“Sources close to Whyte” in economical with truth shocker!


Yesterday’s blog post revealed for the first time in any media outlet (mainstream or otherwise) that Rangers had prepared an appeal of the “wee tax case” and seems to have ruffled a few feathers in the process.

In this morning’s Daily Telegraph, Roddy Forsyth reports: “A source close to Craig Whyte, the Rangers owner, told The Daily Telegraph that an appeal had been lodged several months ago against the liability – incurred under the previous regime of Sir David Murray and not to be confused with the much larger potential debt to HMRC… … The source added emphatically that the existing appeal was not intended to be a defence against Uefa sanctions.”

First, Forsyth is confused or has been misled.  This appeal absolutely and categorically was not filed “several months ago“.  Assuming that Forsyth is not confused, his source is either a shameless liar whose opinions on any of these matters should be treated on a par with asking Joseph Goebbels how the defence of Berlin is going- or his source does not know what is going on.

Next, why did it require “a source close to Craig Whyte“?  Why not an on-the-record statement from the club or one of its executives?  Why have Rangers not made any reference to an appeal of the “wee tax case” assessment prior to my post yesterday?

The phrase “a source close to Craig Whyte” is reminiscent of all of those fabulous promises made in the run-up to the takeover.  Googling this phrase is instructive.  “A source close to Craig Whyte” has been responsible for the following gems being quoted in our mainstream media without critical analysis or qualification:

  • For a start, the deal Craig Whyte is putting forward is worth £52.5m, more than double the amount apparently to be raised by this unnamed Rangers director.  Further, the Craig Whyte investment in the club would begin on day one of a deal being completed.”
  • “…the businessman had decided to make available “significantly more” than the average sum of £5m-a-season to Ally McCoist when he succeeds current manager Walter Smith at the start of next term.”
  • “Ally knows he will have significant funds to spend on players”

With the track record of such “sources close to Whyte” one has to wonder why any member of the press would take them seriously?  Roddy Forsyth is one of the better journalists among a very poor bunch.  However, to repeat the words of someone who will undoubtedly be one of Whyte’s handsomely rewarded PR goons without getting objective proof is symptomatic of the malaise affecting Scottish football journalism.  The lazily and cheaply acquired quote is favoured over truth.  To repeat the words of someone who misleads others for a living without obtaining objective confirmation is just comically stupid or willfully negligent.    I must assume that the subject of Rangers’ accumulating unpaid PAYE & national insurance money just did not come up in conversation?

I do not claim to know with any certainty the motivation behind the appeal.  So I cannot swear that it is related to the mounting pressure for Rangers to make an official and unequivocal statement on the status of this liability to HMRC as of 31 March 2011.  However, the timing of the appeal does look convenient.  I must acknowledge that it is also very possible that it is simply driven by financial necessity i.e. it is an attempt to reverse the arrestment of the £2.3m which is currently frozen prior to it disappearing forever within the next couple of weeks. However, I can confidently state that the launching of this appeal is very recent indeed.

Of course, this can all be cleared up easily.  Mr. Whyte can tell us when the appeal was submitted.  He can produce the appeal documents and show the dates to members of the press.  Even members of his own trusted cadre of tame hacks would suffice.  The central facts of the case are not in dispute and have been a matter of public record since Rangers’ interim accounts were released on 1st April. There will not be many real confidentiality concerns. We know the amount and to what it is related.  All we need to know is the date of the appeal.  This could debunk both my post from yesterday and the theory (expounded by others) that the SFA improperly granted Rangers a UEFA license for the 2011/2012 season.

Go ahead Mr. Whyte.  Prove me wrong.  And Mr Forsyth, you could apply a bit more critical thinking in your work.  If you are interested in the question of Rangers’ UEFA license, you can ask your contacts at Ibrox and at Hampden to show you the evidence.  It would be a good bit of journalism and could lay this issue to rest once and for all.

About rangerstaxcase
I have information on Rangers' tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications for what was (updated) one of the largest football clubs in Britain.

1,149 Responses to “Sources close to Whyte” in economical with truth shocker!

  1. curious onlooker says:

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 5:35 pm
    I see Private Eye are obviously not particularly concerned about being sued either.
    ——————————————
    IIRC those representing CW said (after BBC doc.) that anyone else publicly repeating claims broadcast by the BBC would be Carter Rucked !

  2. sorrynocando says:

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 2:16 pm
    I think Dave King may only have 3% of the shares. Whyte has, I think, 85.2%. There aresomething like 26,000 separate minority shareholders.

    I think he intends just to ignore his responsibilities in respect of the AGM.
    ——————————————————————————————————–

    Adam says:
    07/12/2011 at 2:29 pm
    Just had a quick check and Kings share through Metlika is 5.33%.

    So between King and Whyte they have 90.5% and if any proxies take that above 95% then the 21 day notice of the AGM is not required should they all agree.

    You might be right on the money as usual re your last sentence Paulie.

    ———————————————————————————————————-

    One of the quirks relating to the unwinding of MSL is how and why Dave King’s (Metlika) shareholding increased from from just under 5% to 5.33% at no cost to Metlika.

  3. curious onlooker says:
    07/12/2011 at 5:49 pm

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 5:35 pm
    ———————————————————-
    Private Eye has nothing but respect for Carter Ruck…sorry, delete “but” and substitute “like”.

    After all, it was Private Eye which originated the “reply given in Arkell v Pressdram”.

    I have posted it before, but it is well worth another read – this time from the Jack of Kent blog by the very smart lawyer David Allen Green.

    http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/05/reply-given-in-arkell-v-pressdram.html

    I think it’s fair to say that was the reply the BBC gave to Carter-Ruck!

  4. Perry Whyte says:

    CO @ 5:49.

    Since CW admitted his ban as per the beeb he can go Carter Ruck himself.

  5. curious onlooker says:

    BustedBallsan’a’that says:
    07/12/2011 at 2:58 pm
    Check this out….

    http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/285793-rangers-director-of-football-stands-by-simulation-comments/

    ——————————————–
    I´ve read your link and raise you

    I

  6. sorrynocando says:

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 3:25 pm
    That’s my reading of it Adam. I think though that the logistics of getting the missing 4% will be insurmountable. I believe Paul Murraymay still have a few shares, but him apart I don’t think there is any other big shareholder. I suspect that even if you had King and Whyte together (and my information is that they are certainly not on friendly terms) you’re taiking about maybe a thousand different small sharehoders to make up the balance.

    —————————————————————————————-

    Paul Murray is NOT a shareholder in RFC.

    Click to access 0,,5~148029,00.pdf

  7. curious onlooker says:

    PW
    It wasn´t about the ban though.

    It´s acting as a director during the ban that is disputed by CW.

  8. Jonnybhoy says:

    Is King’s shareholding frozen by the SA authorities?

  9. Paulie Walnuts says:

    CO,

    I know, but that is what Private Eye report.

  10. curious onlooker says:

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 6:30 pm
    CO,

    I know, but that is what Private Eye report.
    —————————————–
    I know you knew and should have made that clear.

    Someone was compiling a list of questions a pagee or two back.
    One asking CW if he were going to take action against Private Eye would put him on the spot somewhat.

  11. Thomas says:

    Private Eye also done a very good piece on Whyte way before the takeover.

    Along the lines of “involved in numerous failed companies, fled UK under a tax investigation, alleged to owe £3m to creditors, has no discernable access to any kind of wealth…”

    They finished up with my favourite line ever:

    “Barring the above, Whyte is the perfect candidate to buy Rangers”

    (typed from memory but I’m sure others will have access to the article)

  12. paul says:

    Heard this on Clyde, can anyone confirm that Celtic broke the British record for penalties awarded in a season at Inverness last season, bringing the total to 17, a record previously held by Man City.
    If in fact this is correct perhaps we can dispense with some of the more extreme views expressed, which veer us off topic.

  13. TheBlackKnight says:

    curious onlooker on 07/12/2011 at 6:07 pm said:
    “PW, It wasn´t about the ban though.
    It´s acting as a director during the ban that is disputed by CW.”

    I suppose the withdrawal of circa £200k during his disqualification period, as stated by the I.S. was another “misunderstanding”?

  14. Paranoid Timdroid says:

    paul says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:30 pm

    That stat, or fact, has been floating around for quite a while, but on it’s own means and proves absolutely nothing.

  15. John You're Immortal says:

    Paranoid Timdroid says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:42 pm
    paul says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:30 pm

    That stat, or fact, has been floating around for quite a while, but on it’s own means and proves absolutely nothing.
    ==================
    Apart from the fact that Celtic obviously enjoy a high degree of possession in the opposition’s 18 yard box maybe…..?

  16. the Don Dionisio says:

    Given his “previous” the MBBCW has no intention of holding an AGM nor honouring any of his other responsibilties, legal, moral or otherwise.

    There is a question on the application form for a waiver of visa for anyone intending to visit the USA,(“ETA” from memory), which goes along the lines of, viz:-

    “Have you ever been convicted of moral turpitude?”

    In our politically correct non-judgemental island where “morality” is an alien concept, indeed a dirty word not to be mentioned or discussed, such a question would be unimaginable.The yanks still obviously pay lip service to ethics, however, albeit we can all guess the MBB’s predictable mendacious retort in the negative.

    As to the sum arrested of £2.3m, either he will appeal the assessment, albeit late, with HMRC, probably to another FTT, or he will lodge a note of objection with the Sheriff Court within the 14 week period which will shortly expire. Or he could do both. Time will tell.

  17. Paranoid Timdroid says:

    John You’re Immortal says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:49 pm

    It could suggest that, but doesn’t prove it.

  18. John You're Immortal says:

    the Don Dionisio says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:52 pm

    “moral turpitude”…… a great phrase put to good effect in Porky’s if I recall correctly 😉

    Anyway – I digress – might I indulge and repost my question from earlier, in that if the MBB is to get his accounts signed off and GT aren’t prepared to do so, then mustn’t he hold an AGM to appoint a new auditor?

  19. John You're Immortal says:

    Paranoid Timdroid says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:53 pm
    John You’re Immortal says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:49 pm

    It could suggest that, but doesn’t prove it.
    ======================
    That’s why I ended with “maybe” 😀

  20. campsiejoe says:

    Don Dionisio @ 7.52pm

    MBB has absolutely no intention, of calling any sort of meeting, where he will have to answer questions from shareholders

  21. Barcabhoy says:

    paul says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:30 pm
    Heard this on Clyde, can anyone confirm that Celtic broke the British record for penalties awarded in a season at Inverness last season, bringing the total to 17, a record previously held by Man City.
    If in fact this is correct perhaps we can dispense with some of the more extreme views expressed, which veer us off topic.

    ==================================================

    yet another reputation management tactic.

    Keep it up, eventually you will come out with something relevant

  22. TheBlackKnight says:

    Paul does appear to be a slightly more intelligent vesion of the “lowly maintenance worker” Sam.

    Do you think there was an upgrade?

    Any hoo, back on topic. I believe Rangers will break all British, European and World records for ‘penalties’ this year………….

    Perhaps £14M of them 😀

  23. I have obtained access to some highly secret HMRC memoranda. I can only say thank you to a certain heating/ventilation engineer. After much consideration, I have decided that they must be published.

    I do not fear the consequences!

    http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/craig-whyte-the-hmrc-memoranda-part-1-as-disclosed-by-sam/

    Except the consequences of being slagged off, in which case I will go back to limericks!

  24. Adam says:

    Off topic and huge apologies but im hoping someone can give me a very quick answer.

    1) Have the extra officials in CL games EVER made a decision ?
    2) If they are there to add additional help, why the hell have them operating at the same side as the linesman. Surely it would be better the other side of the goal.(not that i think they have done anything)

    Anyone know the reason or use ??

  25. TheBlackKnight says:

    Adam on 07/12/2011 at 8:21 pm said:
    Off topic and huge apologies but im hoping someone can give me a very quick answer.

    1) Have the extra officials in CL games EVER made a decision ?
    2) If they are there to add additional help, why the hell have them operating at the same side as the linesman. Surely it would be better the other side of the goal.(not that i think they have done anything)

    1. I believe one did in the match last week. Player down just outside the goal. (may have been Spurs in Europa though)

    2. Yup. Totally agree. Would make sense. TV evidence would make better sense however.

  26. Barcabhoy says:

    corsica says:
    07/12/2011 at 4:49 pm
    btw agm is not a sideshow…failure to hold agm is breach of companies act and could (probably would) lead to suspension of shares and disqualification; for someone in cw’s position that is a big deal

    ==================================

    I think the penalty for a director of a plc who is convicted of failing to hold an AGM within 6 months of the financial year end, is a fine rather than disqualification.

    Which is why I referred to it as a sideshow. If Whyte feels any accountability to and responsibility for the small shareholders then he will make an announcement about an AGM this week. If he doesn’t then I would think we would be safe to assume he doesn’t give a thin dime for them.

    The £2.3 million however is real money. Money which he could use either to keep Rangers going short term, or he could have available to himself via his preferred creditor status in the event of an insolvency event. The £2.3 million will move to HMRC on Friday unless the court reverses it’s decision.

    This is a key date for me. Should he decide or have it decided for him, that he will not get the £2.3 million back short term, then he has a big call to make. If he decides to soldier on, then you can assume he is betting on winning the FTT.

    He can always create an insolvency event tihs week, and attempt to implicate Murray, by saying current opinion on the chances of winning the FTT is now not optimistic . He can then claim it’s better to call in a receiver now rather than continue in an environment of uncertainty and speculation as this is becoming increasingly damaging.

    His problem is that I am certain he would not have budgeted for the scenario he is now facing. He is probably a minimum of £4 million short of his worst expectation. He may not have budgeted for CL money, but he has admitted to expecting EL money as a minimum. He would also not have budgeted for virtually no CIS cup revenue.

    The question is does he, or his backers, have the £4 million to enable him to carry on. The way he is conducting matters, and his previous track record as exposed by the BBC and Private Eye would suggest very strongly he doesn’t have it.

    What would be extremely interesting would be should either the BBC or Private Eye pop their head above the parapet and venture the name of the alleged backers. If it’s the same names that I have heard, it’s game over for Whyte.

    and no, i won’t be mentioning any names as RTC has made it clear that’s a no-no

  27. sorrynocando says:

    Adam says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:21 pm
    Off topic and huge apologies but im hoping someone can give me a very quick answer.

    1) Have the extra officials in CL games EVER made a decision ?
    2) If they are there to add additional help, why the hell have them operating at the same side as the linesman. Surely it would be better the other side of the goal.(not that i think they have done anything)

    Anyone know the reason or use ??
    ———————————————————

    You mean apart from giving a penalty against Steven Naismith in favour of Man Utd at Ibrox?

  28. Thomas says:

    Paul McConville says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:20 pm
    ———————————–

    Love it!

    You should do a version of the Goodwillie transfer saga!

    Or Lee Wallace!

    “a dodgy maintenance guy has been hanging about the files” 🙂

  29. Paulie Walnuts says:

    Just for Paul McConville…

    There was an “accountant” called Sam
    Whose multiple names were a sham
    He caused much irritation
    With his pish punctuation
    Til RTC rumbled the stupid wee bam.

  30. Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:46 pm
    ————————————-

    Chapeau!

  31. campsiejoe says:

    Looks like we are on a roll here !

  32. TheBlackKnight says:

    Brilliant PMcC.

    Very David Thorne-esque 😀

  33. mex says:

    curious onlooker@11.53pm

    ps. Naismith will have no problem finding a decent team in the EPL willing to takeover/improve his contract should the situation arise, even during the time of his present injury aslong as there are no complications.

    I lurk.
    It’s what I do,but wtf?

  34. Thomas says:

    Barcabhoy says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:36 pm
    ————————————-

    One round of CL Qualifier for guaranteed Euro income was not a risky bet but I do agree that Whyte is now facing a shortfall he never anticipated at this point.

    Even without the CL money getting to February/March for the FTT decision was not unrealistic but as we know many things have popped up that simply weren’t mitigated for.

    All in all I’d say Whyte is in a very difficult position.

    Whether his hand is forced or someone else pulls the plug is immaterial.

    Rangers will not survive to see the FTT decision unless there is big money made in the transfer window. Of which I am highly speculative.

  35. TheBlackKnight says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:48 pm
    ———————————————-

    TBK – now that I have read who David Thorne is, I will say – thank you very much!

  36. StevieBC says:

    As everybody would be aware that the MBB would not be in a strong negotiating position during the January transfer window, would it not be more reasonable to expect any significant RFC sales to be agreed at about 11.30pm on January 31st ?

    I.e. the MBB/RFC still needs to be self-funded through January anyway ?

  37. TheBlackKnight says:

    Paul McConville on 07/12/2011 at 9:06 pm

    Most welcome ! 😉

  38. rab says:

    Paul McC.

    Any chance you can clear me from moderation on your site.

    Cheers.

  39. rab says:
    07/12/2011 at 9:14 pm
    ——————————————–

    Done!

  40. Gwared says:

    Barcabhoy,
    Why is it such a problem to mention the name? I can’t understand that.

  41. rab says:

    Paul McC

    Thanks, i enjoy reading your comments on both sites, and appreciate the levels that the heavyweight posters go to, to put their knowledge into understandable language, and with a sense of humour.

  42. longtimelurker says:

    Gwared says:
    07/12/2011 at 9:19 pm
    Barcabhoy,
    Why is it such a problem to mention the name? I can’t understand that.

    ————————————————————————————————————————

    Barcabhoy says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:36 pm

    What would be extremely interesting would be should either the BBC or Private Eye pop their head above the parapet and venture the name of the alleged backers. If it’s the same names that I have heard, it’s game over for Whyte.

    ——————————————————————————————————————

    Pretty obvious Gwared.

    Think about it mate and I’m not talking about an actual name, forget that.

    Why would it be game over for whyte if the name was mentioned?

    Can only be one of two reasons.

    1) Celtic Supporter with dosh

    2) Dodgy Celtic supporter with dosh

    Hmmmm, Asda anyone?

    The Gorbals?

    M74 extension

    Jinky’s EC medal?

    Fridges and Freezers.

  43. Roland Brown says:

    paul says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:30 pm

    Heard this on Clyde, can anyone confirm that Celtic broke the British record for penalties awarded in a season at Inverness last season, bringing the total to 17, a record previously held by Man City.
    If in fact this is correct perhaps we can dispense with some of the more extreme views expressed, which veer us off topic.
    ———————————————————————

    Is that all we got?,should have been more.

  44. longtimelurker says:
    07/12/2011 at 9:40 pm
    ——————————————————

    Fan of the crosswords are you LTL?

    🙂

  45. longtimelurker says:

    Paul McConville says:
    07/12/2011 at 9:43 pm
    longtimelurker says:
    07/12/2011 at 9:40 pm
    ——————————————————

    Fan of the crosswords are you LTL?
    ————————————————————————————————————

    Not The Times Paul more The Dandy.

    How easy can I make it? 😉

  46. Davie b says:

    some thoughts about timing etc. Is it conceivable that GEF is piling up the cash because of Close and the other securities – if it is a liquidation GEF is out on his security but then there are all the other securities (Kelvinside, Sportscotland, SDM) to be dealt with. If his end game is Ragers 2012 (for an onward sale or share float) then he has to be able to get the assets such as Ibroke & Murray Park. So he piles up the cash, his own £18m plus the other secured debt, as a liquidator has a set order of dealing with the debt, secured first – this may explain why Close lent the money – they knew they were going to be repaid because of past history and the GEF modus operandi. The assets are then free from security so can be sold to Ragers 2012. On a receivership, if there was an excess of cash after GEF has been paid his secured amount, then the excess is available to the other secured creditors in a liquidation first, thus freeing up the assets. if this were the case, then GEF has a plan and he controls the timetable, this would also explain the tax appeal, he needs the money back from arrestment to secure the assets during an insolvency event.

  47. Bawsman says:

    Barcabhoy says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:11 pm

    I think we are way behind in the record penalties in a season stake bud.

    Remember the year Barry Ferguson scored 17 goals, absolutely outstanding as a midfielder?

    11 of them were penalties.

    He stopped taking them just after CHRISTMAS TIME when he missed one of 3 awarded in the same game by John Rowbottom at Tannadice in a 2-2 draw.
    Arteta took the last of the 3 to get a point.

    The last kick of the ball that season was Arteta scoring a penalty in tthe 6th minute of injury time against Dunfermline at Ibrox in a 6-1 victory, a game noted for it’s lack of tackles, let alone injury time.
    Have a look on you tube at that award if you think Aluko’s was soft…………………Chris Sutton was only half right.

    Paranoid………Aye 100%

    That mob have never won a thing fair and square in their existance.

  48. longtimelurker says:

    Bawsman says:
    07/12/2011 at 9:49 pm

    That mob have never won a thing fair and square in their existance.

    —————————————————————————————————————

    Ain’t that the truth…

  49. paul says:

    Barcabhoy says:
    07/12/2011 at 8:11 pm

    I fear the relevancy is all in your head, and with you I will leave it there, your hook is apparently bait-less.

  50. Adam says:

    Baws man.

    Yip.

    Perfect description.

%d bloggers like this: