Derby County

[Derby_Ram]

5 minutes ago, chinapig said:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmrc-responses-to-inaccurate-claims#hmrc-does-not-do-sweetheart-deals-with-anyone

Thanks. Confused by this bit...

"HMRC will never accept a lower payment than we could reasonably expect to achieve in court. We will only accept the full amount of tax, interest and penalties owed."

They'll only accept the full amount...but will not accept lower than what could be achieved in court. Does this mean they reasonably expect they'll receive 100% every time even when it's not there? Maybe misinterpreting it but feels contradictory?

[Derby_Ram]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Sorry, what I mean is- I worded it badly, HMRC perhaps cannot just do what they like without challenge in theory, although in practice yes probably they can to an extent.

That's also fair. Future returns are a consideration but perhaps shouldn't be decisive- arguments for and against. On the other hand if HMRC in quite a high profile case get zilch, but the entity is wound up or liquidated then that sends out a message to businesses large and small, self-employed whoever that HMRC will get their dues or the individual or entity will suffer the full consequences. Talking wider than just football btw.

PR disaster? What about repayment over 10 years say. Are there any regulations surrounding an ability to take £x or x% of entity turnover and ringfence it for HMRC debts...

Got you.

And I get the view on sending out messages and not just related to football. Fully. Was just vocalising the opposite, and as said it causes me internal conflict which is why trying hard not to focus on this side too much until everything is clearer.

Last point - I don't know. If so, great, all for something following any such process or regulation. Just not a huge fan of trying to create a new process to fix a case if it's not already in place.

[chinapig]

12 minutes ago, Derby_Ram said:

Thanks. Confused by this bit...

"HMRC will never accept a lower payment than we could reasonably expect to achieve in court. We will only accept the full amount of tax, interest and penalties owed."

They'll only accept the full amount...but will not accept lower than what could be achieved in court. Does this mean they reasonably expect they'll receive 100% every time even when it's not there? Maybe misinterpreting it but feels contradictory?

Exactly the point I have made before. Unless I am missing something the 2 statements can't both be true as you say.

If HMRC are confident in their case and figures why would they expect a court to determine a lower amount?

And it would only take one case that doesn't meet their criteria for their claims to be disproved. It's probably not wise to say "we never do x" or "we always do y".

Frankly I think the whole press release is a case of them protesting too much.

Edited May 18, 2022 by chinapig

[ScottishRed]

If, and is a huge if, this pans out the way predicted i.e. HMRC do a deal and the council buy the stadium and lease it to the club, all hell will break lose, as it should.

The clear implication is that public funds are being used to ‘save’ a football club - sorry, but that is wrong,it should not happen under any circumstances and I include BCFC in that.

For the record I do not ever want to see ANY football club go under but the facts are stark, the previous owner played fast and lose and as he can’t / won’t pay the price, his previous asset has too.

It is that simple.

[Derby_Ram]

10 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

If, and is a huge if, this pans out the way predicted i.e. HMRC do a deal and the council buy the stadium and lease it to the club, all hell will break lose, as it should.

We should know soon enough but I don't think the council buying the stadium is one of the live options any more.

[chinapig]

1 minute ago, Derby_Ram said:

We should know soon enough but I don't think the council buying the stadium is one of the live options any more.

Intriguing. If not the council and not Kirchner, who? Steve Gibson perhaps?

[downendcity]

3 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Intriguing. If not the council and not Kirchner, who? Steve Gibson perhaps?

webuyanystadium.com?

[Mr Popodopolous]

49 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I suspect other clubs who pay their taxes will have something to say but I doubt politicians or indeed the media will be bothered.

Sorry missed this one.

Politicians are (supposedly) there to represent us. What we might have is a handful of MPs from one city and slightly beyond getting a huge slug of HMRC debt waived. 2/3 maybe or just under.

Tail wagging the dog massively. MPs who represent other constituencies have a voice, might it be worth them being leant on about this issue.

The optics are shocking too, in these inflationary times.

Football can do its bit by the EFL imposing a suitably punitive post administration Business Plan on Derby for 2 or 3 years to reflect this haircut and the advantage gained. 

21 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

If, and is a huge if, this pans out the way predicted i.e. HMRC do a deal and the council buy the stadium and lease it to the club, all hell will break lose, as it should.

The clear implication is that public funds are being used to ‘save’ a football club - sorry, but that is wrong,it should not happen under any circumstances and I include BCFC in that.

For the record I do not ever want to see ANY football club go under but the facts are stark, the previous owner played fast and lose and as he can’t / won’t pay the price, his previous asset has too.

It is that simple.

Totally agree, although what is to be, what can be done? 

All hell should break loose totally agree given the sheer size of the HMRC debt, but I'm expect it'll be a vote winner in Derby, perhaps Derbyshire.

Edited May 18, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Can't quote as on phone but was mildly (!) surprised to read a Derby fan suggesting or putting the question as to whether a takeover in conjunction with Covid could see the Book Value wiped!

Probably have to re-read as I can't believe a suggestion to try and pursue yet another loophole and so soon but no!! No. TOWISL (The Only Way Is Straight Line).

Edited May 18, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Sorry missed this one.

Politicians are (supposedly) there to represent us. What we might have is a handful of MPs from one city and slightly beyond getting a huge slug of HMRC debt waived. 2/3 maybe or just under.

Tail wagging the dog massively. MPs who represent other constituencies have a voice, might it be worth them being leant on about this issue.

The optics are shocking too, in these inflationary times.

Football can do its but by imposing a massively punitive Business Plan on Derby for 2 or 3 years to reflect this haircut.

Totally agree, although what is to be, what can be done? 

All hell should break loose totally agree given the sheer size of the HMRC debt, but I'm expect it'll be a vote winner in Derby, perhaps Derbyshire.

You're suggesting what should happen and I sympathise. I'm suggesting what I think will happen, i.e. nothing.

Unless the media take it up as a cause perhaps but, with 1 or 2 exceptions, they are either 1. not interested, 2. uninformed or 3. only interested in Wayne Rooney, so that's unlikely.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

You're suggesting what should happen and I sympathise. I'm suggesting what I think will happen, i.e. nothing.

Unless the media take it up as a cause perhaps but, with 1 or 2 exceptions, they are either 1. not interested, 2. uninformed or 3. only interested in Wayne Rooney, so that's unlikely.

Depends if enough constituents elsewhere are sufficiently motivated to push MPs surely? 

Thoughts on a suitably punitive 2-3 year Business Plan?

[Mr Popodopolous]

The Derby fan suggesting another loophole.

Posts like this harden my position. Hopefully the EFL will have put the Straight line bit in as a condition.

https://dcfcfans.uk/topic/38855-the-administration-thread/page/1579/#comment-2341482

Edited May 18, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Derby_Ram]

14 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Intriguing. If not the council and not Kirchner, who? Steve Gibson perhaps?

Sports Direct Arena could be even more fun.

Got a feeling a couple of as yet publically unknown local businessmen will facilitate a deal to take the stadium away from MM. A few of the supporters groups have spoken to them separately and seems to be substance to it. Whether it's someone with no previous association to the club or one who was part of the consortium who clubbed together in the mid 2000s remains to be seen. There's something bubbling away which is giving those the supporters groups privy to those conversations confidence which they've not had the last 9 months.

[REDOXO]

Do we actually know with certainty that there is a 65% hair cut on taxation. Or is this an assumption based on what’s in the public domain? 
 

The idea that Mike Ashley/Dports Direct buy the ground is not completely silly. However public funds buying the ground and revenue debt being forgiven is a huge ask of government, local and national. 
 

 

[The Swan and Cemetery]

Maybe there should be a referendum in Derby to vote on how best to spend £23m, if they choose DCFC over hospitals etc, odd, but fair enough and the local MPs can explain their heroics. Not particularly keen on a) my team suffering because of the debts built up by DCFC and then b) having fewer nurses etc where I live to ensure ‘a’ gets swept under the carpet. Moral hazard writ large. 

[Derby_Ram]

44 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Do we actually know with certainty that there is a 65% hair cut on taxation. Or is this an assumption based on what’s in the public domain? 
 

Assumption.

[Davefevs]

Some good footie banter in here:

 

[CyderInACan]

12 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

The optics are shocking too, in these inflationary times

I was thinking this too. If HMRC & Derby City Council effectively save DCFC then the cost to the the public purse will be incredible money in very lean times. Let's have it right; Derby are, whichever way you look at it, very much the authors of their own misfortune. Derby are just another business that's gambled. And lost. 

I could be wrong but I doubt that outside of Derby too many people would be bothered if they ceased to exist/became a phoenix club on the Derby Downs. 

[Davefevs]

Kieran Maguire’s POF podcast this morning was interesting.  Suggesting that the 25% (35% / 3 years) will be net and points deduction avoided.  However he suggested (paraphrased) that this will be separate to what will be agreed with HMRC, where he expects a “haircut”.  But I interpreted this as not a “number 1 all over”….perhaps a payment plan for most of it over a longer period.  I’m only guessing but for example 80% over 10 years.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-price-of-football/id1482886394?i=1000562392467

Be interested in the view of the wise sages on here?

[Midred]

38 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Kieran Maguire’s POF podcast this morning was interesting.  Suggesting that the 25% (35% / 3 years) will be net and points deduction avoided.  However he suggested (paraphrased) that this will be separate to what will be agreed with HMRC, where he expects a “haircut”.  But I interpreted this as not a “number 1 all over”….perhaps a payment plan for most of it over a longer period.  I’m only guessing but for example 80% over 10 years.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-price-of-football/id1482886394?i=1000562392467

Be interested in the view of the wise sages on here?

If only I could have had a word with HMRC about my PAYE! 

[exAtyeoMax]

18 hours ago, downendcity said:

If they do then Mel Morris is left holding an £80m  £50m £20m  asset now worth what?

Can’t imagine a prospective owner is enamoured about buying a club without it’s own ground, but, given the financial mess DCFC are in, can also understand them baulking at being almost “held to ransom” over Pride Park by the man who created the financial mess in the first place.

Can also imagine a massive public outcry if Derby Council were to use £20m or so of taxpayers money to purchase Pride Park from the man who failed to pay over £30m of tax.

If the new owner won’t buy PP from Morris, is there anything stopping the club continuing to pay rent to Morris as have DCFC since the ffp sale?

 

Could the council make a profit on that purchase in some way? 

[downendcity]

30 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

Could the council make a profit on that purchase in some way? 

You'd think so, as Pride Park's "market" is £80m, don't you know!

It must be so, as Mel Morris's independent valuer said so.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just on the Pride Park bits, my understanding on a few aspects based on reading up.

1) Derby City Council would borrow the money.

2) Councils can borrow at lower rates seemingly, saw 2.8% mentioned somewhere.

3) The rent would be tied to the interest payments. Think the EFL need to substitute in for FFP purposes a paper market rent, perhaps based on  the original Fair Value?

4) FFP aside, think when such a deal occurred with Plymouth, the rental was an annual yield of 8.5%. A £20m purchase means £1.7m rent in simple terms.

5) I would also argue that there is a case for inflation linked rent to protect the investment for the council. 

6) Going back to the Plymouth deal again, the sale price back to the club after a few years of rent was a % greater than the purchase price. Cannot remember, but seemed not to be any discounting for rent.

Council could actually do okay out of it if on strictly commercial and arms length terms.

Reconsolidation of stadium ownership into the Football group is also unacceptable any time soon. A section of the Agreed Decision should give the EFL grounds for pushback

Edited May 19, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Just on the Pride Park bits, my understanding on a few aspects based on reading up.

1) Derby City Council would borrow the money.

2) Councils can borrow at lower rates seemingly, saw 2.8% mentioned somewhere.

3) The rent would be tied to the interest payments. Think the EFL need to substitute in for FFP purposes a paper market rent, perhaps based on  the original Fair Value?

4) FFP aside, think when such a deal occurred with Plymouth, the rental was an annual yield of 8.5%. A £20m purchase means £1.7m rent in simple terms.

5) I would also argue that there is a case for inflation linked rent to protect the investment for the council. 

6) Going back to the Plymouth deal again, the sale price back to the club after a few years of rent was a % greater than the purchase price. Cannot remember, but seemed not to be any discounting for rent.

Council could actually do okay out of it if on strictly commercial and arms length terms.

Reconsolidation of stadium ownership into the Football group is also unacceptable any time soon. A section of the Agreed Decision should give the EFL grounds for pushback

@Derby_Ram, who seems to have very good sources, says above that it won't be the council buying the stadium so this may be academic.

[Davefevs]

38 minutes ago, chinapig said:

@Derby_Ram, who seems to have very good sources, says above that it won't be the council buying the stadium so this may be academic.

Kieran Maguire suggesting another party is likely too.

[REDOXO]

Just read this on the Derby forum. Answering someone on here called Luke I guess. Apparently MM and his mates at Derby get the same tax pass as whatever organization or industry Gee Screamer decides is somehow not paying their taxes. 

Was Derby not a simple case of not paying employees PAYE payments for several years? 

If HMRC are prepared to sacrifice 65% of the bill to keep Derby alive, as a taxpayer I’m prepared to sacrifice 100% of it to make sure they die, to discourage others. What an alarming precedent.

Well Luke from Bristol, can I Also suggest that the higher rate of tax that the exchequer has missed out on from PAYE would not have stayed there.  Lots of loopholes on a tax return to offset .  Maybe Bristol City should die alongside sport to stop this happening.  Perhaps you should also destroy your TV and stop channels broadcasting with all those pesky buggers getting determined taxation instead of sending in tax returns.  billions overpaid on tax credits a few years ago when it started and written off.  Hunt then down and shoot them.  All those directors taking loans from their own business then going bust next for the chop.  All that s*** you buy online from business not playing the game - stop them trading.  Any business suffering and getting the benefit of not paying some tax they owe, close em down and get a 1000 staff on JSA.  Finally, stop Lukes upcoming bank holiday, it won't be needed when we get rid of the monarchy and seize Charles duchies that he pays ridiculous level of tax on.  

One dimensional bitter nobber 

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, REDOXO said:

Just read this on the Derby forum. Answering someone on here called Luke I guess. Apparently MM and his mates at Derby get the same tax pass as whatever organization or industry Gee Screamer decides is somehow not paying their taxes. 

Was Derby not a simple case of not paying employees PAYE payments for several years? 

If HMRC are prepared to sacrifice 65% of the bill to keep Derby alive, as a taxpayer I’m prepared to sacrifice 100% of it to make sure they die, to discourage others. What an alarming precedent.

Well Luke from Bristol, can I Also suggest that the higher rate of tax that the exchequer has missed out on from PAYE would not have stayed there.  Lots of loopholes on a tax return to offset .  Maybe Bristol City should die alongside sport to stop this happening.  Perhaps you should also destroy your TV and stop channels broadcasting with all those pesky buggers getting determined taxation instead of sending in tax returns.  billions overpaid on tax credits a few years ago when it started and written off.  Hunt then down and shoot them.  All those directors taking loans from their own business then going bust next for the chop.  All that s*** you buy online from business not playing the game - stop them trading.  Any business suffering and getting the benefit of not paying some tax they owe, close em down and get a 1000 staff on JSA.  Finally, stop Lukes upcoming bank holiday, it won't be needed when we get rid of the monarchy and seize Charles duchies that he pays ridiculous level of tax on.  

One dimensional bitter nobber 

Difficult to discern what rational argument might underlie this rant but it looks like whataboutery, perhaps to do with tax avoidance. Like saying "I stole £10 but that person over there stole £50 so I should be let off".

There is a difference between tax avoidance through legal means (much as I dislike much of it) and simply not paying your taxes then expecting the taxpayer at large to take the hit.

As I say, the argument is not entirely clear but suffice it to say that once you start hurling abuse you have probably lost the debate anyway.

[downendcity]

18 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Just read this on the Derby forum. Answering someone on here called Luke I guess. Apparently MM and his mates at Derby get the same tax pass as whatever organization or industry Gee Screamer decides is somehow not paying their taxes. 

Was Derby not a simple case of not paying employees PAYE payments for several years? 

If HMRC are prepared to sacrifice 65% of the bill to keep Derby alive, as a taxpayer I’m prepared to sacrifice 100% of it to make sure they die, to discourage others. What an alarming precedent.

Well Luke from Bristol, can I Also suggest that the higher rate of tax that the exchequer has missed out on from PAYE would not have stayed there.  Lots of loopholes on a tax return to offset .  Maybe Bristol City should die alongside sport to stop this happening.  Perhaps you should also destroy your TV and stop channels broadcasting with all those pesky buggers getting determined taxation instead of sending in tax returns.  billions overpaid on tax credits a few years ago when it started and written off.  Hunt then down and shoot them.  All those directors taking loans from their own business then going bust next for the chop.  All that s*** you buy online from business not playing the game - stop them trading.  Any business suffering and getting the benefit of not paying some tax they owe, close em down and get a 1000 staff on JSA.  Finally, stop Lukes upcoming bank holiday, it won't be needed when we get rid of the monarchy and seize Charles duchies that he pays ridiculous level of tax on.  

One dimensional bitter nobber 

The loopholes to which he refers seem to be  instances of tax avoidance, i.e. where tax payers legally reduce the amount of tax liability they have,  by using the provisions of the tax regime.  

Derby, on the other hand, failed to pay  the tax liability they had incurred over an extended period of time and I’m guessing that their tax liability would have been realised after their accountants had first applied all the legitimate means of tax avoidance available to them! 

The other issue is that much, if not most, of the outstanding tax was accruing during the period when Morris was spending big on players ( transfer fees and wages) in his attempts to secure promotion. We now know that this was being done by cheating the ffp rules, including selling PP to himself for £80m - an independently valued open market value, that has stood the test of time!

It wasn’t that Derby could not pay the taxman, but that they chose not to pay the taxman so they could afford to maintain a challenge for promotion.

Imagine if I tried to excuse non-payment of my tax bill because to do so would not enable Mrs Downend to keep her wardrobe stocked with the latest clothes, have the 3 foreign holidays she wants and to have the new car every year, I don't think I would receive any sympathy whatsoever from the taxman.

Our owner is a tax exile, which, while morally annoying to many ( including our own fans), is perfectly legal. However, as far as his football club is concerned, he has ensured that have operated within the same ffp rules that Derby flagrantly flouted, and took appropriate steps to comply, even when it meant selling some of our best players , which compromised our on field competitiveness. His club also maintained their tax obligations to HMRC, while I’m sure that withholding tax payments would have given more money to spend on the playing squad.

Many of us are old enough to have witnessed BCFC almost going out of business in 1982. That was caused by what were, with hindsight, some poorly judged contract decisions and the club was saved by fans of the club raising the money to rescue us. It was not as a result of withholding payments from the taxman and then expecting the tax man i.e. the taxpayers of the country at large, to take the hit.

 

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

What a bizarre deflecting rant that is. Otoh it is Gee Screamer and I increasingly read his posts in the voice of Victor Meldrew so nuff said...

The whataboutery in general among the Derby fans on there, wow. Sense of entitlement too, no club has an automatic right to League membership. Not had time to read and re-read the rant post but basically he's saying Derby are the lesser of several tax based evils?

Gee Screamer, Derby's answer to Victor Meldrew I'd say!

Edited May 19, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 hours ago, chinapig said:

@Derby_Ram, who seems to have very good sources, says above that it won't be the council buying the stadium so this may be academic.

Thanks. Yeah may well be, just providing a template for how it might work commercially.