From: Gary Withey <gary.withey@collyerbristow.
com>
Date: 25 August 2011
To: Kevin Higgins <[email protected]>, William Lee <[email protected]>
Cc: Julian Hedley <[email protected]>, Peter Hackleton <[email protected]>,
Craig Whyte <[email protected]>
Kevin,
I have authority to instruct in my position of Company Secretary of Rangers FC plc. Please accept
this email as such authority.
With regard to the VAT the club will need to reach an agreement with HMRC to pay over a term. I am
not entirely up to speed with the cash flow but if they had the full amount I guess that I would not be
asking for your assistance.
At this moment in time the assurance will be that an amount of vat will be paid. The club has, so far
as I am aware never been late in paying vat previously.
Did you have any views on the service companies and when we can get a vat registration for them?
Regards
Gary Withey
Partner
T (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7234
F (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7334
From: Kevin Higgins [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 25 August 2011
To: Gary Withey; William Lee
Cc: Julian Hedley; Peter Hackleton
Subject: RFC
Gary/Will
I have just received another call from Mr [Redacted] at HMRC on the subject of Ticketus/VAT. He
was enquiring as to the progress of matters since yesterday.
I told him that we had been appointed to deal with the matter and advise but that I had not yet
received all the documentation to enable us to do so. I asked him whether he could send me copies
of the papers he had obtained from Ticketus so that I could see that we are all looking at the same
paperwork and to my surprise he did not reject my request but said that he would have to consider it.
I suspect that his superiors will veto the idea but, assuming for now that he is allowed to send us the
documentation, he would want confirmation from RFC that it is in order for him to transmit the
documents by email (this is a routine HMRC security issue). Can you please obtain the necessary
clearance from whoever is the appropriate officer at RFC and get them to email me today
confirmation that they are content for HMRC to send me documents relevant to the Ticketus VAT
issue by email. If [Redacted] is authorised by his management to send me copies of the papers he
holds, I will then forward the email I receive from RFC giving him clearance to do so.
He also told me that he had information to suggest that the Ticketus monies had been paid into a
client account held by Collyer Bristow (I assume this came from Ticketus) and he observed that he
would like to know that the money was still there in order to pay the VAT.
He is looking for clarity as to what is the correct position, to the submission of a correct VAT return
and to payment of the VAT on time.
What assurance can we give him with regard to the payment of the VAT that is due next week
(whatever the correct amount proves to be)?
Regards
From: Gary Withey <[email protected]>
Date: 26 August 2011
To: David Grier <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], Craig Whyte <[email protected]>
This is the information we need.
I am not sure what the current vat arrangement is with the club. Who would have this information. It
seems at the moment the best that can be achieved is a time to pay arrangement.
Once that is in place then we need to get the various non group vat registrations in place. Holdco
should itself have a vat registration as should the new asset cos.
Regards
Gary Withey
Partner
T (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7234
F (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7334
From: Gary Burnes [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 25 August 2011
To: Kevin Higgins; Gary Withey
Cc: Peter Hackleton; Julian Hedley; William Lee
Subject: RE: RFC
Gary
This is to summarise the position regarding VAT issues covered in recent e mails
1.CURRENT VAT RETURN ; URGENT
We are awaiting copies of the VAT invoices which we understand have been issued by Rangers to
Ticketus, during the current VAT return period. It is absolutely critical that VAT charged on these
invoices is included on the VAT return. If you have not already done so, I would recommend that you
ensure that the person responsible for submitting the VAT return ( presumably the Financial Controller
) is aware of this . If the invoices are not included on the return, penalties of up to 100% of the tax
due on those invoices could be charged.
2. TIME TO PAY
I assume that the VAT return due is for the period to 31 July 2011 ( please confirm). I also understand
that Rangers may be on the monthly payment on account scheme whereby they pay a fixed monthly
amount in the first two months of each quarter and a balancing payment when the return is
submitted . So the amount due may be the balancing payment.?
If any previous VAT returns/ monthly payments have been submitted /paid late, then default
surcharges may be imposed , which can range between 2% and 15% of the VAT due, depending on
the extent of the defaults. However, if a payment arrangement is agreed BEFORE a payment is due,
then HMRC can agree not to impose default surcharges.
In order to negotiate a settlement, the following details would be required
1. VAT return periods/ The actual VAT liability on the return and payment outstanding / details of any
monthly payment arrangements
2. The details of any arrangements that Rangers has with HMRC for delayed payment of other taxes
3. The amount that Rangers is able to pay now
4. A proposed payment plan for payment of the remaining amount due
5. Commitment to submit the return on time
6. Any arrangements need to take into account any need to delay future payments as they become
due.
If provided with these details we could contact the HMRC Business Payment Support Service
on 0845 302 1455 to make proposals on behalf of Rangers. However, it may be more practicable for
this to be done by Rangers directly.
If you do require our assistance, we would need the above information ASAP
3 HMRC ENQUIRIES
As you know, we have the added complication of the separate enquiries raised by HMRC and, if you
agree, I think we need to clarify with the officer who contacted us that the correct amounts of VAT will
be declared on the VAT returns and explain why Rangers are not in a position to pay the VAT in full.
Otherwise, this may prejudice any attempt to agree time to pay.
There is also a concern ( as per our notes ) in relation to the responses made to HMRC enquiries
I would suggest you call me to discuss this point, before we make any contact with HMRC.
4. SERVICE COMPANIES
If the service companies are controlled by a member of the existing Rangers VAT group registration (
or the company that controls that group ) they could apply to join the VAT group. The advantage
being that supplies within a VAT group are disregarded so there would be no VAT cashflow cost.
Otherwise, they can apply for separate registration.
A VAT registration currently takes up to three weeks to obtain. VAT invoices can not be issued until a
registration is agreed . If the service company was to invoice for services for the forthcoming year,
VAT would be due upfront on the full amount on the VAT invoice
We can assist with applications if required.
Please call me on 020 7841 4057 if you need to discuss any of these issues further
Regards
Gary
From: Kevin Higgins
Sent: Thu 25 August 2011
To: 'Gary Withey'
Cc: Peter Hackleton; Julian Hedley; Gary Burnes
Subject: RE: RFC
Gary
Thank you for your email.
My colleague, Gary Burnes, who is a VAT specialist, will be in touch with you shortly with regard to
the VAT registration matter and indeed the overall position concerning the VAT return and payment
that is required next week.
Regards
From: Kevin Higgins <[email protected]>
To: Gary Withey
Cc: Gary Burnes <[email protected]>; Peter Hackleton <[email protected]>;
Julian Hedley <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri Aug 26 2011
Subject: RFC
Gary
I have just received my daily call from Mr [Redacted].
He told me that he had sent you copies of the determinations (I did not tell him that I had already got
them). If he sends you any papers that I have not already been sent will you please forward copies.
We discussed the basis of the assessments - apparently, they were not based on Donald McIntyre's
figures but rather the amounts were treated as received when payment was guaranteed in the side
letters. I will check this.
He mentioned the Court proceedings today on which I refrained from comment save to say that
Safferys were not engaged in that action.
As regards the VAT return, I simply said that I was sure that the VAT return would be correct when
submitted. [Redacted] asked if I could tell him what figures would be on the return and I said that I
could not at this stage. He also asked of the whereabouts of the monies received from Ticketus -
again I had to say that I do not know. He said that he was about to call you and that he would ask
you these questions.
Regards
From: Gary Withey <[email protected]>
Date: 26 August 2011
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Kevin, do you agree with the figures?
Regards
----------
From: Kevin Higgins <[email protected]>
Date: 26 August 2011
To: Gary Withey <[email protected]>
Cc: Gary Burnes <[email protected]>, Julian Hedley <[email protected]>, Peter
Hackleton <[email protected]>, Craig Whyte <[email protected]>
Gary
Income tax
Re Tore Andre Flo
Unless we can come up with an ingenious argument to the effect that the payments referred to in the
side letter dated 23 November 2000 as "net" did not mean "net of tax", and that the payments should
not therefore be grossed up, I cannot see any basis for disputing the income tax determination for
Tore Andre Flo.
Re Ronald de Boer
I cannot find amongst our papers a copy of the side letter dated 30 August 2000 to which McCurrach
refers in page 2 of his letter.. I need to see that letter. Can you supply it? - if not, I will get McCurrach
to send me a copy.
Also, the payments listed at the foot of the letter do not correspond with a schedule of payments I
have on file (which is marked as having been provided to HMRC by Mike McGill on 21 March 2011. I
need to be clear exactly what payments were made and when.
All of the determinations have been raised outside the normal time limits but, given the previous non-
disclosure of side letters (I assume it is accepted that there was a failure to disclose) it will be
practically impossible in my view to argue that the assessments should be set aside.
National Insurance Contributions
The determinations do not show a computation of the amounts charged, simply a stated figure, and,
on the face of it, appear to me on a rough calculation to be too high. I will have to ask HMRC for an
explanation/computation next week.
Any arguments that we can come up with in relation to income tax (for instance to the effect that
payments should not be grossed up) would potentially affect the NI charge too.
I also want to consider further whether the extended time limit rules apply in the case of NI.
So, at this stage, I don't rule out the possibility that we may be able to challenge some of the
assessments to some extent. Nor, however, do I want to raise hopes too high.
Regards
From: Gary Withey [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Fri 26 August 2011
To: Kevin Higgins
Cc: Gary Burnes; Peter Hackleton; Julian Hedley; [email protected]
Subject: Re: RFC
----------
From: Gary Withey <[email protected]>
Date: 26 August 2011
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Kevin,
Thanks for this. On what basis can we argue payments should not be grossed up?
Any argument would be very difficult given the substantial time delay in making these determinations.
Why are they not time barred being in respect of a time ten years ago?
Regards
Gary Withey
Partner
T (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7234
F (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7334
From: Craig Whyte <[email protected]>
Date: 26 August 2011
To: Gary Withey <[email protected]>
I think we need to try any argument we can if only to buy time.
Sent from my iPhone
