| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? 10:46 - Mar 28 with 6622 views | hype313 |
If so, please elaborate as why he isn't. |  |
| |  |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:48 - Mar 28 with 2754 views | BlueBadger |
Given that he's reportedly putting £8m a year in to ensure the place keeps running, I'm can't really see how he's going to save money in the long run through some kind of tax loophole. |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:50 - Mar 28 with 2738 views | hype313 |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:48 - Mar 28 by BlueBadger |
Given that he's reportedly putting £8m a year in to ensure the place keeps running, I'm can't really see how he's going to save money in the long run through some kind of tax loophole. |
Fair enough, I just don't get why one would buy a business that needs £8m a year just to keep it's head above water. | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:51 - Mar 28 with 2722 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:50 - Mar 28 by hype313 |
Fair enough, I just don't get why one would buy a business that needs £8m a year just to keep it's head above water. |
Yep, defies all logic. Especially sticking to a plan that has been shown to be nothing but a loss maker. |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:55 - Mar 28 with 2722 views | Guthrum |
Because it doesn't work.
You can offset profit against losses (not against tax liability). But you're only paying tax on a proportion of those profits. A loss of £1 will offset a profit of £1 and save you 20p in tax. So you've paid out an extra £1 (covering the losses) to save yourself 20p - leaving yourself 80p worse off.
That's helpful if you have unavoidably lossmaking parts of your business. But deliberately making a loss to reduce tax doesn't add up. |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:58 - Mar 28 with 2689 views | Guthrum |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:50 - Mar 28 by hype313 |
Fair enough, I just don't get why one would buy a business that needs £8m a year just to keep it's head above water. |
Several possible reasons.
There was the chance he could turn that loss into a decent profit by winning promotion (didn't work out, partly through unwise choices).
Prestige and brand exposure.
He likes owning a football club and had some spare money.
He's found it difficult to off load the club once his budget ran out/inflation made it too expensive to compete. | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:23 - Mar 28 with 2628 views | Moulton |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:48 - Mar 28 by BlueBadger |
Given that he's reportedly putting £8m a year in to ensure the place keeps running, I'm can't really see how he's going to save money in the long run through some kind of tax loophole. |
So if he sells the club for £1 he saves himself £8M per annum. |  | | |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:37 - Mar 28 with 2596 views | gerard1947 |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:50 - Mar 28 by hype313 |
Fair enough, I just don't get why one would buy a business that needs £8m a year just to keep it's head above water. |
He probably didn't see it that way when he bought it. He hoped we would be in the Premier League within a couple of years.
He would sell I'm sure if the right offer comes along. Your point who would by a business that need £8m pa is likely the reason why he's still got it. |  | | |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:37 - Mar 28 with 2597 views | Guthrum |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:23 - Mar 28 by Moulton |
So if he sells the club for £1 he saves himself £8M per annum. |
And loses all of the c£80m he's put in so far. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:39 - Mar 28 with 2583 views | TractorWood |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:55 - Mar 28 by Guthrum |
Because it doesn't work.
You can offset profit against losses (not against tax liability). But you're only paying tax on a proportion of those profits. A loss of £1 will offset a profit of £1 and save you 20p in tax. So you've paid out an extra £1 (covering the losses) to save yourself 20p - leaving yourself 80p worse off.
That's helpful if you have unavoidably lossmaking parts of your business. But deliberately making a loss to reduce tax doesn't add up. |
Spot on. This.
It's like saying I'll take 5 season tickets because I'll get 5% back (although you clearly won't next season). |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:02 - Mar 28 with 2492 views | hype313 |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:55 - Mar 28 by Guthrum |
Because it doesn't work.
You can offset profit against losses (not against tax liability). But you're only paying tax on a proportion of those profits. A loss of £1 will offset a profit of £1 and save you 20p in tax. So you've paid out an extra £1 (covering the losses) to save yourself 20p - leaving yourself 80p worse off.
That's helpful if you have unavoidably lossmaking parts of your business. But deliberately making a loss to reduce tax doesn't add up. |
Thanks Guthers, I'm no tax expert by any stretch, so if that stand true then it's clearly not a tax exercise. | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:13 - Mar 28 with 2442 views | Benters |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:02 - Mar 28 by hype313 |
Thanks Guthers, I'm no tax expert by any stretch, so if that stand true then it's clearly not a tax exercise. |
If you get the right highly paid accountant they could do things many of us would never understand on here ! |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:18 - Mar 28 with 2415 views | TheBlueBarca |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:37 - Mar 28 by Guthrum |
And loses all of the c£80m he's put in so far. |
Yeah, but lets face it he could lose more than double than that still. If I were a businessman I would offload, write off the debt and be done with it unless he really does have some master plan outside of watermarking the clubs facebook pictures. |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:22 - Mar 28 with 2376 views | Benters |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:02 - Mar 28 by hype313 |
Thanks Guthers, I'm no tax expert by any stretch, so if that stand true then it's clearly not a tax exercise. |
Sadly i dont believe any of it . | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:23 - Mar 28 with 2380 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:37 - Mar 28 by Guthrum |
And loses all of the c£80m he's put in so far. |
He's going to lose most of that anyway I suspect.
Thanks for outlining the tax position clearly though - drives me up the wall when people say he's happy making losses because he'll save tax payments. As you say, that's nonsense. Reminds me of an ex-boss I had who told us all he was doing us a favour by not giving us pay rises because the tax man would only get more! | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:23 - Mar 28 with 2381 views | BlueBadger |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:13 - Mar 28 by Benters |
If you get the right highly paid accountant they could do things many of us would never understand on here ! |
In all fairness though Benters, things you don't understand include books that don't have Janet and John on the cover, automatic doors and that things written on buses may be lies. [Post edited 28 Mar 2017 12:24]
| |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:25 - Mar 28 with 2382 views | Guthrum |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:13 - Mar 28 by Benters |
If you get the right highly paid accountant they could do things many of us would never understand on here ! |
But that's mainly by claiming extra expenses/costs or sending profit elsewhere, using means which don't cost more than the sums you're likely to save.
Making a deliberate loss on ITFC to offset against other MEG profits doesn't achieve that, as you will necessarily pay out more than you're saving. Effectively the net profit (what's left over to potentially go into your pocket) would go down by up to four times the amount you'd avoided paying in tax.
Accountants still have to work within the law. It's a science, not magic. | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:30 - Mar 28 with 2355 views | Dennyx4 |
Don't think he is using it for tax purposes, however he has decided to not fund to the level he had before - 5 years or so ago.
We know find oursleves with an owner that does not want to contribute (his right to do so), hence sales of players and little reinvestment into the team, to try to make it as cost neutral as possible. |  | | |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:53 - Mar 28 with 2299 views | dirtyboy |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:25 - Mar 28 by Guthrum |
But that's mainly by claiming extra expenses/costs or sending profit elsewhere, using means which don't cost more than the sums you're likely to save.
Making a deliberate loss on ITFC to offset against other MEG profits doesn't achieve that, as you will necessarily pay out more than you're saving. Effectively the net profit (what's left over to potentially go into your pocket) would go down by up to four times the amount you'd avoided paying in tax.
Accountants still have to work within the law. It's a science, not magic. |
Tax follows legislative procedure and that legislation is then what us accountants use as a guide.
I say guide, because legislation is open to interpretation and interpretation of something may actually be different to what was intended and can be contended. In simplistic terms of course.
We look for something that can perhaps be disputed in favour of a client and exploit it before the 'loophole' is closed.
Having a group of companies across tax jurisdictions (such as say Bermuda) allows certain items to be treated differently, for instance, interest received in Bermuda used to be free of tax, thus a parent company charging interest to an overseas company meant that company got tax relief on the interest it was being charged whereas the parent company didn't get taxed on the lending of said money.
It's changing all the time, and FFP has also likely affected what is actually allowable. I'll stress, I don't know what though as I've not looked.
The above cannot necessarily be extrapolated to ITFC and MEG nor should it, but it's just indicative that it's not really science or magic, it's just interpretation and the willingness to take umbrage with the relevant tax authority to suit your agenda with enough evidence or case law to support your claim.
Regardless, Evans having a company that loses £8m a year will not please him or the rest of the group unless it truly does bring added value elsewhere (which I doubt). |  | | |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:58 - Mar 28 with 2259 views | No9 |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:25 - Mar 28 by Guthrum |
But that's mainly by claiming extra expenses/costs or sending profit elsewhere, using means which don't cost more than the sums you're likely to save.
Making a deliberate loss on ITFC to offset against other MEG profits doesn't achieve that, as you will necessarily pay out more than you're saving. Effectively the net profit (what's left over to potentially go into your pocket) would go down by up to four times the amount you'd avoided paying in tax.
Accountants still have to work within the law. It's a science, not magic. |
It is worth remembering that Mr E's companies are not all res=gisterd in the Uk so will not come under UK laws.
It is also worth remembering that what you & I have to pay to HMRC bares no resemblence to how HMRC work with large multinational corporations | | | |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 14:45 - Mar 28 with 2088 views | southnorfolkblue |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 10:50 - Mar 28 by hype313 |
Fair enough, I just don't get why one would buy a business that needs £8m a year just to keep it's head above water. |
He was sold the proposition that all it would take to get promoted was an investment of a couple of million. It was only when it became apparent that this wasn't going to happen that he found himself saddled with a bit of a black hole financially speaking | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 14:47 - Mar 28 with 2076 views | MJallday |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 11:37 - Mar 28 by Guthrum |
And loses all of the c£80m he's put in so far. |
he might have put in 80m but from what i can see from teh account, theres at least 20m of player sales that havent exactly been coming our way. |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 15:14 - Mar 28 with 2058 views | Guthrum |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 14:47 - Mar 28 by MJallday |
he might have put in 80m but from what i can see from teh account, theres at least 20m of player sales that havent exactly been coming our way. |
Tho they have been enabling him to put in less than the full £6m or so per year over the last few seasons, thus merely meaning the debt has not increased as much as it might have done during that time.
Debt
Summer 2012 - £72.5m
Summer 2013 - £82.4m
Summer 2014 - £86.0m
Summer 2015 - £87.2m
Summer 2016 - £86.5m
Clearly, recent player sales and cost savings have kept debt increase to nearly zero. | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 16:16 - Mar 28 with 2005 views | Guthrum |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 12:58 - Mar 28 by No9 |
It is worth remembering that Mr E's companies are not all res=gisterd in the Uk so will not come under UK laws.
It is also worth remembering that what you & I have to pay to HMRC bares no resemblence to how HMRC work with large multinational corporations |
So if all his profitable companies are registered overseas and not subject to UK tax, or he's let off some of his assessment by dubious agreements with HMRC, that's even less reason to have a deliberate lossmaker on the books. | |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 16:25 - Mar 28 with 1982 views | itfcjoe |
It might be tax efficient in some ways but ultimately he is still spending money to 'save' that tax.
Even if he saves 25% of his tax bill - is it worth spending £6m to save £1.5m? Ultimately it is still costing serious money.
He obviously thinks that either:
- he can still take us up with funding levels
- football will fundamentally change and the Championship will become lucrative enough
- he is comfortable spending a few £m a year and clawing some back in fees and gets enough value (or potential return) for that money |  |
| |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 16:29 - Mar 28 with 1975 views | textbackup |
| Does anyone not think Evans is using us as some Tax purpose? on 16:25 - Mar 28 by itfcjoe |
It might be tax efficient in some ways but ultimately he is still spending money to 'save' that tax.
Even if he saves 25% of his tax bill - is it worth spending £6m to save £1.5m? Ultimately it is still costing serious money.
He obviously thinks that either:
- he can still take us up with funding levels
- football will fundamentally change and the Championship will become lucrative enough
- he is comfortable spending a few £m a year and clawing some back in fees and gets enough value (or potential return) for that money |
Honestly mate I don't think he thinks anything football related. I think he sees his name on the shirt, name all over the ITFC brand, and that does enough for him. He could probably get it cheaper than £6m a year obviously, but if he sees £6m a year as sod all then he'll carry on.
Basically with that as our owner we are fcked and will never be anything |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
