You, being a legal man, can appreciate the need to separate understandable prejudice against over-paid footballers from the legal principle of an employee receiving his or her rightful wages.
That is the point in my view so, to answer the question, yes ahead of the public purse since the public purse will not make good the unpaid wages. (we are not talking redundancy as far as I am aware where the government will fork out the statutory minimum).
In a normal situation, yes, I;d agree absolutely, however this is a situation whereby players have been envolved with blatent tax evasion, just look at what sol was getting in image rights, he knows exactly why he was paid like that and so do the other players, they all played their part in defrauding the tax man and should be punished accordingly.
[cite]Posted By: johnny73[/cite]I have no issue with the players getting what they were promised in wages though.
Ahead of the public purse?
You, being a legal man, can appreciate the need to separate understandable prejudice against over-paid footballers from the legal principle of an employee receiving his or her rightful wages.
That is the point in my view so, to answer the question, yes ahead of the public purse since the public purse will not make good the unpaid wages. (we are not talking redundancy as far as I am aware where the government will fork out the statutory minimum).
I assume the players wages are protected as they are footballing debts. Is this correct? If it is, then it is in the interest of every football club that this rule is followed (I'm also aware that this was not the main issue today).
You, being a legal man, can appreciate the need to separate understandable prejudice against over-paid footballers from the legal principle of an employee receiving his or her rightful wages.
That is the point in my view so, to answer the question, yes ahead of the public purse since the public purse will not make good the unpaid wages. (we are not talking redundancy as far as I am aware where the government will fork out the statutory minimum).
In a normal situation, yes, I;d agree absolutely, however this is a situation whereby players have been envolved with blatent tax evasion, just look at what sol was getting in image rights, he knows exactly why he was paid like that and so do the other players, they all played their part in defrauding the tax man and should be punished accordingly.
If individuals have been involved in tax evasion then surely HMRC should pursue those individuals rather than the football club?
Tax avoidance is legal and it maybe construed that tax avoidance is what has happened. We are not really in a position to know.
Pompey escape AGAIN !!!!!!! lucky sods, should have lost the court case and had more points docked.
Surely its not right that players, agents etc can get ALL of their money where as the taxpayer (HMRC) only get 20% of what they are legally owed, and over a 5 yr period.
wonder what would happen if I tried that scam - having comnpleted my tax return I tell the taxman that I can only pay him 20% of the actual tax due , and I'll pay in instalments over the next 5 yrs !!!!!!!!! Esentially what Pompey have done.
I can't believe HMRC lost this case, considering they were up against such a weak opponent and the case was so extreme. And considering how much they had to lose.
Who paid for Pompey's lawyers? Probably me, through reduced payment of debt to the taxpayer. Joy of joys. They'll probably be spending money on new players now.
whats now stopping clubs not paying the tax bill and using the moiney on wages or a new player etc............if they go into admin then the tax owed could be vastly reduced
One thing that astounded me (apart from the decision itself!), is that players' get a portion of their salaries as "image rights" on which they pay less tax. I'm not someone who bangs on about how outrageous it is that footballers get well paid, but this makes my effing blood boil. Why do we have a tax system that allows rich people to pay less tax than ordinary people.
I am not at all sure about how clubs get away with any of this, image rights and football creditors aside, the clubs are blatantly trading while insolvent. To be solvent, a football club, just like any other business, must be able to pay all its debts at any given time (they would normally not be asked to, but they must be able to).
The moment that the directors are aware that the company is not able to do so then they are trading while insolvent. This is simply illegal and, if the numbers are big enough, in the normal business world could land the director in jail.
I cannot understand how a club like Pompey, or any number of other clubs, could justifiably argue that they can pay back all their debts at any given moment.
I know 2 wrongs don't make a right but considering their debt, late payment to other clubs and non payment to various organisations i think Portsmouth have got a massive cheek complaining because Genoa are 2 weeks late with a payment.
Pretty shabby situation on everyones account really. You can't blame the administrator though because it's his job to get as much in as soon as possible to get the club back on it's feet. Football finances have reached a point now where they make the average drugs deal look above board.
Cheeky pikeys. I hope they keep getting relegated. They were months late on payments for the likes of Johnson, Smith and Williamson and completely stiffed a bunch of small businesses while continuing to spunk huge wages and fees on Dindane, O'Hara, Utaka and so on. No sympathy whatsoever. I hope Genoa piss them around endlessly.
Comments
In a normal situation, yes, I;d agree absolutely, however this is a situation whereby players have been envolved with blatent tax evasion, just look at what sol was getting in image rights, he knows exactly why he was paid like that and so do the other players, they all played their part in defrauding the tax man and should be punished accordingly.
SSN currently reporting that HMRC will not be appealing!
I assume the players wages are protected as they are footballing debts. Is this correct? If it is, then it is in the interest of every football club that this rule is followed (I'm also aware that this was not the main issue today).
If individuals have been involved in tax evasion then surely HMRC should pursue those individuals rather than the football club?
Tax avoidance is legal and it maybe construed that tax avoidance is what has happened. We are not really in a position to know.
Surely its not right that players, agents etc can get ALL of their money where as the taxpayer (HMRC) only get 20% of what they are legally owed, and over a 5 yr period.
wonder what would happen if I tried that scam - having comnpleted my tax return I tell the taxman that I can only pay him 20% of the actual tax due , and I'll pay in instalments over the next 5 yrs !!!!!!!!! Esentially what Pompey have done.
DISCRACE.
Who paid for Pompey's lawyers? Probably me, through reduced payment of debt to the taxpayer. Joy of joys. They'll probably be spending money on new players now.
madness
One thing that astounded me (apart from the decision itself!), is that players' get a portion of their salaries as "image rights" on which they pay less tax. I'm not someone who bangs on about how outrageous it is that footballers get well paid, but this makes my effing blood boil. Why do we have a tax system that allows rich people to pay less tax than ordinary people.
"If I go in, I will go in with money to stabilise the club and bring it back to the Premier League"
"I'm not going to stay in the Championship. The manager would receive my full support."
FFS
The moment that the directors are aware that the company is not able to do so then they are trading while insolvent. This is simply illegal and, if the numbers are big enough, in the normal business world could land the director in jail.
I cannot understand how a club like Pompey, or any number of other clubs, could justifiably argue that they can pay back all their debts at any given moment.
2 weeks late
from BBC's Dan Roan on twitter
Lawyer for Portsmouth FC owner in waiting Balram Chainrai say demands of Sacha Gaydamak "puts future of club in jeopardy - club may close"
Lawyer for Portsmouth FC owner in waiting Balram Chainrai says "likely the club will now be closed down and liquidated by administrators"