the players.

    Para 160

    Rangers had promised to ensure that even if the trust arrangements
    ceased, alternative arrangements would be made to give the players their agreed net
    pay. That crucially was the underlying reality.

    Para 161

    Side-letters, of course, had not been registered with the football authorities, the
    SFA and SPL. The spirit of their rules was that the whole contract terms should be
    registered. Suspiciously, no evidence was led as to who decided that the benefits in
    terms of the side-letters should not be registered. Non-registration of side-letters was
    40 incompatible with both authorities’ policing and disciplinary powers. For example
    any fines imposed on players would customarily reflect the disclosed wage. Nondisclosure
    would thwart the authorities’ powers.

    Page 39 Para 163

    On any view, Mr Thomson argued, Rangers could have sought a ruling from
    the SFA or SPL about disclosure of side-letters but, clearly, they had chosen not to do
    so. There was a conscious decision to conceal their existence, 5 and that extended even
    to the Club’s auditors.

  14. Carl 31

    A curious sentence. The club themselves considered at least one of their players’ earnings to include payments via EBT.

    “The insurance claim by Rangers for Mr Evesham’s injury was met by payments that calculated Mr Evesham’s earnings as inclusive of the trust payments due to him under the terms of his side-letter.” 123, pg103.

    • mick

      thats 1 crime uncovered insurance fruad is well in the report a loan is not earnings and cant be cliamed on injury who made the cliam ???

  15. mick

    lol 6 times the broad sheets are calling them a pheniox lol another 6 times

    “the Phoenix club accepted the transfer embargo which had been handed down during Craig Whyte’s brief and calamitous reign for bringing the game into disrepute”

    so there you have it outside the scottish media its seen for what it is lol .

  16. mick

    From an Italian Football magazine, an interview with Marco Negri, about Rangers, and life in Scotland.

    LB- Luigi Bruno (Interviewer)

    MN- Marco Negri

    LB- Marco, you left Rangers under very strange circumstances, why was that?

    MN- Strange? There was nothing strange in anything that happened there, they simply did not want me there any longer.

    LB- Why was that?

    MN- The honest answer is that I didn’t know then and I still don’t know even today. Nobody ever explained why I had fallen out of favour.

    LB- Your goal record at Rangers was fantastic and when fit and available you were scoring for fun. I, and many others still do not understand why you left under a cloud.

    MN- Let’s just say you are getting very close to why I think that I was frozen out. Scotland is a very claustrophobic place where everything is examined and analyzed endlessly. Scottish society is in many ways a backward place.

    LB- What do you mean by that?

    MN- The culture, the underlying culture of Rangers was not good. The first team players had a habit of drinking vast amounts of alcohol during the week. As you know here in Italy we have a different culture as professional footballers. We know that it is our duty to keep ourselves fit and healthy. Some of the players there like Paul Gascoigne and Andy Goram would turn up smelling of drink BEFORE training. I could not understand why such behaviour was tolerated by Walter Smith who was manager then”.

    LB- Marco we are well aware of Paul Gascoigne’s problems and it is sad to see his decline, we saw it earlier at Lazio. Are you saying that the players were out of control?

    MN- Absolutely, I tried to point this out to Walter Smith several times but he became very defensive and said that I needed to understand Scottish footballing culture. He would hear no criticism of Goram and especially Gascoigne who could literally do anything he wanted to and still get away with it! It wasn’t just their drinking however, they had some really extreme political and religious views.

    LB- Could you elaborate on this please?

    MN- Of course. They hated Catholics. All of them. I never understood why they were so filled with hatred. Several of us who were Catholic players and all foreigners were told upon arrival, never to bless ourselves at Ibrox as it could cause problems for us. I began to understand that Rangers was an extreme club very similar to Lazio here in Italy. You know, a right wing club with right wing supporters. I personally am not a practicing Catholic but my wife Anna Maria is, and it used to cause me pain when I heard what they said about my fellow Catholics. Lorenzo Amoruso and Jorg Albertz, just kept quiet and kept their heads down.

    LB- What finally brought things to a head?

    MN- I was rapidly disillusioned by Rangers and especially their supporters. As part of my professional duties I was strongly encouraged to attend social functions which meant going to several Rangers supporters clubs. The last one I attended really brought home to me the fact that I had nothing in common with these people. The anti-Catholic feeling was venomous and the songs they sang that evening filled me with disgust. It was at that point I decided not to give my all for a club that condoned such behaviour. I went sick. Walter Smith knew the real reason for my ‘illness’ and he just ignored it. But I wasn’t lying, I was sick, sick of Rangers and sick of what they stood for and that is the truth.

    scotlands shame a little of topic but it brings home what we are dealing with here and the true extent of the problems not just cheating

  17. mick

    all this side letters got me thinking as to who’s job it would be to report financial wrongdoings to UEFA/FIFA, the name Campbell Ogilve leapt instantly to mind. I then remembered he has openly admitted to having recieved an EBT payment of £95,000 (the cost of a good night out according to the BBC Pundit Chuck Muck)……………..Why is this payment not included in the list published in the red-tops today?……..Who else may be missing from this list?

    I find it almost impossible to believe there are not a few others who’s names have been ‘missed off’.


    Every game these players played in should be recorded as a 3-0 defeat.

    Alan Hutton £364,000 . Made debut in 2002 and played 94 games, before £9million move to Spurs.

    Alex McLeish £1.7million . Managed Rangers from 2001-06.

    Alex Rae £569,000 . Midfielder arrived at Ibrox in 2004 and spent two years there. Played 34 games.

    Andrei Kanchelskis £145,000 . Russian winger arrived from Fiorentina in 1998 for £5.5million.

    Andrew Dickson £33,000 . Head of football administration since 2003. Previously financial controller at Ibrox.

    Arthur Numan £510,000 . Dutch full-back arrived at Rangers from PSV Eindhoven in 1998 for £4.5million. Played 118 times.

    Barry Ferguson £2.5million . Former youth player who became Rangers captain. Played at Ibrox from 1996-2003 and 2005-09.

    Bert Konterman £300,000 . Dutch defender signed by Dick Advocaat for £4.5million in 2000.

    Bert Van Lingen £65,000 . Assistant manager under Dick Advocaat from 1998 to 2002.

    Billy Dodds £190,000 . Arrived in a £1.5million deal from Dundee United in 1999.

    Bob Malcolm £125,000. Central defender started his career with Rangers in 1997. Played 88 games. Left for Derby County in 2006.

    Carlos Cuellar £448,255 . Spanish centre-half arrived from Osasuna in £2.37million deal in 2007. Moved to Aston Villa in 2008.

    Chris Burke £55,000 . Started career at Rangers, playing 96 games from 2002 to 2009. Left for Cardiff City.

    Christian Nerlinger £1.8million . German midfielder signed from Borrusia Dortmund in 2001 and left in 2004.

    Claudio Caniggia £1million . Argentinian signed from Dundee for £1million in 2001.

    Craig Moore £1.1million . Australian centre-half played more than 90 games from 1994-98. Returned in 1999 and stayed until 2005.

    Dado Prso £1.9million . Croatian striker was free transfer in 2004. Left for Dinamo Zagreb in 2007.

    Dan Eggen £68,000 . Norwegian central defender signed in 2003 from Spanish club Alaves.

    Sir David Murray £6.3million . Owned club from 1988-2011. They won 15 titles and 26 cups. Sold shares to Craig Whyte for £1.

    Dick Advocaat £1.5million . Rangers manager from 1998-2002. Spent almost £74million to win five trophies, including two titles.

    Douglas Odam £119,000 . Finance director for 15 years. Left in 2003 to take up a role within

    Egil Ostenstad £370,000 . Norwegian forward signed from Blackburn on free transfer in 2003.

    Fernando Ricksen £684,225 . Dutch right-back signed in 2000 from AZ Alkmaar for £3.75million.

    Federico Nieto £24,500 . Argentine striker joined on loan deal in 2005 from Almagro. Scored once in three matches.

    Gavin Rae £376,000 . Midfielder signed from Dundee in 2004 for a fee of £250,000. Moved to Cardiff in 2007.

    George Adams £30,000 . Ex-player was head of youth development between 2003-05.

    Graeme Souness £30,000 . Player-manager from 1986-91.

    Gregory Vignal £173,000 . French defender joined on loan from Liverpool in 2004. Moved to Portsmouth in 2005.

    Ian McGuinness £25,400 . Club doctor sacked after Paul Le Guen left.

    Ian Murray £95,000 . Midfielder was free transfer from Hibernian in 2006. Left in 2007.

    Jan Wouters £285,000 . Former Dutch midfielder joined as a coachunder Dick Advocaat, then Alex McLeish. Left in 2006.

    Jean-Alain Boumsong £630,000 . French centre-half joined in 2004 on free transfer. Moved to for Newcastle for £8million.

    Jerome Bonnissel £48,000 . French left-back arrived in 2003 from Bordeaux.

    Jesper Christiansen £320,000 . Danish goalkeeper signed in 2000 as injury cover.

    Joel Le Hir £28,275 . Paul Le Guen-appointed physiotherapist from 2006 to 2007.

    John Greig £40,000 . Played for club from 1961-78. Managed Rangers from 1978 to 1983. Later became a director.

    John McClelland £225,000 . Appointed a director in 2000. Chairman from 2002 to 2004. Resigned last year.

    Julien Rodriguez £638,000 . French centre-half signed from Monaco in 2005 for £1million. Left for Marseille in 2007.

    Kevin Muscat £1million . Australian defender joined from Wolves in 2002 on free transfer. Joined Millwall in 2003.

    Kris Boyd £215,000 . Signed from Kilmarnock in 2006 for £500,000. Left in 2010.

    Libor Sionko £178,000 . Czech midfielder signed from Austria Vienna in 2006. Played 18 matches before signing Copenhagen in 2007.

    Lorenzo Amoruso £639,000 . Italian defender signed from Fiorentina for £4million in 1997. Moved to Blackburn Rovers for £1.4million in 2003.

    Martin Bain £249,000 . Chief executive of Rangers from 2005 to 2011. Resigned after Murray sold club to Whyte.

    Marvin Andrews £316,025 . Centre-half from Trinidad and Tobago joined from Livingston in 2004.

    Maurice Ross £120,000 . Played 78 games for Rangers from 2000 to 2005, before moving to Sheffield Wednesday.

    Michael Ball £1.4million . Left-back signed from Everton in 2001 for £6.5million. Moved to PSV Eindhoven in 2005.

    Michael Mols £260,000 . Dutch striker joined Rangers under Dick Advocaat. He arrived in 1999 and spent five years at Ibrox.

    Mikel Arteta £674,603 . Spanish midfielder joined in 2002 and played 50 matches, scoring 12 goals. Moved to Everton.

    Nacho Novo £1.2million. Spanish striker joined in 2004 from Dundee for £450,000.

    Neil McCann £500,000 . Winger joined from Hearts in 1998 for £2million.

    Nuno Capucho £970,000 . Portuguese winger who arrived in 2003 for £700,000.

    Olivier Bernard £224,000 . French defender arrived on a free transfer in 2005.

    Paolo Vanoli £592,000 . Italian left-back joined from Bologna in 2003 and played in 28 matches.

    Paul Le Guen £201,250 . French manager replaced Alex McLeish in 2006. Left in January 2007 after a string of poor results.

    Pedro Mendes £1million . Portuguese midfielder joined in 2008 for £3million. Joined Vituria Guimares in 2010.

    Peter Lovenkrands £902,000 . Danish winger arrived in 2000 from Akademisk Boldklub for £1.3million.

    Ronald De Boer £1.2million . Dutch midfielder joined in 2000 under Advocaat.

    Ronald Waterreus £510,000 . Dutch goalkeeper joined Rangers in 2004 from Manchester City.

    Sasa Papac £319,000 . Bosnian left-back arrived in 2006 from Austria Vienna for £450,000.

    Sotirios Kyrgiakos £532,200 . Greek centre-half signed from Panathinaikos in 2005.

    Stefan Klos £2million . German international keeper signed in 1999 for £800,000. Join Bayer Leverkusen in 2007.

    Stephane Wiertelak £28,275 . French fitness-physiotherapy coach joined Rangers in 2006 under Le Guen.

    Steven Davis £600,000 . Northern Ireland midfielder. Left for Southampton in the summer.

    Steven Smith £7500 . Defender came through youth ranks and made debut in 2004.

    Steven Thompson £485,000 . Joined from Dundee United in 2003 for £200,000. Went to Cardiff City in 2006.

    Tero Penttila £140,000 . Finnish defender joined in 1999 for £300,000 from Haka Valkeakoski. Left in 2002 to join HJK Helsinki.

    Thomas Buffel £1.2million. Belgian midfielder joined in 2005 for £2.3million from Feyenoord.

    Tore Andre Flo £1.3million . Norwegian striker joined from Chelsea in 2000 for £12million. Sold for £6.75million to Sunderland in 2002.

    Yves Colleau £106,200 . Former French midfielder served as assistant to Le Guen at Rennes, Lyon and Rangers from 2006 to 2007.

    Zurab Khizanishvili £405,000 . Georgian defender joined on a free transfer from Dundee in 2003. Moved to Blackburn Rovers in 2005.

    and the factual evidence is in the report and mih have admitted guilt so LNS can only come to 1 conclution on it all and fifa are circling and eufa as havle of scotland via fansites are bombarding them with emails and phone calls wanting justice in case CO trys to sweep it under the bulging carpet

    • cam

      Yup, you told us for months(correction,,someone told you!) that the tax bomb was gonna land.It did like a big damp squib!
      Now you’re telling us that Captain Nimmo must do whatever some halfwit on KDS tells you!
      You and like minded bigoted halfwits are bombarding UEFA with imbecilic e-mails that might get you taken away for counselling and now you want to make snide comments with no proof regarding an individual just because he had a Gers connection.
      Tell me,what colours the sky in your reality?

  18. mick

    so murray got of and dropped a bomb shell on the fans by admitting guilt on the side letter issue what a sad thing to do to save his own neck passed it to the players and fans

  19. The net is closing, it is difficult to decide which is the more amusing at the moment the breeze block boulevard dwellers love of all things Rangers as opposed to that of their own less than squeaky clean club, or the fact that rtc and his cohorts attempted to bolt and shred to late and to little, armageddon is coming believe it.

    • mick

      alex your club cheated via non discloser of side letters to sfa and ebts and fielding players they should not have it will hit home soon to you no matter what your buddys say in msm the chips are down for title stripping the evidence was brought to light by mih legal team it can not be ignored and the supreme court is still to sit if upper say same the hmrc have similiar cases sitting at this would set a presidence that would see billions dis appear in cliams so stop tripping out your tree and do some digging on it and post facts not some daft child like comments about rtc and whataboutyou your tripping out your tree here upper then supreme 2 shots left its havle time get with the facts and structure of the court system your comments are boring and lack factual debate , breeze block boulevard dwellers were did you get that from europe compares yous to the usa trialer trash because of all the domestic abuse and drug taking and lack of order in your lifes lolx6

    • ecojon

      so’s the cookie monster 🙂

    • mick

      armageddon been your club died lol were you been

  20. cam

    Looks like incubator man has also left the building,,,must be an establishment conspiracy.If i can’t get my daily laugh at that thing then i’ll have to watch the wee guy in the yellow top greeting the news of Robbie Keanes signing in the car park,,,,bwahahahaa

  21. Excellent investigative blogging, there seems to be an echo of one of the partakers of the sour grapes reverberating on this blog, does their envy of The Rangers know any boundaries at all ?

    The information.

    • mick

      alex the upper house and supreme will sort it out if you know the lingo that is wait and see rtc was right in his judgements

      • cam

        Guy has gotta be steamin right? we are talking heavy duty mind altering substances here!
        ffs the upper house,the supreme court,,,in between the Jeremy Kyle show he is watching re runs of Petrocelli.
        I want a book of this loon balls utterances for my xmas,,, in fact i’m off to contact Andrex to see if they can help me with my mates pressies!

        • Against my better judgement I tuned into clyde1 what a result, I haven’t laughed as much for ages. The slavering imbecilic rants of those celtic minded cretins whom the bunnet very honestly described as bigots was pantomime at its very best, absolute crackheids….

        • cam

          Just pause for a second,,,,an ex lawyer allows this idiot to post this crap????? ffs what does that tell you?

      • A saying that describes your idiot persona very well;

        “Never argue with a fool – they will drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience”.

        I never argue with fools, I won’t make an exception for you.

      • ecojon

        @ mick

        A lot seems to hinge on The Sempra Decision according to the minorty decision which states:

        ‘210. The Special Commissioners’ decision on Sempra is heavily relied upon by the Appellants and extensively cited in the majority Decision. I have not relied on Sempra as it is a decision from a court of first instance and is not binding on this Tribunal;

        I have focused instead on the relevant binding authorities from the House of Lords and the Court of Appeal. In respect of Ramsay, I do not consider that Sempra has been adequately tested for the application of the Ramsay principle to be of any assistance in the present case. The appeal by the Revenue in Sempra was not heard because the parties concluded with a settlement before its progress to an appellate court.

        Lastly, the Special Commissioners made a finding of fact that the trustees had a continuing discretion and were not a mere cipher, and that is not a fact replicated in my findings of fact in respect of the trustees in the present case to allow a like-for-like comparison with Sempra.’
        Obviously I have no expertise to make any legal judgement on the soundness or otherwise of the minority decision but I wonder if HMRC might see this as an opportunity to obtain a definitive decision on Sempra by taking the matter to the Upper Tribunal? I have no idea how important it would be to Hector to get such a decsion and I don’t just mean in the relatively narrow context of the Rangers case.

        If HMRC are allowed an appeal from the FTT then it will be interesting to see if the Murray Group decide it’s time to throw in the towel and pay the tax that would then be due or decide to defend an Upper Tribunal hearing.

        If they lost the Upper Tribunal hearing they would then need to decide whether to then appeal that decision upwards and conversely, if they win, it leaves HMRC to either throw in the towel or appeal yet again.

        I don’t know if there’s any significance in this but in the FTT case the majority decision comes from the two legal eagles whereas the minority dissent decision is from the accountancy camp.

        • mick

          a think the hmrc will wait till the spin dies down then seek an appeal on the grounds of misjudgement also the fact they filed insurance cliams and stated the ebts were wages could be the nail in the coffin here for mih why one year say there wages but a few year later say there loans it stinks of lies and deflections and maybe the judges were hoping to get it up to a higher court for them to deciced it was not ever1 thought they were clean

    • mick

      why you not debating the side letters why just focus on rtc it seems you are on a witch hunt you and your like will be put in there place when aLNS pops up and takes what is not yours titles and cups fifa will sort it CO wont be able to bully and hide from them alex

  22. lordmac

    Paul in your honest opinion, do you thing the rangers old co, new of this result about 1 month ago, giving them time to get Walter bedded into the new co. a few weeks ago i heard traynor say on the radio that when this report come out the names of the people will not be there real names but i am concerned, as to why he would have made such a statement
    also with the reference as to when the judges pane,l sat in Edinburgh
    and there are dates of these sittings, If you had to look at any of the red top papers and prior to these dates and also on them dates, they where putting out front and middle page reports about rangers. as if making sure the judges where getting a one sided story.

    • cam

      Jeez, thats it the jigs up,,theres always one guy who can see through the smoke and mirrors
      Cam to base; we have a clean up situation at Random p@sh,over
      Base; is the situ. manageable?
      Cam; negative,we need black ops
      Base; can you not talk shoite to him as usual and twist his melon?
      Cam; negative,this ones a smart cookie.
      Base; roger that,we will deploy agent Leggo,he has never failed.
      Cam; whats the word on my replacement?
      Base; no change,command needs you in situ.
      Cam;roger, i will give it my best,look after my family if i don’t make it.
      Base;stow the negativity Cam!,we’re nearly finished.
      Cam;ok,its just the M.I.C.K and Eco thing,,,,the horror,the horror

      Fades to helicopter sounds


    • ecojon

      @ lordmac

      If there is one thing I am certain of it’s that the tribunal members wouldn’t be influenced one iota by the redtops no matter what they wrote 🙂

  23. mick

    Buba3d, one of the most frequent posters on the Rangers Media forum, is now openly issuing death threats:

    “The day the names get leaked is the day they better start making funeral plans, rangers isn’t just a football club it’s our blood and when somebody tries to kill our club well……. god help them.”

    Over to you, Stephen House . . .
    sourced at tsfm

  24. cam

    Hope the devotees of Mr Red heard Darrell King just trash the Captain Nimmo/Rod McKenzie charity event scheduled for the new year.
    Loans,not contractual payments,decided by a Tribunal that blows the SPL commission right oot the watter!
    Coyote Pete can reshuffle the trophy cabinet cos nuttins gaun naewhere.
    M.I.C.K do you realise that your fav. bird of the momento apart from your good lady,is Heidi Poon.Thats an anagram of ,,,,o, no hid pie.
    Its karma innit man,,,yer fav. bird blows piegate right oot the blogosphere.
    Me, i love Mr Red especially when he goes oot wi his best pals Mr Whyte and Mr Blue.
    A Mr Red sky at night is a bluenose delight!

    • Mike

      I think you are being deliberately obtuse in commenting that the loans are now decided not to be contractual payments.

      If you have been paying attention, the result of the FTTT has nothing to do with the result of the SPL commission or tribunal, whatever it’s called – they may use the same evidence, but are working to different rules.

      Just like the FTTT we won’t know the result of the SPL commission until it is published.

  25. Adam

    Is there any view as to why RTC has stopped using Twitter over the last 2 days ?

    And please give an honest assessment.

    • His identity is known, but wise heads have prevailed and not released it into the public domain, the law will take its course, he really isn’t all that many miles away, despite the American server spilling the beans.

      • mick

        alex why the witch hunt for any1 that mentions tax and side letters and the bulling and threats your cult makes a arse of its self any were it gos and your suits are crooks proven the side letters ,and lack of transparcy with hmrc going back to 2004 ,yous are daft and the whole world knows it simples ,yous dont know rtc or it would be out by now why is that so special that yous are obsessed with rtc why are yous celebrating mih not being liable murray killed your club rtc just highlighted it

        • ecojon

          @ mick

          Well nice to know we have such a senior Rangers man – who appears to be right in the loop – spending so much time on here. We must really be annoying them with the amount of time the snarling pack are spending here.

          Still, as I always say, it keeps them off the street and away from annoying anyone else which is always a bonus 🙂

      • mick

        well maybe the celtic community should chip in for a legal to make it ilegal for his name to be released as we all know yous want to give him threats yous are bams yous run all the time and only stand when its 3 or 4 on to 100 cowards

      • cam

        Is not the law that you get to meet your accuser,,,or does that not apply to cowards/sweetie wifes/liars?

    • ecojon


      What’s your view?

  26. Adam

    Another question and something that always troubled me back in the days of posting on RTC. By way of a thumbs poll, for those who constantly moan about tax avoidance with Rangers, are you moaning juxt because it is Rangers (THUMBS UP) or are you moaning because you think anyone who avoids tax is morally wrong and should be punished/hung out to dry. (THUMBS DOWN)

    • Andy


      Do you not realise its okay for Lennon to dodge taxes…

      • ecojon


        If you have any evidence then report him to HMRC. It would appear that the difference between you and I is that I don’t care which football team anyone proven to be a tax dodger belongs to.

        If they are guilty then they should suffer the legal consequences.

    • Mike

      Hi Adam
      never read RTC but I am in a dilemma over this whole thing – on the one hand I think that limiting your taxation legally to the smallest amount is not OK, but acceptable, however limiting your taxation so that multi-millions of pounds are withheld is another matter.

      I’m in a quandary and the only way out I can see is that I hope I wouldn’t do it – either a Jimmy Carr or a Rangers. I hope I have enough regard for the rule of law and the principle of taxation that I would pay my taxes if ever I was lucky enough to earn enough to enable me to employ advisors capable of showing me the way of least taxation.

      Unfortunately, most businesses are there to make a profit and their advisors will tell them how best to do that. The issue lies with the decision made upon haring that advice.

      I never thought Rangers were trying to cheat the taxman, only to use the rules to their best advantage, but I did think they were trying to evade the SFA / SPL rules by using what are now decided to be loans to pay wages.

      So thumbs up or thumbs down, I honestly have to say I’m thumbs level! 🙂

      • ecojon

        @ Adam

        Considering how many posters ‘rig’ TDs and TUs I can’t see how any such poll would have the slightest validity. It actually opens the way for people unable to formulate a reasoned argument or take part in debate actually skew a result for their own secret agenda as they need never speak or even use their moniker.

    • ecojon

      @ Adam

      Considering how many posters ‘cheat’ on TDs and TUs I can’t see how any such poll would have the slightest validity. It actually opens the way for people unable to formulate a reasoned argument or take part in debate actually skew a result for their own secret agenda as they need never speak or even use their moniker.

  27. mick

    as always ave saved the best till last there gone deid and buried adios

  28. tom16gold90

    The current discussions regarding the FTT decision are becoming increasingly tedious. The FTT decision has been made. It may be appealed but until then we are where we are. What’s the point in speculating (actually, this should be “hoping”) that HMRC will OR will not l lodge an appeal. Only HMRC can decide. Paul Simon sung the lines:- “ A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest”. That says it all for me.

    I would hope that the moderators will (can?) call a halt to this particular thread. Please tell me this is not wishful thinking.

    What will be interesting is the forthcoming share flotation. Let’s wait for that and start a thread which has merit rather than these pathetic attempts at point scoring.

    • Mike

      Hear hear Tom,

      much too much point scoring rather than point making going on.

      I don’t mind the thread carrying on, but there is not much real discourse on the original topic of the result of the FTTT. Ecojon has made some very good comments on the source data, but as always has been sidetracked by attacks by Rangers fans (harsh but fair I think Eco).

      Pathetic is the right word for some of the nonsense being posted now (I’m looking at you mick and Andy (1 or 2)).

  29. Andy

    Enjoy what well implemented ebt scheme can buy you…

  30. portpower

    Looks like HMRC will have to draw up a new template. Only fools don`t
    learn by their mistakes. Time to buy a new pair of shoes. Sell the shoes
    and keep the box for all receipts?

  31. Andy


    In the spirit of posting videos… and eco have some cheek labelling Rangers fans after this!!!……is this why your so upset about ebts…

  32. ecojon

    I think that many fell into the trap of wanting the FTT to find in a certain way, for various reasons, and coming to believe that their objective would be achieved.

    However they, which includes Rangers fans, also fell into the trap of seeing this as having simply a Rangers agenda. The truth of course is that it is a much wider issue to HMRC and though the law has been radically changed on EBTs the ones put in place, prior to the legal changes, are still in existance as are the Trust Funds.

    So HMRC will continue this fight. The decision they have to make is whether to do so by appealing the BTC decision or just extracting what is useful from it to use in a fresh action not involving Rangers.

    HMRC will make their decision purely on how best to achieve their end-game re EBTs and other instruments designed for the purpose of aggressive tax avoidance and worse. There is nothing personal re Rangers as such although I have no doubt erses were kicked particularly over the way that CW appeared to be able to rack-up the Revenue debts that he did in such a short period.

    I trust that all football supporters will actually applaud the HMRC in attempting to ensure that all tax loopholes should be closed whenever and wherever possible so that companies and individuals pay the tax which is due and don’t attempt to hide or destroy the paperwork that would determine the amount due.

    At the end of the day public services require income from taxation, particularly in times of recession, to assist the more vulnerable in our society and all decent people with even the slightest smidgeon of honesty, fair-play and morality will, I feel sure, be able to support that position.

    • Adam

      So on the basis of your last paragraph, if it was found that around 25 players, coaches, managers and directors of Celtic past and present were potentially using a HMTC loophole to deprive income from public services then you would be happy to denounce these people and blog constantly in a thirst to have them investigated by HMRC ?

      • Surely you don’t mean ……….

        NEIL Lennon is being chased for legal costs after losing more than £100,000 in a tax scheme and failing to get his cash back.

        Experts say the Celtic manager and his fellow investors could face a bill of up to £20million after a judge threw out their lawsuit.

        And the group going after the money include lawyers Collyer Bristow, who advised Craig Whyte on his
        disastrous takeover of Rangers.

        Lennon put £200,000 into two investment schemes in 2003, when he was earning £30,000 a week at Celtic.

        He was told they would save him almost £500,000 in income tax.

    • Andy


      It is the job of government to introduce laws on taxation, the job of HMRC is to collect all tax legally due to them, not to gamble with tax payers money by chasing money that is not legally due to them!!

      Far from being applauded they have cost the taxpayers tens of millions of pounds at a time where every penny counts through their recklessness!!!

      I do agree that such tax schemes should be closed, but that is the job of government to sort out. A massive simplification of tax in this country is required, and maybe then HMRC will actually know what their meant to be doing!!

      Morality is at a personal level, companies do not have morals, individuals running them and working for them are those that decide the fate of morality in respect of tax, and I have not met one person that has said they would rather pay more tax than keep the money in their pocket….Would you? Would I?….its very easy to sit here and judge others, but I wonder would we look after ourselves and our families first given the choice even at a lower level if you took home 50k a year and someone said I can legally save you tax and you will take home 60k, how many people would actually say no please have the extra 10k tax…..

      Perhaps, that was why Mr Lennon earning £30k a week, which was clearly not enough, chose to try and save himself £500k of tax!!

      • Adam

        Any brave bloggers willing to have a look at all these LLP’s and Film companies to find out what each of the companies do ?

        • Andy


          Perhaps I could start a blog call myself MR BLUE and make up a story about what these companies do, get an ‘award’ for my lies and then disappear off the face of the earth….

          • ecojon

            @ Andy

            Why don’t you – you could write the factual account of Rangers. Let’s see if your investigative skills are up to it.

            Btw have you found the answers to the questions I asked about the 22+ million shares or who actually own Rangers. If you don’t know the answers then maybe your book could be a best-seller at Ibrox as no one there seems to want to know that either – still little changes.

        • ecojon

          @ Adam

          Why don’y you do it? You sound as thugh you have the motivation to do so.

      • JohnBhoy

        Hi Andy. I do not pretend to be a goody two-shoes but every year I honestly declare to the taxman what I have earned and I do not seek ways to avoid what I owe. I call up the tax office, seek advice on completing their forms, thank them for their patience, and send off my cheque as requested. I imagine that my behaviour is unexceptional and that others do as I do or, alternatively, pay dutifully through PAYE.

        It is wholly unacceptable for rich people to desperately seek devious schemes to pay less tax, relatively speaking, than you or me. In the case of Rangers, we are dealing with people whose families are not in desperate need; we are talking about millionaires. Citing Neil Lennon is beside the point – his actions do not negate the immorality of Murray’s scheme. People who are paid these large sums, whatever their colour or creed or club, should pay what they owe, like the rest of us.

        This is not about ‘paying more tax’ than you should, but paying what you owe in relation to what you earn. Justifying the actions of these millionaires is a hard hill to climb, the first stage of which normally involves removing that wearisome hurdle called morality. As soon as that happens, everything is defensible. Even Jabba’s succulent lamb.

  33. Maggie

    @cam,Andy Alex@kk etc
    Any thoughts/comments on the Marco Negri interview
    posted by mick ?

    • The last thing anyone would have is thoughts about anything the resident mindbender posts.

    • Adam

      Maggie, the guy just posts rubbish all day long. By the looks of the front covers of some of the videos, i would rather not subject my home to that, thanks.

    • Andy


      The Celtic way….deflect and hide….I didnt see the interview, if you would oblige me by reposting I will oblige you with my comments…And perhaps you can give your views on Celtics players and officials widescale tax avoidance culture?

      • Maggie

        Ah! The old ad hominem approach.

        mick’s post is halfway up the page,taken from
        an Italian magazine,no link posted,but
        you’ll find it easily.

        Just thought I’d ask about it guys as you all seem to answer
        everything else that mick posts.

        I would have been genuinely interested ( and I’m NOT
        being sarcastic here believe me ) to have your views
        on what Marco Negri said.
        I mean your HONEST views,not some point scoring

        Btw Andy if you didn’t read the post, then the
        “deflect and hide” comment is nonsensical.
        I’m quite happy for you and all Rangers’ supporters to
        have their “moment” now, as God knows you’ve had
        enough bad news to cope with recently,but I won’t
        be engaging in any futile point scoring,and you’ll
        probably not hear from me again,as anything I say
        will just be repeating what others have said before,
        which you took no cognisance of,so why waste my

        • Adam

          “Just thought I’d ask about it guys as you all seem to answer
          everything else that mick posts.”

          That is simply an outlandish lie.

          • Maggie

            Still didn’t manage to find the article then Andy?

            • Adam

              I thought it was a video interview, and my name is Adam, not Andy.

              Im assuming though if its Marco Negri, then it will be the one where having fell out with the club, he slated the atmosphere in the dressing room, the drinking culture and the fact that he was never made welcome because of his religion.

              I certainly wont deny there was a drinking culture at the club back in the day, but for all the drinking they did, when they stepped across the line onto the football park, they produced the goods. As a football fan, i care less about whether my centre forward has a whisky before the match if that in turn means he scores a hat-trick in a 3-0 win every week.

              In relation to the religion thing, only a fool would deny that their was a religious backdrop to the club(im excluding the fans from this) for a long long period. David Murray killed that(again excluding the fans) and before, during and after Negris time, we have had Catholic players, captains and managers. Indeed some of the Catholic players of his era are deemed and revered as Rangers Legends. If there was banter flying about the dressing room about religion in 1997 when Negri was here, then im sure it was no worse/better than the banter that Tommy Gemmell used to receive back in the day.

    • cam

      None the guy is a tosser!

  34. mick

    is it not in your mind set to disguse negatives eeeee aaaaaa

  35. charliedon

    There has been a mass attack from certain quarters on HMRC for “wasting” public money chasing tax not actually due to them. This is patent nonsense. HMRC obviously believed the tax was due, and probably still do, so they were perfectly within their rights to make an attempt to recover it. The fact that they lost SOME of the case on a split decision is unfortunate for them but they had every right to try. Too many wealthy people in this country are getting away with questionable tax “reduction” schemes and we should all be pleased HMRC are going to fight the corner of ordinary working folk.
    There has been “whataboutery” bandied about in respect of other individuals using tax schemes but the Rangers one was on a grand scale over a considerable period involving many people.
    There is also the emerging evidence that Rangers, or their parent company, did not cooperate with the investigation and held it up considerably, so in these circumstances does anyone actually think HMRC should just have abandoned the case?
    Don’t be ridiculous.

    • Adam

      I dont have any issues with the original investigation. Nor the outcome. I would just like for some peoples moral compasses to face all points of the compass now instead of North, North, North, North, North all the time.

      • ecojon

        @ Adam

        I’m quite sure you will provide the balance necessary to ensure the compass is boxed. Of course it’s up to people whether they have the sightest interest in what you say or even read it let alone respond.

        That, my friend, is what freedom of choice is all about. I am always suspicious of people who want to dictate to other people what their moral compass ought to be because IMHO a sound moral compass should never be based on the views or influence of just one person.

        It should be based on a wide fabric of experience stretching from family and childhood to schooling and work and with a million other experiences along the way that you learn especially through forming relationships and interaction with other people and eve creatures. And if there is no love and compassion in that moral compass it will spin like a top.

        I would rather have someone with a fixed moral compass because even if their True North is my True South then I at least know that that person has reached their belief through a set of experiences and values which help create and underpin their morality.

        Sometimes it is hard to understand someone else’s morality but one thng for sure is that when a person has none then it’s as obvious as the nose on their face and IMHO they are best avoided as they really are a destructive black hole and lack any direction to escape its destructiveness.

  36. doofdoofdoof

    I wont deny that the tribunals findings were a disappointment to my biased mind. As a mere PAYE serf I also wont deny that high net worth individuals seeking to minimise their tax outlay is unpleasant whoever they may be (Lennon included). It is however worth pointing out that the film scam was probably not sold as such but more likely as an investment opportunity that was essentially a win-win scenario so those putting their money in were probably not all at it. There’s an interesting blog about it on Adam Curtis BBC page if you can be bothered digging for it that explains it in more detail.

    Looking at the bigger picture however the biggest disappointment was not that RFC failed to be disgraced publicly. RFC died and the tribute act are a shadow of their former selves and it would seem are not yet on a firm financial footing so i’ve had ample jollies so far and expect to enjoy some more for years to come. The thing about this outcome that rankles is that Murray seems to be getting away with it. He to me is emblematic of the Thatcher era . A spiv who built his business on others money. Borrowing vast sums to accumulate wealth while rarely risking his own. As I got into the details of the tax case as described on various blogs it felt like it might be the first domino in a chain, leading on to HBOS and the rash lending that was afforded to Murray on a nod . I had some hopes that this would be akin to the process in The Wire where small (relatively) sums led to larger ones and yet sharper practices. The adage “Follow the money” seemed appropriate. How much is the taxpayer into for Murray’s bank debts post bailout? Someone with the details to hand can help out but is it not hundreds of millions? But as afficionados of that particular show might note, once the investigators got above a certain level they were frustrated by the powerful and influential in their quest for justice and the trail went cold.

    Anyway for the time being I’ll have to wait.

    I don’t blame deadco fans for coming on to blogs like this to crow a bit. They’ve been getting it tight for months. Let them have their wee chuckle. But I would ask that they up their game. Could the AndyCams engage in the spirit of the blog and perhaps try to engage with others. If the points raised by others are worthy of challenge by all means fire in. I’m not really seeing you address specific points or argue effectively. It’s repetitive and dull.

  37. Clarkeng


    As I said earlier what debate there is on here nowadays is mostly tainted by vitriol and bigotry and only seems to be considered debate if putting Rangers down.
    Accept the facts.
    Rangers won the appeal to the FTT.
    If and it is a big if following the NAC report released yesterday HMRC appeal then they have to prove that the majority verdict was flawed in law.
    As you say appeals do regularly succeed but not without either prooof that information has been withheld from the court or new evidence coming to light.
    It is now time to investigate and chastise all activity which prejudiced the survival of the club and the debts to the creditors.
    As a recent poster on here said ” justice should be done”.
    And no I don’t know about the various share issues, Ahmad or Zeus but before I print and opinion I will try to find out.
    Perhaps others should do the same.


    It seems you dont like replies as you seem to leave out the opportunity on posts.
    So far I have not heard one salient point from you to refute anything I have posted.
    Are you disputing the Wikipedia information? With what?
    You say about Green’s eroneous claims.
    When McCann came here he made as many verbal feux pas as Green has and ultimately employed Peter McLean to speak in his stead.
    You don’t know whether the Green plan will be successful just as you did not know if McCann’s plan was going to work.
    McCann saved Celtic not by commiting his own funds to clear the debt but by guaranteeing the debt. He then used the hostility of the fans to the original share holders and board to obtain the shares at a very low price. Incidentally I do not criticise him for that as they had been falsifying accounts for years and evading payment of tax by declaring farcical crowds.
    Next he formed a new company Celtic PLC to hive off the assets of the old private company.
    He then raised money through a share issue which was and I believe is still the most successful in British Football and built the stadium. As the value of the assets of the Newco increased he then cashed in on this to the tune of £52m of which he gave back £1.5m in a donation to the club. How very generous.
    You say anyone could have done this but that is not true as McCann had control of the shares in the private limited company and only he could dictate the tems of the issue. He counted well and the Celtic fans bit hard.
    Was McCanns frugility in investing in the team on the park purely driven by the level of return he had clculated he could make?
    Take a reality check on the level of return.
    Wee Fergus £50m Celtic £0

    • ecojon

      @ clarkeng

      Who has control of the 22+ million Rangers shares and what is the name of the private company that they are in. Who has control of that company? Who are the shareholders who hold these shares?

      I’m amazed that you are so interested in Celtic history in view of the dangers which currently face a very weakened Rangers. I would have thought all of your energy would be aimed at your club.

      You can try and drag us back to the past if you wish but many will see it as a PR deflection to hide the problems closer to home and the worries that exist.

      Has the Ibrox mole been traced yet?

      Whether Rangers ‘won’ anything from the FTT decision is a matter of viewpoint – if I was a Rangers supporters I think I might be thinking a helluva lot had been lost which needn’t have happened if there hadn’t been the delay created through the lack of co-operation with the HMRC and indeed it seems that progress was only made after a police raid.

      Rangers destroyed itself through a variety of reasons it really is as simple as that but this must never be admitted to the ordinary Bears – But just like with Murray and Whyte they will arrive at the truth and realise they were shafted yet again.

      The PR line can only hold the dyke for a time – then it will give way and we’ll see what emerges.

    • @clarkeng

      “Take a reality check on the level of return.
      Wee Fergus £50m Celtic £0”

      Fergus McCann was totally up front about his intentions & made no secret of what he would do & when he would leave.

      The share issue, as well as giving the return on his investment paid for a brand new stadium, & engaged a great many fans in buying into their club.

      How much was raised by these fans? And how much did Murray’s 1st attempt?

      Now we have CG virtually begging fans to buy into the putative IPO, because the “big investors” & “20 pension funds” just aren’t there.

  38. mure and rae, rangers fans no doubt, bring on the appeal

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s