Derby County

[East Londoner]

Could the money laundering checks issue be due to having to convert bitcoin into cash?

[REDOXO]

13 minutes ago, East Londoner said:

Could the money laundering checks issue be due to having to convert bitcoin into cash?

If that is what is happening It will be a factor, with authorities and banks. 

[BTRFTG]

I have it on good authority CK is using as collateral Michael Owen NFTs and as we know, they can't lose value ......

[REDOXO]

Kirschnets exclusivity period has just been ended according to reports!

[Hxj]

I wonder if CK was asked to verify the Crypto profits from his tax return ....

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, REDOXO said:

Kirschnets exclusivity period has just been ended according to reports!

Sky are saying so but Nixon is saying no.

I suspect Sky are reporting rumour as fact but then again Nixon is clearly now Kirchner's mouthpiece so he would say that wouldn't he?

Quantuma are saying nothing of course. Though their statements are usually rambling near gibberish written in very bad English anyway.

Edit: Nixon now saying Quantuma are his source.

Edited June 9, 2022 by chinapig

[BTRFTG]

I just looked at CK's LinkedIn profile and now know less about him than I did prior to visiting.

At least you knew what you were letting yourself in for in the golden days of dubious income sources, you'll recall, 'Supplier of meats to Labour controlled authorities throughout the North West - service with a handshake....' Through condemned offal were such famous empires built.

[Monkeh]

26 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Sky are saying so but Nixon is saying no.

I suspect Sky are reporting rumour as fact but then again Nixon is clearly now Kirchner's mouthpiece so he would say that wouldn't he?

Quantuma are saying nothing of course. Though their statements are usually rambling near gibberish written in very bad English anyway.

Edit: Nixon now saying Quantuma are his source.

Then he's being lied too

[CyderInACan]

What a tangled web they weave. It’s a fascinating old story mind. 

[Rich]

Excuse me if this has been covered before but I haven't seen it. There's lot's of talk about how much is owed to HMRC, with possible agreements to pay less over a period of time. How do we know the exact figure? HMRC won't have released it, Quantuma might have but, is it the correct figure? £36m sounds an awful lot in terms of PAYE, NI and VAT. Are players paid on a PAYE basis, or self employed? 

I only ask as whenever I've dealt with the collector of taxes, there is no leeway in the total, just an agreed payment plan. But, if the figures demanded are wrong from the outset, which is often the case, demands are issued for the incorrect figure. Automated late payment fines are then issued, along interest charged and totaled, yet the original demand was incorrect. I've made payments directly to the HMPO which is supposedly attributed instantly, only for it to be not registered until after the due date. I've then received fines for late payment and when disputing it, additional charges. So, how can we be sure this is not a disputed figure?

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, CyderInACan said:

What a tangled web they weave. It’s a fascinating old story mind. 

And one where I don't think any single person will every really know the whole truth of the matter.

[REDOXO]

6 minutes ago, Rich said:

Excuse me if this has been covered before but I haven't seen it. There's lot's of talk about how much is owed to HMRC, with possible agreements to pay less over a period of time. How do we know the exact figure? HMRC won't have released it, Quantuma might have but, is it the correct figure? £36m sounds an awful lot in terms of PAYE, NI and VAT. Are players paid on a PAYE basis, or self employed? 

I only ask as whenever I've dealt with the collector of taxes, there is no leeway in the total, just an agreed payment plan. But, if the figures demanded are wrong from the outset, which is often the case, demands are issued for the incorrect figure. Automated late payment fines are then issued, along interest charged and totaled, yet the original demand was incorrect. I've made payments directly to the HMPO which is supposedly attributed instantly, only for it to be not registered until after the due date. I've then received fines for late payment and when disputing it, additional charges. So, how can we be sure this is not a disputed figure?

I think a large part of the issue is, in summary, that HMRC started the winding up process well before Covid. Gvnmnt policy was not to wind organizations up through Covid and as such Derby County were given a green light to continue not to pay income tax on wages etc over an extended period. 

[Davefevs]

7 minutes ago, Rich said:

Excuse me if this has been covered before but I haven't seen it. There's lot's of talk about how much is owed to HMRC, with possible agreements to pay less over a period of time. How do we know the exact figure? HMRC won't have released it, Quantuma might have but, is it the correct figure? £36m sounds an awful lot in terms of PAYE, NI and VAT. Are players paid on a PAYE basis, or self employed? 

I only ask as whenever I've dealt with the collector of taxes, there is no leeway in the total, just an agreed payment plan. But, if the figures demanded are wrong from the outset, which is often the case, demands are issued for the incorrect figure. Automated late payment fines are then issued, along interest charged and totaled, yet the original demand was incorrect. I've made payments directly to the HMPO which is supposedly attributed instantly, only for it to be not registered until after the due date. I've then received fines for late payment and when disputing it, additional charges. So, how can we be sure this is not a disputed figure?

Yes, £36m is correct, and as you say a combo of unpaid VAT, NI and PAYE.  It’s not an awful lot if (as it seems) it’s been built up over a period of time!

Players are paid PAYE.  They’ve been paid the net amount, but Derby didn’t pay HMRC their bit.

[Rich]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yes, £36m is correct, and as you say a combo of unpaid VAT, NI and PAYE.  It’s not an awful lot if (as it seems) it’s been built up over a period of time!

Players are paid PAYE.  They’ve been paid the net amount, but Derby didn’t pay HMRC their bit.

As you say, built up over a period of time but, would HMRC and the collector of taxes have allowed that to happen over a period of time, as penalties are added automatically for late payment of taxes and tax returns. That's what I mean by disputable, any interested buyer might want to dispute those figures and possibly find a scapegoat, these are the legal side of things to consider. I thought, possibly wrongly, that the directors, or their bookeeper/accountants are legally obliged personally, to run the business properly and pay taxes on time and on demand?

[BTRFTG]

2 hours ago, Rich said:

As you say, built up over a period of time but, would HMRC and the collector of taxes have allowed that to happen over a period of time, as penalties are added automatically for late payment of taxes and tax returns. That's what I mean by disputable, any interested buyer might want to dispute those figures and possibly find a scapegoat, these are the legal side of things to consider. I thought, possibly wrongly, that the directors, or their bookeeper/accountants are legally obliged personally, to run the business properly and pay taxes on time and on demand?

I remind it is DERBY were talking about here....

Amounts should not be in dispute as players will have documents showing earnings and sales receipts will have been recorded.

Simply a case of Morris finding HMRC a soft touch and using their latitude to fund business rather than he.

[BTRFTG]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Yes, £36m is correct, and as you say a combo of unpaid VAT, NI and PAYE.  It’s not an awful lot if (as it seems) it’s been built up over a period of time!

Players are paid PAYE.  They’ve been paid the net amount, but Derby didn’t pay HMRC their bit.

Believe their accounts if you will but the last period, end year 2018, which if impaired would have been written to Derby's benefit showed staff costs at £40.5m and sales of £29m, so there's roughly around £24m in that year that would have gone to HMRC. Suddenly £36m doesn't seem so much.

[Davefevs]

Just now, BTRFTG said:

Believe their accounts if you will but the last period, end year 2018, which if impaired would have been written to Derby's benefit showed staff costs at £40.5m and sales of £29m, so there's roughly around £24m in that year that would have gone to HMRC. Suddenly £36m doesn't seem so much.

Yep, I wasn’t suggesting it was years and years worth, more likely since the EFL started getting tough on non-payment of players…when Mel decided to pay the “net” to the players but not pay the “tax”, to avoid more points deductions.  Disgraceful behaviour and totally calculated.

[Rich]

1 minute ago, BTRFTG said:

I remind it is DERBY were talking about here....

Amounts should not be in dispute as players will have documents showing earnings and sales receipts will have been recorded.

Simply a case of Morris finding HMRC a soft touch and using their latitude to fund business rather than he.

Perhaps I haven't explained myself very well. If the monthly returns given to HMRC  are not lodged in time and the payments made are not on time, then penalties are issued by HMRC in the form of fines, they are issued on an automated system. From personnel experience, I have made returns and payments by the due date but, that due date has fallen after 5pm on a Friday evening. It then doesn't get registered until Monday morning and an automatic penalty is issued, you then have to appeal this within a certain time limit. If DCFC were so poor in their administrative duties that they never appealed these penalties, then it could possibly be disputed by any prospective buyer that either It's not owed to HMRC or they won't pick up the tab for those failings by the previous administration. 

There's also the personal liability to HMRC if as a company, they haven't completed their returns in a legally required way. Meaning someone within the DCFC admin is liable to prosecution.

[chinapig]

27 minutes ago, Rich said:

Perhaps I haven't explained myself very well. If the monthly returns given to HMRC  are not lodged in time and the payments made are not on time, then penalties are issued by HMRC in the form of fines, they are issued on an automated system. From personnel experience, I have made returns and payments by the due date but, that due date has fallen after 5pm on a Friday evening. It then doesn't get registered until Monday morning and an automatic penalty is issued, you then have to appeal this within a certain time limit. If DCFC were so poor in their administrative duties that they never appealed these penalties, then it could possibly be disputed by any prospective buyer that either It's not owed to HMRC or they won't pick up the tab for those failings by the previous administration. 

There's also the personal liability to HMRC if as a company, they haven't completed their returns in a legally required way. Meaning someone within the DCFC admin is liable to prosecution.

The amount Derby owe will include penalties. It was originally reported as something like £27m and has risen to £36m as far as we know.

A club owner is not personally liable for a club's taxes so Morris gets a free pass. The liability remains with the club, which cannot come out of administration until a settlement is reached with HMRC. We are assuming a deal has been done with them though we don't know for sure.

As far as I'm aware not paying tax due is not a criminal offence, unless you are guilty of tax evasion, which is not the case here.

So nobody goes to jail however disreputable their behaviour.

[Lanterne Rouge]

12 minutes ago, chinapig said:

. We are assuming a deal has been done with them though we don't know for sure.

=

And, unless it has somehow been paid in full, I doubt we ever will.

[Davefevs]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61731404

[REDOXO]

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

The amount Derby owe will include penalties. It was originally reported as something like £27m and has risen to £36m as far as we know.

A club owner is not personally liable for a club's taxes so Morris gets a free pass. The liability remains with the club, which cannot come out of administration until a settlement is reached with HMRC. We are assuming a deal has been done with them though we don't know for sure.

As far as I'm aware not paying tax due is not a criminal offence, unless you are guilty of tax evasion, which is not the case here.

So nobody goes to jail however disreputable their behaviour.

Tax evasion! Clearly there is a standard that does not include evading tax!

[Lrrr]

Doesn't say which Friday tbf....

 

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, Rich said:

Perhaps I haven't explained myself very well. If the monthly returns given to HMRC  are not lodged in time and the payments made are not on time, then penalties are issued by HMRC in the form of fines, they are issued on an automated system. From personnel experience, I have made returns and payments by the due date but, that due date has fallen after 5pm on a Friday evening. It then doesn't get registered until Monday morning and an automatic penalty is issued, you then have to appeal this within a certain time limit. If DCFC were so poor in their administrative duties that they never appealed these penalties, then it could possibly be disputed by any prospective buyer that either It's not owed to HMRC or they won't pick up the tab for those failings by the previous administration. 

There's also the personal liability to HMRC if as a company, they haven't completed their returns in a legally required way. Meaning someone within the DCFC admin is liable to prosecution.

I think HMRC may have dropped this now (or are more lenient,) but there was a time, should an employer have deducted but not yet paid over tax and NI, that the employee could be charged by HMRC against the net figures they had received. I worked as a student on many a site where the gaffer had 'done a bunk'. Like any creditor HMRC have to pursue non payments, it's a civil not criminal debt.

Derby clearly didn't dispute any penalties, non or deferred payment was their act of choice, robbing Peter to pay Paul in balancing the accounts to the EFL.

[chinapig]

18 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Tax evasion! Clearly there is a standard that does not include evading tax!

Tax evasion is a technical term for illegally failing to pay tax due e.g. by making false returns, faking documents etc.

Derby haven't done that they simply haven't paid up. Tax is after all for the little people.

[chinapig]

27 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Doesn't say which Friday tbf....

 

Quantuma are actually saying he has until then to provide satisfactory evidence that he is in a position to complete, not that he has to complete by then.

So how has it got this far without him having provided that evidence given the deadline was 31May?

[Midred]

These Friday deadlines! 

[Midred]

17 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Tax evasion is a technical term for illegally failing to pay tax due e.g. by making false returns, faking documents etc.

Derby haven't done that they simply haven't paid up. Tax is after all for the little people.

So is this tax avoidance? 

[chinapig]

3 minutes ago, Midred said:

So is this tax avoidance? 

No, it's just non-payment of tax due.

From Investopedia:

The term tax avoidance refers to the use of legal methods to minimize the amount of income tax owed by an individual or a business. This is generally accomplished by claiming as many deductions and credits as are allowable. It may also be achieved by prioritizing investments that have tax advantages, such as buying tax-free municipal bonds. Tax avoidance is not the same as tax evasion, which relies on illegal methods such as under reporting income and falsifying deductions.

[phantom]