Quote:
Originally Posted by colin25
It seems to ignore the facts. Tax man pursued Rangers as they were blatantly using EBT wrongly and illegally.
To say otherwise is somewhat silly.
They had a set back when others disagree, though I suspect they will appeal that.
During that period, they were also withholding other tax revenues they should have been paying (NI and tax).
I worry when journalists promote tax evasion.
|
Traynor has been Murray's mouthpiece for years. Nobody who had read the tribunal findings could write such an article.
He makes no mention of the side contracts which are mentioned extensively in the report. He also seems to forget that Rangers were liquidated owing nearly £60 million that had nothing to with the "big tax case".
The appeal was partially successfull on a legal technicality. The interpretation by the majority is heavily criticised by the the only tax expert on the panel. There's mileage in this yet.
IMHO the decision does seem perverse having read the evidence. Perhaps the majority didn't read Peter Lawell's instructions properly or were promised exclusive use of the goat this month.
I'm having fun trying to work out who all the anonymised individuals are.
How anybody could perceive this judgement to be a victory is beyond me. You would have to be morally bankrupt to consider this to be any kind of vindication.
http://www.financeandtaxtribunals.go...50/TC02372.pdf