[Football] HM Revenue & Customs investigates players, clubs & agents over tax

[NooBHA]

I'm sure the barristers of both parties have the clock running until the case is heard though, how much did it cost the EFL and QPR in legal fees over the recent FFP case?

Cant remember the costs on that one but obviously the player must have taken out Investigation Insurance. No one can really afford to take these cases on in the Courts unless they are insured for it.

I get the feeling both are waiting for each other to blink and make a settlement before it goes to Court. On this one I think HMRC are unreasonable in their assessment but they know if they win there is a massive windfall out there for them in the future and that's why they are willing to go to court on it

 

[Weststander]

Cant remember the costs on that one but obviously the player must have taken out Investigation Insurance. No one can really afford to take these cases on in the Courts unless they are in it

Tax investigation insurance covers all or part of external accountants fees regarding an HMRC enquiry.

But not where there's tax fraud, tax avoidance schemes, deliberate omission on returns, or a criminal prosecution by HMRC.

Failure to disclose all worldwide income on a return or the use of tax avoiding EBT schemes, would fall into the not covered domain.

 

[NooBHA]

Tax investigation insurance covers all or part of external accountants fees regarding an HMRC enquiry.

But not where there's tax fraud, tax avoidance schemes, deliberate omission on returns, or a criminal prosecution by HMRC.

Failure to disclose all worldwide income on a return or the use of tax avoiding EBT schemes, would fall into the not covered domain.

This isn't about Tax Schemes or Tax Avoidance in any way shape or form. The Taxpayer in this instance has an extremely strong case. HMRC are making things up as they go along on this one without any Legislation to back them up that's probably why the are seeking a Ruling on it in the Courts, to try and set a Case Law Precedent.

I hate anyone who seeks to avoid paying tax but it isn't the case here. I hope they lose this one and normally I am on the side of HMRC and fairness but they aren't fair in this instance which is why the case against them is quite strong. This type of issue would be covered certain types of insurance but even if it isn't, I think the Players Unions should fund it.

Normally I want HMRC to win certain cases in the pursuit of fairness because I hate any form of tax avoidance but they are seeking to tax monies that people are never physically in receipt of. And that isn't right in my view.

 

[Jim D]

So, if HMRC win their case, how many of our players will be affected?

 

[NooBHA]

So, if HMRC win their case, how many of our players will be affected?

Every player at every club in the PL

 

[beorhthelm]

Every player at every club in the PL

shirley something so broad would be affecting people outside of football. also cant see how you can be taxed for money (or benefits?) you dont receive. whats the deal?

 

[Weststander]

This isn't about Tax Schemes or Tax Avoidance in any way shape or form. The Taxpayer in this instance has an extremely strong case. HMRC are making things up as they go along on this one without any Legislation to back them up that's probably why the are seeking a Ruling on it in the Courts, to try and set a Case Law Precedent.

I hate anyone who seeks to avoid paying tax but it isn't the case here. I hope they lose this one and normally I am on the side of HMRC and fairness but they aren't fair in this instance which is why the case against them is quite strong. This type of issue would be covered certain types of insurance but even if it isn't, I think the Players Unions should fund it.

Normally I want HMRC to win certain cases in the pursuit of fairness because I hate any form of tax avoidance but they are seeking to tax monies that people are never physically in receipt of. And that isn't right in my view.

The First and Second Tier Tax Tribunals are completety independent of HMRC. Justice will be done, so we’ll get the definitive answer.

 

[NooBHA]

The First and Second Tier Tax Tribunals are completety independent of HMRC. Justice will be done, so we’ll get the definitive answer.

First Tier Tribunal was where the Postponement happened in April so still early days. Fraught with legal issues. One of the sides obviously wasn't ready with their case. It will be interesting once it's heard but I think HMRC will back down on it, although they don't have that much to lose except costs

 

[NooBHA]

shirley something so broad would be affecting people outside of football. also cant see how you can be taxed for money (or benefits?) you dont receive. whats the deal?

Can't go on to a football forum while legal issues are pending. HMRC would potentially sue NSC or any publication for that matter if specifics were posted here for seeking to influence a legal case.

 

[highflyer]

The highly regarded IFS simply deliver the facts, apolitically. Millions of the lower paid have been taken out of tax under the last 10 years of Labour/Coalition/Tory administrations, whilst the highest earners are compelled to pay more in tax. Yes, tax cuts for the poor, happy days.

View attachment 101544

Only just seen this.

Tthe reason the share of tax paid by top 1% is going up is primarily because they are getting wealthier. This is an indicator of rising inequality not (involuntary) generosity.

Increasing the personal tax allowance primarily benefits people already well off. It certainly does nothing for those at the bottom (the actual poor) who don't pay tax. It is actually a regressive tax measure.

Meanwhile the cuts to public services affect all of us, but hit the poorest hardest.

Not such happy days after all!

The IFS are very good at what they do, and indeed highly regarded. But NO economic analysis is 'apolitical'. Economics is political. It's not science. The IFS are generally seen as not great at 'macro' and this tends to push their analysis in a certain direction. They sit in a very specific (and I would say small 'c' conservative) place on the spectrum of economic perspectives. IPPR are also highly regarded, but for some reason not given as much airtime as IFS...

 

[Weststander]

Only just seen this.

Tthe reason the share of tax paid by top 1% is going up is primarily because they are getting wealthier. This is an indicator of rising inequality not (involuntary) generosity.

Increasing the personal tax allowance primarily benefits people already well off. It certainly does nothing for those at the bottom (the actual poor) who don't pay tax. It is actually a regressive tax measure.

Meanwhile the cuts to public services affect all of us, but hit the poorest hardest.

Not such happy days after all!

The IFS are very good at what they do, and indeed highly regarded. But NO economic analysis is 'apolitical'. Economics is political. It's not science. The IFS are generally seen as not great at 'macro' and this tends to push their analysis in a certain direction. They sit in a very specific (and I would say small 'c' conservative) place on the spectrum of economic perspectives. IPPR are also highly regarded, but for some reason not given as much airtime as IFS...

Tax is my field. Stealth taxes and tax in general have been rising, £ per £ of income, steadily over the last 21 years for middle and higher earners. Anyone here who runs a one or two man limited company will confirm this. For every penny drop in corporation tax, the government have been taking far more than that in an array of income tax bands/rates on dividends. All classes of national insurance, cost far more £ for £ of income or self employed profits than they did 21 years ago.

IHT and CGT yields many times what it used to, due to rises in asset values, plus the removal of aspects in the taxpayers favour.

Lastly, most forms of tax planning and schemes have been manditarily closed down by very tight legislation.

Fair enough. With a rapidly ageing population, the costs for the NHS, state pensions and welfare, all need paying for.

 

[rippleman]

shirley something so broad would be affecting people outside of football. also cant see how you can be taxed for money (or benefits?) you dont receive. whats the deal?

The only thing that might relate (almost) exclusively to footballers, but not to the general taxpaying public, could be image rights.

 

[Weststander]

The only thing that might relate (almost) exclusively to footballers, but not to the general taxpaying public, could be image rights.

Spanish tax authorities are one by one taxing this income, for the managers and players who failed to disclose this income on their tax returns. The taxpayers in question are quietly paying the unpaid tax without a complaint.

Having the image rights income paid into BVI or Cayman Islands special limited company bank accounts, did not shield the income source from Spanish tax.

 

[NooBHA]

The only thing that might relate (almost) exclusively to footballers, but not to the general taxpaying public, could be image rights.

Nowt to do with ''Image Rights'' either - That wouldn't affect almost every PL player

 

[NooBHA]

Spanish tax authorities are one by one taxing this income, for the managers and players who failed to disclose this income on their tax returns. The taxpayers in question are quietly paying the unpaid tax without a complaint.

Having the image rights income paid into BVI or Cayman Islands special limited company bank accounts, did not shield the income source from Spanish tax.

Technically, it doesn't shield UK Resident Taxpayers either but this isn't an ''Image Rights'' case. - Although is could potentially shield Non Doms on some of it if the Amounts exceed the RBC - But its not a Non Dom issue either

 

[Jim D]

Nowt to do with ''Image Rights'' either - That wouldn't affect almost every PL player

The only thing left that footballers have but the 'man in the street' doesn't is an agent. Are they planning to tax money given to agents as coming out of the player's earnings - and tax at a higher level?

 

[Weststander]

Contrary to anti HMRC posts on similar NSC threads in the past year, that they've been wasting our money in heavy handed enquiries into football clubs; they've already raised an extra £329m in tax from clubs from their investigations.

With 198 players and 29 agents currently under investigation.

We don't get to find out the names of those couging up, if the settlements are made without need for the courts or tax tribunals.

https://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/hmrc-clamp-down-on-footballers-for-tax-abuse/

 

[Hampster Gull]

Good. Paid obscene money. Wait until comrade Corbyn comes in

 

[Weststander]

Good. Paid obscene money. Wait until comrade Corbyn comes in

Often overlooked when people demand much higher taxes for anyone earning over £100k, but the likes of PL and Championship players and managers will likely be receiving vastly less in net pay, under a Corbyn or Corbyn coalition government. The same for media presenters and entertainers. The visualisation that it will hit those evil City workers and ruling classes, is too narrow.

 

[Weststander]

HMRC's enquries into footballers tax affairs, yielded £73m for 2019/20, double that for 2018/19.

246 players, 55 agents/fees paid to them and 25 clubs were/are under enquiry for 2019/20.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12045846/hmrc-investigations-into-footballers-tax-affairs-treble-in-past-year?mid=107812310&rid=6645861&cid=DM226573&market=GB&region=UK&campaignlabel=Media%20AB%20Direct

Cumulatively, £464m has been collected by HMRC over the 6 years to 2019/20, directly resulting from their investigations into the professional football industry.