But they were putting the boot in AFTER you'd entered administration due to the activities of Craig Whyte.
In the years preceding admin then liquidation the Rangers fans revelled in calling themselves the "Establishment Club" and went on about "Balance Book Trophies" while the debt mounted up. People putting the boot in after fans acted like the club was impervious to punishment was to be expected.
Fair enough But, under no circumstances would I have offered to settle if I was sure I was on this right side of the law. I honestley don't think Hector is done with you yet (no point scoring piss) I think we may still see Dodgy Dave in the dock.
Plenty of ****s try to settle with the tax man instead of going to court It's no a ****ing admission of guilt you cretins. Some of you worry me sometimes, honestly.
Not all of us are part-time-tramps who deal with money issues in the courts regularly though. You've got to take this into consideration.
Any other site and I'd counter that with: Then don't talk about things you know nothing about. But lets be realistic. Asking some of you to shut the **** up is a fools errand. By the way, where the **** is mindy and rebelbhoy? why are they not on this thread telling everyone that the court judgement actually goes into details on page 43 that proves we are guilty?
Not once have I mentioned EBT's. Rangers Football Club died because they had a mountain of debt and also attracted the attention of HMRC. I was talking about the spastics among you who have created a fantasy version of the death of Rangers whereby it was a conspiracy between the media, the SFA and the "Taig" teams. You continue to ignore it and get involved with your fellow revisionists though
Trying to settle with the tax man to the tune of £10m even though you were positive you had done nothing wrong? Yeah, right Why were the side letters hidden and the investigation constantly hindered then? Pull yer head oot yer arse.
The bottom line is Rangers owed the Taxman £21m when they went (or were placed into) Administration. That is beyond dispute. They were placed into admin by Craig Whyte who hoped to get a CVA so there would be no investigation into the activites of him and his predecessor, HMRC wanted to look into the finances, and as they were owed the most, and because they had the power, they vetoed the CVA. Does it matter anymore? Not really.
You started talking to me spazmo. My first post was aimed at mainly ST and BAD. If you wanted abuse though all you had to do was ask, ya know? I think you should figure out the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion before I dare pull my head out of my arse. It's cosy up there the now.
"HMRC opened enquiry into the use of the MGRT in January 2004. The progress of the enquiry was protracted and chequered due to key documents being withheld or actively concealed."
It's just that quoting HMRC to prove HMRC right could be a bit unbalanced, don't you think? Or do you think that HMRC is one of these institutions (like the polis) that is entirely fool proof? Never get anything wrong, never make any mistakes. Just unequivocally reliable.
