Derby County

[chinapig]

Appleby still allegedly working on a bid including the stadium I see.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60105675

[Bristol Rob]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

My thoughts are that they are already in breach of that if they haven’t paid NI and IT…or is it all VAT?

Might be taking minus 15 points into next season in Lg1

Can they start a season in administration?

Or is it the conference that doesn't accept teams in admin.

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Can they start a season in administration?

Or is it the conference that doesn't accept teams in admin.

Sure I’ve read on here that you cant.

[CyderInACan]

16 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

It's a gamble 

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Might be taking minus 15 points into next season in Lg1

What a mess. 

[chinapig]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/jan/25/derby-county-what-is-going-on-and-will-club-survive-key-questions-answered

The Guardian is now suggesting HMRC may accept significantly less than they are owed.

Hell of a precedent. Perhaps all clubs could now withhold tax payments on the grounds that they can't afford to pay?

[AnotherDerbyFan]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/jan/25/derby-county-what-is-going-on-and-will-club-survive-key-questions-answered

The Guardian is now suggesting HMRC may accept significantly less than they are owed.

Hell of a precedent. Perhaps all clubs could now withhold tax payments on the grounds that they can't afford to pay?

Because these decisions are made on a case by case basis. They know this is the maximum they can get. An insistence on more results in the club folding and HMRC getting even less due to the structure of the debt and the assets at the club.

Only 6 first team players contracted beyond the summer. With compensation for other youngsters, we'd be lucky to pay back MSD and the administrators, never mind having enough left over to go to HMRC.

[Lanterne Rouge]

17 minutes ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Because these decisions are made on a case by case basis. They know this is the maximum they can get. An insistence on more results in the club folding and HMRC getting even less due to the structure of the debt and the assets at the club.

Only 6 first team players contracted beyond the summer. With compensation for other youngsters, we'd be lucky to pay back MSD and the administrators, never mind having enough left over to go to HMRC.

I get your point but it doesn`t half piss off those of us who run small businesses and are patronised, intimidated, threatened and made to dance to HMRC`s tune if we try to delay paying our dues.

I`m ******* livid to be honest. I don`t care if it takes Derby twenty years to pay their tax debts as long as they do in full.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I get your point but it doesn`t half piss off those of us who run small businesses and are patronised, intimidated, threatened and made to dance to HMRC`s tune if we try to delay paying our dues.

I`m ******* livid to be honest. I don`t care if it takes Derby twenty years to pay their tax debts as long as they do in full.

Yep, should be a payment plan. Maybe there is???

[BTRFTG]

25 minutes ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

An insistence on more results in the club folding and HMRC getting even less due to the structure of the debt and the assets at the club.

Perhaps, but long term possibly that's worth it to the taxpayer.

I think in this case HMRC should call the administrators bluff. 

[chinapig]

So if for example HMRC agree that Derby need only pay 25% of the debt I assume the EFL would not be able to impose another points penalty for failure to pay even though they would in fact have failed to pay 75% of what was due.

What a tangled web. Still, as long as football creditors get their money ...

But of course HMRC do not do sweetheart deals do they?

https://farnellclarke.co.uk/resources/hmrc-sweetheart-deals/

Edited January 25, 2022 by chinapig

[ExiledAjax]

34 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I get your point but it doesn`t half piss off those of us who run small businesses and are patronised, intimidated, threatened and made to dance to HMRC`s tune if we try to delay paying our dues.

I`m ******* livid to be honest. I don`t care if it takes Derby twenty years to pay their tax debts as long as they do in full.

It's the old adage that if you owe the bank $100 it's your problem, but if you owe them $100 million it's the Bank's problem.

[AnotherDerbyFan]

21 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

And isn’t that just the wrong priorities. If HMRC let this go it will be a free for all due to the precedent . They always said they would never do it and Rangers know about that .

Far better letting you fold , as someone will then resurrect Derby from non league . 

Priorities set by law  

As I previously said, HMRC will make judgments on a case by case basis, so that they receive as much as they possibly can.

19 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Perhaps, but long term possibly that's worth it to the taxpayer.

I think in this case HMRC should call the administrators bluff. 

There is no bluff. Selling every registered player isn't going to raise the £37m needed to exceed the offer on the table. There are no assets to sell other than players and a few bits of silverware.

[Ska Junkie]

Don't bother paying 75% of the tax bill then City. If it's ok for Derby etc etc.

[luke_bristol]

If Derby aren’t able to pay HMRC then they should go to the wall, “pour encourager les autres”.

[chinapig]

3 minutes ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Priorities set by law  

As I previously said, HMRC will make judgments on a case by case basis, so that they receive as much as they possibly can.

There is no bluff. Selling every registered player isn't going to raise the £37m needed to exceed the offer on the table. There are no assets to sell other than players and a few bits of silverware.

Law or policy? From the HMRC press release I linked above:

‘Fact: HMRC does not do ‘sweetheart deals’. HMRC makes sure every taxpayer, no matter what their size, pays everything they owe.’

[lenred]

40 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, should be a payment plan. Maybe there is???

There had better be! Absolute disgrace if not. 

[Ska Junkie]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Law or policy? From the HMRC press release I linked above:

‘Fact: HMRC does not do ‘sweetheart deals’. HMRC makes sure every taxpayer, no matter what their size, pays everything they owe.’

They missed out 'apart from Derby' by the looks of it.

Scandalous.

[lenred]

6 minutes ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Priorities set by law  

As I previously said, HMRC will make judgments on a case by case basis, so that they receive as much as they possibly can.

There is no bluff. Selling every registered player isn't going to raise the £37m needed to exceed the offer on the table. There are no assets to sell other than players and a few bits of silverware.

They should be receiving it all. Every single penny. Your club bet on 18 red and came up short. If that’s as part of a Payment plan then so be it. If that means you have to sell every asset you have and start at the bottom again so be it.  If Derby do not have to pay it sets a very worrying precedent, as others have said, and I personally think that would be unacceptable.  

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, lenred said:

Your club bet on 18 red and came up short

*32 Red.

[chinapig]

12 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Don't bother paying 75% of the tax bill then City. If it's ok for Derby etc etc.

Steve won't do that of course but if the Guardian report turns out to be correct there will doubtless be an uproar from some, maybe many, clubs.

[davidoldfart]

58 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I get your point but it doesn`t half piss off those of us who run small businesses and are patronised, intimidated, threatened and made to dance to HMRC`s tune if we try to delay paying our dues.

I`m ******* livid to be honest. I don`t care if it takes Derby twenty years to pay their tax debts as long as they do in full.

They have already collected the VAT and NIC etc but spent it on players that no other club could afford. Make them pay in full..we already have one tax payer subsidised club in West Ham !!

[Mr Popodopolous]

21 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Steve won't do that of course but if the Guardian report turns out to be correct there will doubtless be an uproar from some, maybe many, clubs.

Some kind of special measures for Derby over the next few years feel a must if this turns out to be true.

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 hours ago, Hxj said:

They are in breach currently.  And they will remain in breach until the debt is cleared.  So if they do a four year payment plan then they could be in an Embargo for four years, significantly in excess of the Administration embargo.

Surely that would only kick in if Derby were in default of the new arrangement?

Eg if HMRC let them pay x now and then there was  a payment plan for the remainder a default only kicks in when that new rearranged plan is defaulted on?

[Mr Popodopolous]

I also hope that the EFL come back on the following:

1) The rent tied to the 2018 transaction, for FFP purposes if nothing else.

2) Perhaps revisit the 2018 valuation issue if Pride Park goes back for significantly less.

As for HMRC, don't see why they couldn't take £x up front, and then a chunk, a % of their annual income each season into such time as it is paid back. 

[Hxj]

1 hour ago, AnotherDerbyFan said:

Because these decisions are made on a case by case basis. They know this is the maximum they can get. An insistence on more results in the club folding and HMRC getting even less due to the structure of the debt and the assets at the club.

The problem with this is that it runs counter to published HMRC guidance on their position, the following comes from VAS help sheet (publishing.service.gov.uk).

 

[Yellow&Blue&Red]

It's really unfair that Derby are getting away without paying their full debts but forcing them to fail doesn't help anyone. This way HMRC get £xM tax back which would otherwise be lost. Wycombe and Middlesbrough get their claims adjudicated and possibly awarded damages (I really hope they do in Wycombe's case). And the club gets to live on. Mel Morris's crazy failed gamble shouldn't be at the cost of the whole club - all the people who work for it and all the people who support it. I know lots of the supporters were cheering him on, but it's him that's responsible, not them. Putting it out of business punishes people who weren't responsible, in the harshest possible way. Even if the supporters were responsible, forcing it out of existence isn't remotely proportionate!

[Ska Junkie]

28 minutes ago, Yellow&Blue&Red said:

It's really unfair that Derby are getting away without paying their full debts but forcing them to fail doesn't help anyone. This way HMRC get £xM tax back which would otherwise be lost. Wycombe and Middlesbrough get their claims adjudicated and possibly awarded damages (I really hope they do in Wycombe's case). And the club gets to live on. Mel Morris's crazy failed gamble shouldn't be at the cost of the whole club - all the people who work for it and all the people who support it. I know lots of the supporters were cheering him on, but it's him that's responsible, not them. Putting it out of business punishes people who weren't responsible, in the harshest possible way. Even if the supporters were responsible, forcing it out of existence isn't remotely proportionate!

While I totally agree with your sentiment, Derby County should still be help accountable where the HMRC is concerned, even if it takes them years to pay it off. Letting them off the proceeds of sticking 2 fingers up at the tax man (which we would all love to do) is just wrong, the HMRC should not set a precedent IMHO, Derby should face that bill, in full or it cause them discomfort until it's settled.

Edited January 25, 2022 by Ska Junkie

[Yellow&Blue&Red]

4 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

While I totally agree with your sentiment, Derby County should still be help accountable where the HMRC is concerned, even if it takes them years to pay it off. Letting them off the proceeds of sticking 2 fingers up at the tax man (which we would all love to do) is just wrong, the HMRC should not set a precedent IMHO, Derby should face that bill, in full or it cause them discomfort until it's settled.

Yep - completely agree.

[Merrick's Marvels]

24 minutes ago, Yellow&Blue&Red said:

It's really unfair that Derby are getting away without paying their full debts but forcing them to fail doesn't help anyone. 

Yes it does. Derby disappearing and having to climb their way back protects ALL the other EFL clubs from being in a similar mess in the future. And that's the EFL's role - to act on behalf of all their members.

It's not foolproof protection but it sends a message to owners, a mighty powerful one, that if they go rogue, they're putting their club's very existence at risk. That's the EFL protecting ALL of us, as best it can.

If the opposite happens, Derby "get away with it" and pay a pittance, a precedent is set that might just encourage more dodgy owners to act like Mel Morris - and as we've seen, that's no good for anyone.

And for the benefit of any visiting Derby fans, I have no beef with you or your club. Whatsoever. But I certainly do with the people who got you in this mess.       

[Yellow&Blue&Red]

7 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Yes it does. Derby disappearing and having to climb their way back protects ALL the other EFL clubs from being in a similar mess in the future. And that's the EFL's role - to act on behalf of all their members.

It's not foolproof protection but it sends a message to owners, a mighty powerful one, that if they go rogue, they're putting their club's very existence at risk. That's the EFL protecting ALL of us, as best it can.

If the opposite happens, Derby "get away with it" and pay a pittance, a precedent is set that might just encourage more dodgy owners to act like Mel Morris - and as we've seen, that's no good for anyone.

And for the benefit of any visiting Derby fans, I have no beef with you or your club. Whatsoever. But I certainly do with the people who got you in this mess.       

I do see that and it's a fair point, but I don't think I agree because Mel Morris isn't getting the punishment. The regulation has now been tightened up and there are good proposals to tighten it up further so the chance of exactly this happening agains is less now than I think it was. But if someone was to do exactly what Mel Morris did and everything was the same again, then that dodgy **** wouldn't get punished either.

Also - as a side point, it's not the EFL's choice, it's HMRC. If you were to say the EFL punishment for Derby should be stronger - mandatory relegation instead of points for instance - I'd definitely agree with that. Can't say I'm happy with the possibility that they'll dig themselves out of trouble and keep their Championship place. That really would stink.