Rangers Statement

[TRVMP]

Are we going to have the next Rangers match thread moved here as well if Dr Zhivago has another attack of the vapors? Rangers chairman specifically mentions the rest of Scottish football and we can't even discuss Morton's mention in a Morton context in case someone faints at the very sight of the word.

[Toby]

Are we going to have the next Rangers match thread moved here as well if Dr Zhivago has another attack of the vapors? Rangers chairman specifically mentions the rest of Scottish football and we can't even discuss Morton's mention in a Morton context in case someone faints at the very sight of the word.

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

The Rangers situation is relevant to every club in the SPFL. A few years ago, this forum had a filter for the name "Hugh Scott" and after some debate it was agreed that he was an important part of the club's history, and should not have been filtered out in such a way, regardless of how hated he was. The same should apply to Rangers IMHO. Who cares if some drama queen that's got a long list of previous when it comes to getting offended about the slightest things doesn't like seeing the word "Rangers" at the top of the main board?

 

Appeasing some pompous arsehole that takes pleasure in having his feelings hurt shouldn't be the priority of those running the forum. Get it sorted.

[HamCam]

Does anyone realistically believe there is an appetite in Scottish football to remove titles from Rangers?

 

King is a blustering tax-avoiding buffoon pandering to his client base - in many respects not much different to Green or Whyte before him.

 

As for the taxman no reason Hector should not consider taking retrospective action against tax avoidance but like others I am sure around the time the EBT issue was originally under discussion various parties suggested no action would be taken against the individuals. Interesting though how this position is not necessarily consistent with the stance being taken in regard to footballers and their tax-efficient or is it no so efficient film 'investments'.

 

As for moving the Rangers never ending saga to the General Football forum I think for once Deego has got it right! Limited relevance to Morton and I suspect limited interest to most Morton fans.

[vikingTON]

I see that the forum's resident Lionel Hutz still haven't provided any evidence of his superior competence over that of the consensus of professional experts. Standard. 

[Ed de Ball]

I see that the forum's resident Lionel Hutz still haven't provided any evidence of his superior competence over that of the consensus of professional experts. Standard.

 

Cannot help it if you are to lazy to look at the references I pointed you to or if you did too lacking in intellect to understand them and my example. There was even an article in the Daily Record about a week ago which said the Rangers players will be targeted and hit for penalties though they might not get done for all the tax. The only thing that might prevent the latter will be if HMRC missed enquiry time limits on individuals which is possible given the period was 2001 to 2010. If you think Hector is going to keep away because the opposition make a few noises in the press you are mistaken. It's a bit like you saying we should not turn up against the Midden because Ian Murray says they will whip us.

 

Seems to me you have a burning wish that Rangers are left alone. Not another two scarf wearing fan are you?

[LinwoodTON]

Cannot help it if you are to lazy to look at the references I pointed you to or if you did too lacking in intellect to understand them and my example. There was even an article in the Daily Record about a week ago which said the Rangers players will be targeted and hit for penalties though they might not get done for all the tax. The only thing that might prevent the latter will be if HMRC missed enquiry time limits on individuals which is possible given the period was 2001 to 2010. If you think Hector is going to keep away because the opposition make a few noises in the press you are mistaken. It's a bit like you saying we should not turn up against the Midden because Ian Murray says they will whip us.

 

Seems to me you have a burning wish that Rangers are left alone. Not another two scarf wearing fan are you?

 

What happens if the players in question no longer reside in the UK?

[Ed de Ball]

What happens if the players in question no longer reside in the UK?

Technically they can still pursued but if they did not cooperate additional tax would only capable of being recovered if they are resident in an EU country as UK tax fiscal authorities have reciprocal arrangements in place with EU countries fiscal collections. There are less than 1000 people working in HMRC Counter Avoidance and more than 70,000 avoiders so to an extent how far foreign mercenaries are pursued depends on resources.

[cappiecat]

 It's a bit like you saying we should not turn up against the Midden because Ian Murray says they will whip us.

 

Seems to me you have a burning wish that Rangers are left alone. Not another two scarf wearing fan are you?

 

 

 

[vikingTON]

Cannot help it if you are to lazy to look at the references I pointed you to or if you did too lacking in intellect to understand them and my example. There was even an article in the Daily Record about a week ago which said the Rangers players will be targeted and hit for penalties though they might not get done for all the tax. The only thing that might prevent the latter will be if HMRC missed enquiry time limits on individuals which is possible given the period was 2001 to 2010. If you think Hector is going to keep away because the opposition make a few noises in the press you are mistaken. It's a bit like you saying we should not turn up against the Midden because Ian Murray says they will whip us.

 

Seems to me you have a burning wish that Rangers are left alone. Not another two scarf wearing fan are you?

 

What references? So far all you have stated, erm, your amateur-hour opinion and, even worse, a Daily Record article (uncited). Unfortunately for you Lionel, only simpletons are actually buying this sack of utter bulls*** over the consensus of experts, professionally qualified to make a credible judgement. You are not one of them, as demonstrated by your failure to provide a scrap of evidence showing your competence in this matter. Gutted for you.

 

And then we get to the last, absolutely desperate attempt at deflection here, in which you try to link an absolute certainty - that ex-players will not be pursued by HMRC - to a 'pro-Rangers' stance. In fact, as those professionally qualified experts would point out to cretins like yourself, the players won't be pursued because they'll simply point to the club as the guilty party rather themselves. Swing and a miss.

 

The bottom line is that you're a mouth-breathing no-mark, trying to pass off cherry-picked press speculation and your own wishful thinking as a credible analysis of HMRC's decision-making. It's not though - so sit down and leave the discussion to the adults.

[Ed de Ball]

What references? So far all you have stated, erm, your amateur-hour opinion and, even worse, a Daily Record article (uncited). Unfortunately for you Lionel, only simpletons are actually buying this sack of utter bulls*** over the consensus of experts, professionally qualified to make a credible judgement. You are not one of them, as demonstrated by your failure to provide a scrap of evidence showing your competence in this matter. Gutted for you.

 

And then we get to the last, absolutely desperate attempt at deflection here, in which you try to link an absolute certainty - that ex-players will not be pursued by HMRC - to a 'pro-Rangers' stance. In fact, as those professionally qualified experts would point out to cretins like yourself, the players won't be pursued because they'll simply point to the club as the guilty party rather themselves. Swing and a miss.

 

The bottom line is that you're a mouth-breathing no-mark, trying to pass off cherry-picked press speculation and your own wishful thinking as a credible analysis of HMRC's decision-making. It's not though - so sit down and leave the discussion to the adults.

Oh dear, The Grinch is having a hissy fit a la Mark Millar.

 

Not sure why you cannot see the distinction between HMRC policy, which is determined by The Treasury and HMRC and the opinions of the band of people whose views dropped Rangers and their players in the shit in the first place. That lot might well think that HMRC does not have have a cats chance of being successful but that won't stop HMRC taking action. If you had actually taken the trouble to look at the First Tier Tribunal Decision, particularly the decision of Dr Heidi Poon you would have inferred that there are already open proceedings against many of the individual players, they just have not been individually litigated yet. Daily a Record article was 4 November 2015 by the way.

 

Your stance on this proves, to me at least, what a no mark objectionable little runt of a sparring partner you really are. I won't be wasting my time engaging with you again so I suppose to that extent you have achieved something.

[capitanus]

Really don't like seeing the word 'Rangers' sitting at the top of a Morton forum.  Can it be moved?

 

Should be in General Football.. or better General Nonsense.

 

Or better still, back where the thread began on the General Morton Board.

[vikingTON]

Oh dear, The Grinch is having a hissy fit a la Mark Millar.

 

Not sure why you cannot see the distinction between HMRC policy, which is determined by The Treasury and HMRC and the opinions of the band of people whose views dropped Rangers and their players in the s*** in the first place. That lot might well think that HMRC does not have have a cats chance of being successful but that won't stop HMRC taking action. If you had actually taken the trouble to look at the First Tier Tribunal Decision, particularly the decision of Dr Heidi Poon you would have inferred that there are already open proceedings against many of the individual players, they just have not been individually litigated yet. Daily a Record article was 4 November 2015 by the way.

 

Your stance on this proves, to me at least, what a no mark objectionable little runt of a sparring partner you really are. I won't be wasting my time engaging with you again so I suppose to that extent you have achieved something.

That'll be your usual, tear-stained flounce confirmed then. Better luck next time.

[Ed de Ball]

Just one thing before I leave you. Would have thought that any normal person would have been incensed to learn that HMRC had decided not to pursue tax dodging fat cats. You think that Hector has decided not to go after Rangers players but yet profess not the slightest concern that may be a deriliction of duty. Contrast that with your usual vitriol hissed at Duffy and McInally. I can only conclude that you are a two scarfer on the Rangers side of the bigot divide. Little boy blue stop blowing your horn.

[TaunTon]

Just one thing before I leave you. Would have thought that any normal person would have been incensed to learn that HMRC had decided not to pursue tax dodging fat cats. You think that Hector has decided not to go after Rangers players but yet profess not the slightest concern that may be a deriliction of duty. Contrast that with your usual vitriol hissed at Duffy and McInally. I can only conclude that you are a two scarfer on the Rangers side of the bigot divide. Little boy blue stop blowing your horn.

 

Nothing wrong with your basic point here regarding non pursuit but the last sentences are really juvenile and say more about you than VT.

[TRVMP]

I've heard Bob Malcolm called a fat bastard but not a fat cat.

[vikingTON]

Just one thing before I leave you. Would have thought that any normal person would have been incensed to learn that HMRC had decided not to pursue tax dodging fat cats. You think that Hector has decided not to go after Rangers players but yet profess not the slightest concern that may be a deriliction of duty. Contrast that with your usual vitriol hissed at Duffy and McInally. I can only conclude that you are a two scarfer on the Rangers side of the bigot divide. Little boy blue stop blowing your horn.

Rangers players are almost certainly not responsible - or at least cannot be proven to be responsible - for the illegal tax dealings of their employer. Much in the same way that if Tesco tried to dodge payroll taxes, the checkout wifey wouldn't be subject to HMRC dragging her through the courts for it. A fairly straightforward concept, that, as all the experts far, far more qualified to comment than an amateur, Lionel Hutz-esque clown like yourself have confirmed, makes HMRC's pursuit of them a non-starter.

 

As I deal solely in facts I couldn't give a toss whether they're pursued or not - they won't be, though. Good to see that your exercise in utter fail has further pushed you over towards a seethe-induced coronary though.

[Ed de Ball]

Rangers players are almost certainly not responsible - or at least cannot be proven to be responsible - for the illegal tax arrangement.

 

Oh really? I assume you are confident that none of them signed side agreements and letters of wishes,entered into arrangements with sub trusts and made contributions to a fighting fund to finance legal fees in the event of HMRC challenge, all of which would evidence a collusive arrangement.

[vikingTON]

The overwhelming consensus of professionally qualified opinion not so much disagrees with, but simply disregards these fantasy island ramblings from a Walter Mitty figure like yourself champ.

 

Gutted for you.

[Ed de Ball]

The overwhelming consensus of professionally qualified opinion not so much disagrees with, but simply disregards these fantasy island ramblings from a Walter Mitty figure like yourself champ.

 

Enough, stop digging on this one now. Not looking forward to your future expositions when you tell us why, according to more of your favourite experts, you think the earth is flat and the moon is made of green cheese.

[EanieMeany]

As much of a delight as this conversation has been, you don't really have a leg to stand on until you answer vT's perfectly reasonable question regarding this statement:

"I think I am much better placed than you will ever know buddy boy to know what HMRC's intentions are likely to be."

 

Why? If you have just said "I work as a a tax lawyer, my qualifications are x, y and z" or whatever, it'd have saved a lot of hassle; the fact that you didn't kinda suggests that you were talking pish and just trying to score cheap points with a poster you claim not to be bothered about.