FTT Verdict, Trust payments construed as earnings


An anonymised version of the First Tier Tribunal verdict was published by the Finance and Trbunals service today.  The 145 page document will take some reading but it concluded:

“the trust payments are to be construed as ‘emoluments’ for the purposes of the tax legislation”

For those without a dictionary to hand,… Emoluments: Synonyms earnings, pay, recompense.

I for one am absolutely shocked that Sir David’s confidence was misplaced on this matter.

Enjoy the game!

“having ascertained the real nature of the transaction, you cannot … disguise it by using camouflaged clothing”


‘it is wrong and an unnecessary self-limitation’ not to give regard to ‘the manifested intentions of the parties’ in the face of documents or transactions that are not ‘shams’

Orders are now open for the very first CQN Annual, get it here!

[calameo code=0003901717b03ef5e64cb lang=en page=100 hidelinks=1 width=100% height=500]
Click Here for Comments >

About Author

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6

  1. Murray to sue ala lord McAlpine



    Jane Lewis ‏@JaneLewisSport


    More from MIH – “We have instructed our lawyers to retrospectively review online and printed publications relating…


    Expand Reply Retweet Favorite



    Jane Lewis ‏@JaneLewisSport


    ….to the case to identify whether legal redress is either appropriate or necessary.”


    Expand Reply Retweet Favorite

  2. From page 58;



    “Accordingly, the assessments made fall to be reduced substantially. 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. In these circumstances we expect that it is sufficient that we allow the Appeal in principle. Parties can no doubt settle the


    sums due for the limited number of cases mentioned without further reference to the Tribunal.”

  3. Not if Ally gets there names.



    And for all you out there moaning about how long this took if it came out last October the huns could have been saved.



    God works in mysterious ways



    : > )






    Lennon n Mc….Mjallby


    16:44 on


    20 November, 2012


    Is it possible the ex hun players get together to raise an action against former hun directors?

  4. bournesouprecipe



    Quite funny, when you could argue that it was all really Allez LeCoists fault.



    >Ha ha ha



    Exactement mon ami

  5. PF



    It’s hilarious, – if they’d not lost out on the CL money they might not have died.



    The focus is now on the next panel’s decision on whether the side letters had to be declared


    to the SFA.

  6. GlassTwoThirdsFull on





    16:25 on 20 November, 2012



    makes no difference with the SFA/SPL issue the individual players did not have all their earnings registered with the football authorities.


    They have not been properly registered all games reversed to a 3-0 result and withdraw titles.




    In theory you are spot on. The reality is that there will be a HUGE push by the MSM to say that this verdict means the players were not registered improperly. The SPL have clearly been waiting for this verdict before they give their one.

  7. celticrollercoaster loves Wee Oscar, our Celtic Warrior on

    Go on Celtic make the 20th November, the Feast of Lisbon







  8. Right, reading between the lines;



    Certain peeps were given “loans” for which no Tax or NI was paid.



    The “Loans” were made by an independently set up?



    The decision appears to be that these “loans” have to repaid….as is the norm with “loans”



    Q1 – As OldCo are deid……..very little money is available to the Creditors………is this correct?



    Q2 – The “Loanee” has to repay the loan / loans made……is this correct?



    Q3 – The “Loanee” has also to pay Tax & NI aginst the sum of the loans made……as if it had been earnings…..is this correct?



    Q4 – Is interest recovered from when the loan / loans had been made?



    Q5 – Is Mr HMRC not better of financially with this decision….



    Sure to be a lot of squeeky bums about the now.



    Paddy T……who always pays the taxman

  9. Tooting Tim


    I see your point, but it wouldn’t take Inspector Gadget to figure out WHY the Trust paid the money to the players.


    If they were paid these monies at the same time they were employed at the dead club, then the SPL have every right to conclude that these monies were part of their wage.




  10. Can anyone see the SPL/SFA going after them for players having side letters now (if they have won)??



    Me thinks it’s all finished now.

  11. Lennon n Mc....Mjallby on

    I wonder if ex players will be keen on distinguishing between club and company when their getting invoices through the door?

  12. Canny believe this ! For me it’s a victory for Minty. Totally gutted . This will be viewed as complete vindication for the Orcs.



    Ps don’t think for a second that the independent tribunal will vote against them on dual contracts!!!!!!



    Absolutely unreal ….. These people will now claim all their bleating about being wronged is proved right



    How can we have all been so wrong?

  13. So Mr Blue bent up everyone around him including Mr Orange at the friendly local financial service and all the way up to Mr Tartan at the friendly local and national decision makers thus Mr Tartans speech about the quality cloth of the Scottish Nation…



    How damaging will this be to Mr Tartans thrust towards a stand alone nation should the whole truth and nothing but the truth come out?



    Very I would imagine, hence the multi-coloured rainbow conglomerate of crooks and associated vagabonds and hillbillys…



    Ruth is stranger than Richard they say…

  14. Oho!


    Methinks this is all the way of the future : emoluments as loans (never to be repaid), this will be the stock answer for the taxman et al should they ever come calling. Nice precedent set by the fine and upstanding (though apparently prematurely deceased; how funny is that?) rankers. The gates of hell just opened for HM Treasury.


    : > )

  15. PaddyTurner


    Q2. I don’t think they need to pay back the loan if they pay the tax and NI on it.




  16. gebhoy is the taxmans tick tocking clock, tick...tock on

    Something very strange going on here, the parties will have had this document for 2 weeks, i am absolutely amazed that this result was not leaked by Mintys poodles, amazed!



    What does this actually mean, from what i have read and can deduce, it looks like the deed club one by 2-1 that EBT’s were loans and not tax liability for the club. Players were paid by loans that are liable for tax and NI which were not declared to HMRC or the footballing authorities.



    Dont wont to even begin to think of the shenanigans that have went on in the corridors of the SNP government and judges chambers…..



    It seems a once great institution died for nothing, be interesting to see where this places the SPHell inquiry, does it let them off the hook, is there a smoking gun within those 145 odd pages proving duel and unregistered contracts…



    Well done Craigy Whyte, Craigy Craigy Whyte!




  17. Phyllis Dietrichson on

    Paul67 – the Emoluments quote is from the minority verdict – she was outvoted by the other two.

  18. Contrary to some statements, EBT’s are not illegal in the UK and can still be recommended should you have an appropriate client.



    If the payments are deemed to be loans then how can it be argued that players were “paid” illegally. If there was evidence of side contracts saying repayment was not necessary, then this would have been considered as proof that these were NOT loans, surely?



    The quotes people are using to back up the argument that there is still an issue, may well be from the dissenting opinion, which is the trap Paul fell into.

  19. Gerry


    Why would the SPL not go after them?


    The EBT’s and the side letters were always two separate issues.


    Yes, deadco win on the tax issue, but the lose with the side letters issue.




  20. And I can just picture the MSM print now “Rangers really have suffered enough – reinstate them to the top tier of the new league set up next season”.



    And I don’t think anyone in Scottish football is going to have the balls to find against the old club with respect to titles won by cheating.



    Some poster goes on about the Masonic Cabal – maybe they’re not too far off the mark.



    Anyway F em, we’ve got the last 16 to reach.



    C’mon the Hoops.

  21. BBC – Former Rangers Football Club wins Big Tax Case appeal.



    Rangers disputed the bill and a First Tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) has ruled the payments were loans that can be repaid.



    The decision was welcomed by Murray International Holdings, who were majority shareholders of the old club until Craig Whyte’s takeover in May 2011.



    However, HMRC said it was considering an appeal.

  22. Devil’s advocate question. If the payments from the EBT are deemed to have been loans, notwithstanding the issues around repayment of said loans, how can the football authorities consider these to have been payment for playing football? Therefore does the question about illegal registration not become moot? ( Please note I am only going by online comments as I dont have access to the ruling)

  23. Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo on




    This decision if not successfully appealed is a nightmare for HMRC and especially George Osbourne hope of increasing revenue. Easier to go after UK registered companies than thousands of individuals scattered around the world.



    It is a big blow for the government and would appear to me that the majority of judges in this case ignored the legislation or effectively anulled the emergency legislation that Osbourne brought in in his emergency budget ..the summer before last.




  24. Party is over Rangers have won.



    No chance of title stripping now.



    So much for RangersTaxCase et al…………




  25. Bob loblaw …. That’s my take on it , this is a complete victory for them . No way will they be done for dual contracts!!!



    We are in for a tough time from gloating orcs !!!!

  26. Greenwells Glory on

    Hi Ghuys, Salve salve;-


    Most strange but absolutely hilarious, it seems they could have been saved. It really is so funny. Like others on here, I feel there will be no appetite within the SPL and the SFA to pursue the dual contracts issue so I do not expect so see titles stripped or any other punishments meeted out. How would it have gone if they were still up and running with their dept to MIH and MIH’s dept to the bank, I can see a lot of work ahead for My Learned friends, there could be a lot more hilarity yet to come.




    Dies irae

  27. traditionalist88 on

    ‘The Evidence


    15. The Respondents have categorised the payments through the trust arrangements


    into five areas in accordance with the situations that gave rise to them: (i) bonus


    payments to ordinary employees; (ii) salary increase to ordinary employees;


    (iii) bonus payments to footballers; (iv) payments to footballers and managers under


    side-letters; (v) termination payments further to side-letters’



    Page 64 CSC

  28. Greenwells Glory on

    Salve salve;-


    Tonight Bhoys, courage and belief. This team have exceeded all my expectations and win lose or draw thet can be proud of themselves.




    Post proelia praemia

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6