Tribunal saves Rangers from HMRC tax penalty

The former Rangers Football Club has defeated one of its fiercest competitors in recent history - HMRC, in a significant tax tribunal ruling.

The tribunal ruled that the now liquidated old Rangers company use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBT) was legal, meaning the £47.65m of payments to players and staff were loans - rather than earnings - and so not subject to tax as HMRC had argued.

The shadow of a potentially large tax bill from what became known as the 'big tax case', loomed large over the Glaswegian club, but the decision on the payments made between 2001 and 2010 will not affect the new Rangers club, Charles Green, chief executive of Rangers pointed out.

Green said: 'This case is historic and was a matter for The Rangers Football Club plc ('oldco') which is in liquidation. The Rangers Football Club Ltd is a corporate entity formed following the acquisition in June this year, by a consortium led by me, of the business and assets of Rangers, including the Club and its honours.

'As HMRC stated in June when they decided to vote against the proposed oldco CVA, no tax liabilities relating to 'oldco' would transfer across to the new company. HMRC have recently reaffirmed this position to the Club's tax advisers, Deloitte.

'The Rangers Football Club Ltd is a company free of external debt. The judgment serves to further undermine the validity of the SPL Commission into the use of EBTs. As we have said all along the SPL decision to press ahead with a commission was ill-timed and fundamentally misconceived.'

The three-person tribunal judged 2:1 in favour of Rangers and HMRC is subsequently considering whether to challenge the decision.

An HMRC spokesperson said: 'We are disappointed that we have lost this stage of the court process and we are considering an appeal. The decision was not unanimous and the diligence of HMRC investigators was acknowledged by the whole tribunal. HMRC is committed to tackling avoidance and it is right that we challenge the type of avoidance seen in this case.'

0
Be the first to vote

Rate this article

Related Articles
Subscribe