The Diary prides itself on telling the truth. Except for the bits we make up. Which, some would argue, is most of it.

The mainstream media in Scotland has a much simpler approach. It just makes things up. Thats harmless enough, because most people only buy the papers these days out of habit, and hardly anyone takes them seriously. And they’re always handy if you run out of the softer substitute in the smallest room in the house.

This week has seen the start of the annual competition between hacks to see who can come up with the biggest pile of shite that readers will believe, and it appears theres quite a lot of competition even at this early stage.

Lets go back to yesterday, and Gavin Berry, a relative newcomer to the world of fiction.and his story about Fraser Forster being the subject of a bid from Benfica.

Its apparently bollocks.

You see, when a hack gets a tittle of information, what he should do is check it, question it , and maybe even get a statement from those concerned. This is known as “getting the fucking basics right “, in much the same way as when you learn to drive, the instructor will tell you to make sure all the doors are shut before driving off.

Berry didn’t check the doors, but Portuguese newspaper O Jogo did. And Sports Witness tells us a few details the Record left out.

The newspaper often get leaks from Benfica and it can be assumed they’ve spoken to the club about this and would know better than the Scottish media about what Benfica’s plans are. The Daily Record were wrong to say money is no object for Benfica, money is ALWAYS an object for Benfica!

Portuguese clubs face an ongoing battle with finances and often don’t get the full fees they receive for players because there are third party owners involved.

O Jogo say Benfica wouldn’t reach ‘such high numbers’ as £6m/€7.4m for the goalkeeper and therefore won’t be launching a move for him unless things change. Benfica have watched Forster and there has been interest but they won’t go to the figures mentioned and have not indicated to anyone they’ll do so. 

So, bearing in mind the basics, whats Gav saying today ?

SOUTHAMPTON boss Ronald Koeman is set to battle it out with Benfica for Celtic goalkeeper Fraser Forster by making an £8million bid.

Record Sport revealed yesterday how the Portuguese champions are keen on the giant Hoops No.1 as a replacement for Atletico Madrid-bound Jan Oblak. 

Except we’ve already established, via a Portuguese newspaper, that they aren’t.

But Dutch legend Koeman wants Forster at St Mary’s as part of his £70m rebuilding job at the English Premier League side. 

This same Southampton who were knee deep in debt and had to sell players to pay it off ?

The former Feyenoord boss, who replaced Mauricio Pochettino this summer, has funds available following the big-money sales of England trio Rickie Lambert, Adam Lallana and Luke Shaw.

This is where the quote from the Dutch fellow should be. something along the lines of ” We have money to spend and Forster is on our list of targets. ” Instead, we get one of those “connections ” that actually mean very little and only occurred to the writer as he was , er, writing the story;

Koeman also hopes the appointment of Three Lions goalkeeping coach Dave Watson could help persuade Forster to move to the south-coast club.

Saints were also linked with Forster under Pochettino during regular spying trips north of the border which eventually saw them sign midfielder Victor Wanyama in a bumper deal.

Celtic central defender Virgil van Dijk is also on Koeman’s radar as a potential replacement for wantaway defender Dejan Lovren who has threatened to go on strike after the St Mary’s club rejected a £20m bid from Liverpool.

 And then the big news yesterday. Apparently Rangers, the club liquidated back in 2012, need not have been liquidated after all. It was all a big mistake.

 Or so you would believe if you were the sort of person who believes the guff that passes for reportage these days;

So, we’ll avoid that for a minute and look at what did actually has happened. Regular reader Doc posted this in the replies to yesterdays diary. So, in case you missed it, have a read of this;

RTC

Another chapter closes on rangers tax case as Lord Doherty finds that there is no income tax or national insurance to be paid on the outstanding EBT payments, with the exception of mcclelland, macmillan, murray and his son’s EBTs (in excess of £6.5m) which are being returned to first tier tribunal for a decision.

I will go through the case point by point further down but the crux of the matter is that it was found that the EBT loans were, in fact, genuine loans from a benefit in kind and not a wage.

It has been a long and complex process and could even be a record breaker for the amount of publicity a tax case has attracted and the amount of bullshit the MSM print about it. I’ll try to keep it simple as I go through it, like saying ‘wages’ instead of ‘enolument’, and maybe anyone reading this maybe awake at the end, we’ll see about that.

I’ll start from the start, I’ve always found it a good place to start from so, here goes. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth… well not that far back, I’ll start from the FTT decisions that the UTT was to consider. The UTT is not there to re-hear the original case but to decide if the FTT were correct in their decisions, so here they are:

A-rangers paid money into EBT as a ‘benefit in kind’ to benefit the player’s families which was then divided into sub-trusts for each player, the advantage being that players could get tax free loan payment, repayable from estate on death, negating inheritence tax (more on this later).

B-Participation in the EBT scheme was voluntary, players could have had the money paid as wages. Players partaking in the EBT scheme were given the set-up papers and loan applications at the same time (this means the loan applications were completed before the sub-trusts existed).

C- Equity administered the EBT/ sub-trusts until they questioned some of the loan applications then the administration was transferred to Trident

D-Trident had no formal process of approving loans, no income or credit checks were performed. The only things requested were ID and bills (though these must be taken to comply with anti money-laundering laws).

E-Trident acknowledged their responsibiity, and potential liability, to ensure the loans are repaid in full.

HOME TEAM – HMRC

As you know rangers became liable to pay tax on some of the EBTs and not on others so I’ll dispense with re-visiting the whole FTT and move onto the parts of appeal heard at UTT leaving out the 5 now outstanding sub-trusts and also those not under appeal.

1-HMRC claim the FTT misinterpreted precedent setting cases about the intentions of tax avoidance schemes and had been in error to do so.

2-That tax was due and the FTT was incorrect as they only looked at the loans seperately and not as part of the players entire renumeration package and that the FTT did not address this part of HMRC’s case.

3-That the FTT did only limited fact-finding on the control the players had over the money, that they basically had control over the loans, they requested the loans and they were paid with no solid structure or discretion in approving the loans. The FTT said “there was a degree or orchestration” with the players but did not eloborate and the FTT did not consider much of the evidence provided by HMRC.

4-That Equity then Trinity did not act as trustees but merely as a vehicle to get money from rangers to the players shown by the lack of discretion when approving loans.

5-That the some of the witnesses at the FTT on rangers behalf were not credible or reliable in giving evidence.

6-As rangers were appealing their tax bill, the onus should have been on rangers to show their tax matters were above board but at the FTT, incorrectly, the onus fell on HMRC to prove the scheme was unlawful.

7-rangers had breached SFA rules by operating the scheme

AWAY TEAM – rangers

rangers had their chance to counter HMRC’s position and did so:

1-The FTT correctly interptreted the relevant parts of the laws and cases

2-The FTT did not find any agreement between rangers and the players that the players could direct the money and that the loans were separate from wages as they must be repaid and not a sham.

3-The money was not at the disposal of the players as loans could have been refused and the FTT only needed little fact-finding as HMRC’s evidence was of little or no value and the FTT did not have to consider all evidence, only why the case went the way it did.

4-Equity and Trinity were legimate trustees as the trustees were changed when the risk of potential criticism from the plaers arose and Trinity showed it understood its duty to the players.

5-If there had been errors, they were honest misunderstandings.

6-The conduct of the FTT could not be appealed, only failure in findings and error in law

7-The SFA rules were nothing to do with the tax matter

REFEREE – Lord Doherty

The decisions took a while to get decided but the basics are:

1-The FTT correctly interptreted the relevant parts of the laws and cases

2-The FTT, in one citation, distinguished between the different transactions

3-The payments were loans as the players did not have a right to money.The FTT did not have to make findings on all evidence and the UTT is bound by the facts found of the FTT.

4-The FTT were entitled not to make any findings on whether the trustees were genuine but that Equity showed they were acting properly by refusing to sanction unsecured loans.

5-HMRC did not provide enough evidence to show witnesses were unreliable.

6-The FTT can’t be appealed on process and are free to conduct proceedings as they see fit as long as the result was a proper one.

7-The SFA rules were not essential to the case

THE RESULT

The MSM will have this as another glorious victory for ‘the people’ and that rangers downfall was due to HMRC and not conmen and spivs. Looking beyond the lamb stained bibs we need to remember that this case trundled on for years and rangers died due to rangers refusal to cooperate, concealment of documents, policy of dishonesty towards HMRC and above all, their refusal to pay the PAYE. While allsorts crawl from the woodwork and say how rangers are hard done by, HMRC cannot comment due to confidentiality so prepare for one sided debate and get the mint sauce ready.

So thats the end of this chapter and as usual there are a few questions left to be answered, the main one being will HMRC take it to extra time and appeal to the court of session? If they do there will be many more facets to this case eg the witness testimony was completely at odds with documents released by Charlotte Fakes, one side is clearly mistaken. The released documents also hold the ‘smoking gun’ which could turn the case upside down. The documents were removed very quickly by rangers and if HMRC use them may be issues around how the were sourced and aquired.

If HMRC don’t appeal then that leaves the door wide open for all clubs and companies who used EBTs in this way (including Celtic) to amend their previous tax returns and get ready for one hell of a tax rebate, we could well see the rich english teams get a lot richer.

Now its time for the Jerry Springer style final thought, if your still awake, in which i’ll deviate from PAYE and NI and look at inheritance tax. When the EBT scheme was started there were huge inheritance tax advantages, but not now. The Finance Act 2013 came into effect on 17/7/13 and one of it’s provisions restricts the ability to deduct liabilities from an estate when calculating inheritance tax, although this is one of the most complex areas of tax law, there may be a few shocks in store as even if HMRC lose the EBT case, they could still get their money, far more than a penny/pound from a liquidated company but full payments out of cold, dead hands.

To be continued…

With us so far ?

Now, as the press prepare that onslaught, remember this as well, from Tommy Tickle on Twitter

And just to round things off, theres these people, who everyone seems to have forgotten;

rangers-administration-full-list-of-creditors-1-2325870

So, I think we can conclude that it wasn’t only the big tax case, the one they actually offered to settle, that sent them under.

But that hasn’t stopped David Murray from crawling out from under his stone. And true to form, he’s blaming everyone else;

Sir David Murray’s verdict on

Rangers’ Big Tax Case decision:

There are no winners

Except whoever ended up with around £70 million of supporters money in their back pockets, presumably. 

FORMER Rangers owner Sir David Murray has released a statement in the wake of HMRC’s unsuccessful appeal over the use of Employee Benefit Trusts during his time in charge, welcoming the decision but also highlighting the damage done during the case.

The case which he thought he would lose, because he thought he was guilty. And remember, the decision yesterday is fully explained above.

Stating that there “are no winners” Murray argues “the much publicised existence of these proceedings over-shadowed Rangers Football Club for many years and tarnished the external perception of its value.”

A bit like he did, really.

He goes on to state that with the value of the club so diminished and Craig Whyte taking charge for £1, “Rangers Football Club would not have gone into administration or liquidation had the purchaser (Whyte) fulfilled its contractual obligations and responsibilities.

A big boy did it and ran away. Surely Murrays credibility and influence is now low enough for journalists to ask him some questions-serious questions, such as why would no-one buy the club , long before any of this tax didging became apparent ? And why the bank made him sell ? Because as I remember it, they wanted their money. Nothing to do with Hector.

“Similar to the resolution of the UTT appeal, we hope that that the relevant authorities conclude their investigations and commence proceedings at the earliest opportunity.”

Well, at least we agree on one thing. I hope they conclude their investigations and start proceedings as well. Oddly enough, Murray doesn’t say who he wants to see proceedings start against. I will. Him. 

The full statement, its worth reproducing in full because its laughable, is here

In response to the release of the judgement of the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal (“UTT”) on HMRC’s appeal against the original decision of the First Tier Tax Tribunal (“FTT”) on the operation of the Employee Benefit Trust (“EBT”), a spokesperson said: “We are satisfied that the UTT has now published its widely awaited decision and note the contents thereof. We are pleased with the judgement which again leaves negligible tax liability and overwhelmingly supports the views collectively and consistently held by our advisers, legal counsel and MIH itself.

“We will therefore review the detailed content of the decision with our legal counsel and advisers to ascertain what action, if any, is now required by MIH.

“The decision substantially reduces HMRC’s claim in the liquidation of the old Rangers Football Club.

Reduces, not removes. It doesn’t matter how much. They still didn’t have a pot to piss in.

“While we have been successful in both the FTT and UTT, there are, as we have stated previously, no victors. This has been an exceptionally long, difficult and expensive process involving not just the FTT and UTT but also several approaches to resolve the matter with senior HMRC officials on a commercially sensible basis for all parties which were rejected.

That was when he offered to pay £10m on a £24m bill plus interest and penalties. Which he now says he didn’t have to pay, which is why he, er, offered to pay it.

“MIH has, at all times, recognised that the tax tribunal proceedings stemmed from arrangements put in place during its ownership. They were introduced before legislative changes removed the tax efficiency of such arrangements from the end of 2010.

“However, it is obvious that the much publicised existence of these proceedings over-shadowed Rangers Football Club for many years and tarnished the external perception of its value. There can be little doubt that despite favourable legal opinion, potential acquirers were therefore dissuaded from pursuing their interest during a period in which we were marketing the sale of MIH’s shareholding.

And when added to a history of bigotry, discrimination, intimidation, violence and , yes, a failure to pay tax , something everyone seems to forget they have been found guilty of, its not hard to see why only asset strippers were interested. Still, at least they’ve done well out of it.

“The case has also stimulated extensive press and social media comment, discussion and speculation, a significant quantity of which has been ill informed. During proceedings, it would have been entirely inappropriate for us to highlight fundamental misunderstandings or contribute to this public debate.

 Which bit has been ” ill informed ” ? Seriously, was it the bit about not paying taxes, or national insurance ? Or about the existence of EBTs, which were used inappropriately to renumerate one of the de Boers and Tore Andre Flo ? 

Fundamental misunderstandings my arse. You were at it, you thought you had been caught, so you ran off. Now , with a little bit of spin from your old pals in the media, you might be able to go outside again without some staunch and loyal Rangers fan punching you on the nose. A Rangers fan who has just been fleeced of hundreds of pounds by a set of spivs , who have pretended that they were trying to take the club back to the top of football, when in fact all they did was buy a stadium, for next to nothing, dress some footballers up in blue and say it was still Rangers. 

And the press, as usual, ignored the facts and went along with the charade. 

“Notwithstanding all of this, it is abundantly clear that Rangers Football Club would not have gone into administration or liquidation had the purchaser fulfilled its contractual obligations and responsibilities.

Fairly obvious bit there, if the bills had been paid there would have been no liquidation. But the underlying blame is with Craig Whyte, who many thought was a patsy anyway….

Similar to the resolution of the UTT appeal, we hope that that the relevant authorities conclude their investigations and commence proceedings at the earliest opportunity.”

Yes, yes we do.

Sir David Murray

Mike McGill

9 July 2014

 As stated above, be prepared for a complete whitewash of Murray, and another attempt to re-write history. A history that was actually concluded back in 2012 when Rangers FC died.

 I just wish someone would tell them. The supporters deserve that. ( Well, most of them anyway. )

Someone at a major newspaper with a pair of balls. Someone who wants to establish what actually happened at Ibrox. And get it out into the public domain.

At least , in death, they can then be allowed the dignity and respect they never had in life.

 Which is where we came in, when we mentioned the newspapers…

 To move to Paul McStay and Tommy Boyd after talking about David Murray shows a complete lack of structure and planning in any article, so thats me a stick on for editor of the Daily Express.

 Boyd and McStay, two guys who fully earned legendary status while at Celtic , never played in the group stages of the Champions League. Boyd picked up an injury before our first venture, and never featured in the group games. But he did captain the team that stopped the ten, which he certainly feels more than makes up for it.

 Now, what has this guy

managed to do that this guy

hasn’t ?

 And I saw it with my own eyes just the other day…….