Gingeletiss Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 A question many people would like an answer to, although Vantis were only given a short amount of time to produce the SOA so i don't think the numbers were made up. Can the HMRC refer this back to court given the new numbers? IMO yes, it is a matter of court record now, it was a document requested by the court, and signed off by the clubs directors as a true statement of the clubs affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbyboy Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Can HMRC levy a fine on their bill for PFC submitting an incorrect return and being late? If so the punishment on this is up to 100% of the amount outstanding so this could take their slice up from £17.1m to £34.2m, which puts a different perspective on their importance to the CVA. Wow. According Matt Slater's twitter, this is exactly what's happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Can HMRC levy a fine on their bill for PFC submitting an incorrect return and being late? If so the punishment on this is up to 100% of the amount outstanding so this could take their slice up from £17.1m to £34.2m, which puts a different perspective on their importance to the CVA. We need Clapham Saint or a tax expert. My take on it (Pure guess work, so happy to be corrected) If they owe 140 million of which 17 is secured to baloo and 30 owed to gaydamak, if both debts are due to loans, then nether would incur VAT or tax. There will of course be other debts that won't as well, but assumming that at least half of it does thats a minimum of 17.5% on 70 million quid, which is another 12 million that the tax man will lose out on unless, they can cliam it from pompey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Wow. According Matt Slater's twitter, this is exactly what's happened Wow indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 (edited) Taxman it seems has just double the debt owed to them and increased their % in the CVA vote. Edited 6 May, 2010 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Wow. According Matt Slater's twitter, this is exactly what's happened Awesome! Put that in your chuff Andronikou. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Damn - I'm good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 A stroke of genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Wow. According Matt Slater's twitter, this is exactly what's happened if this is true lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 BBC_MATT "Expect headlines 2moro about additional liability 2 Football League pension fund of £50m!" Ouch ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draino76 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Was this the move up HMRC's sleeve? (Sorry a bit late, but I want to make love to my avatar.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Also, at all the people who said HMRC were backing off or were stymied by Gordon Brown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Oh, and at those who said they would get away with it also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiesaint Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Wow. According Matt Slater's twitter, this is exactly what's happened Well if thats the case then HMRC will have well above 25% & Poopey can kiss their CVA goodbye! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
100%Red&White Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 "Nail the skates Inland Revenue, and we will love you more than you will know, Whoa-o-o-o!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 BBC_MATT "Expect headlines 2moro about additional liability 2 Football League pension fund of £50m!" Ouch ! Expect a couple of paragraphs on page 12 buried under a load of election crap you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saints foreva Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 I got a feeling that they're going to get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 I got a feeling that they're going to get away with it. What are like at doing the pools ? ( Hope it's pretty poor ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 (edited) so HMRC reveal their masterstroke. Pay us 100% or we double what you owe us. Question. If a CVA is agreed at 20p in the pound, does that mean that HMRC by law must accept that agreement and take 20p in the pound or can they fight on till they get 100p in the pound? Edited 6 May, 2010 by Chez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 so HMRC reveal their masterstroke. Pay us 100% or we double what you owe us. Question. If a CVA is agreed at 20p in the pound, does that mean that HMRC by law must accept that agreement and take 20p in the pound or can they fight on till they get 100p in the pound? If a CVA is validly passed then it is binding on all unsecured creditors, so they would have to give up the fight at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiesaint Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 BBC_MATT "Expect headlines 2moro about additional liability 2 Football League pension fund of £50m!" Ouch ! Actually this could be worrying. Right now, they are as good as fooked but an extra £50m could bring HMRC's block back under 25%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latter day saint Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 YESSSS!!!! nice one HMRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Actually this could be worrying. Right now, they are as good as fooked but an extra £50m could bring HMRC's block back under 25%. True, but then if it's a football related debt it would mean a new owner having to stump up the best part of £100m to be allowed to run it as a football club. Either way, they're absolutely ruined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMPR Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 I got a feeling that they're going to get away with it. No chance, we wont have a club as no one is going to pay the money to own what we have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Actually this could be worrying. Right now, they are as good as fooked but an extra £50m could bring HMRC's block back under 25%. But an extra £50m of football debt would mean they would be ****ged anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Actually this could be worrying. Right now, they are as good as fooked but an extra £50m could bring HMRC's block back under 25%. It may count as football debt and thus all £50m have to be paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 If HMRC's debt is now £34million, and the total debt is £134million, thats HMRC holding 25.4% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 If HMRC's debt is now £34million, and the total debt is £134million, thats HMRC holding 25.4% Yes, but the total debt figure includes secured debt which is not relevant for the purposes of the CVA so they actually have a greater share in the CVA vote. Anyway, even 25.4% would be enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 bbc_matt Andronikou attacked Premier League's attitude 2 club & says it will apply 4 Europe. Wants Grant 2 stay on too. Player sales inevitable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 If HMRC's debt is now £34million, and the total debt is £134million, thats HMRC holding 25.4% Take off the secured debt of £14m and it's 28% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 If HMRC's debt is now £34million, and the total debt is £134million, thats HMRC holding 25.4% isn't it 25% of unsecured debt that is the key, rather than total debt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMPR Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Take off the secured debt of £14m and it's 28% Last post of the day, theres another £22m of secured debt so its actually 35%ish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolo Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 isn't it 25% of unsecured debt that is the key, rather than total debt? + secured debt + football related items isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleonothing Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 bbc_matt Andronikou attacked Premier League's attitude 2 club & says it will apply 4 Europe. Wants Grant 2 stay on too. Player sales inevitable How on earth can they think they are going to get into Europe. They have cheated!! They are not getting in!! How they think that they are getting a raw deal from the Prem I do not know. What are they going to think when the FL get hold of them? Only difference is that it has happened before in the FL so there is precedence! C'mon HMRC. Extinguish what little hope they have!! OOO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 HMRC have levied the 100% penalty they are legally allowed to do in circumstances like this. It's a masterstroke alright. They may well have done it deliberately to get over the 25% threshold so they can block the CVA to make an example of pompey to the rest of football. Or alternatively they are just maximising their return from the CVA. Hope it's the former. i think the 50M owed to the pension fund will be batted away - apparently Android wasn't fazed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 It may count as football debt and thus all £50m have to be paid. So looking on the bright side; 1) We have potentially £34-35M owed to HMRC, which is over 25% so no CVA or 2) we have another £50M of football debt that has to be paid in full, PLUS another £3.4M as 20% of the increase claimed by HMRC :smt043 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merrimd Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 No chance, we wont have a club as no one is going to pay the money to own what we have I'm not sure anyone is coming in to buy you anyway, hence the 5 year deal on the cva. If you get it agreed, parachute payments and player sales will pay the cva in full. I can see you getting away with just a few years with a cr@p squad but ultimately debt free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brightspark Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 is the ship finally sinking? yes? YES!!! COYHMRC!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 apparently Android wasn't fazed. He has appeared unfazed for a lot of things in the last few months and later been shown to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiesaint Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 True, but then if it's a football related debt it would mean a new owner having to stump up the best part of £100m to be allowed to run it as a football club. Either way, they're absolutely ruined. You're quite right - thanks Benjii & others for putting my mind at ease. They are indeed, as you say, ruined!!!! :smt043 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Well if thats the case then HMRC will have well above 25% & Poopey can kiss their CVA goodbye! check my sums?? (100 / 138.6) * 34.2 = 24.6753247 tax man 24.6% of cva? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 check my sums?? (100 / 138.6) * 34.2 = 24.6753247 tax man 24.6% of cva? You need to take out the secured debt (£14m?) from that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 check my sums?? (100 / 138.6) * 34.2 = 24.6753247 tax man 24.6% of cva? You need to take out Baloo's lump sum & transfer fees owed, so it's about £105M rather than £138.6M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolo Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 34.2 / (138 - 14 (secured loans) - 22 (player sales + wages) =102) = 33.5% Put that in your pipe and smoke it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 You need to take out the secured debt (£14m?) from that Thats better! (100 / (138.6 - 14)) * 34.2 = 27.4478331 27% of CVA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkins Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Greetings, Have just been reading some of the posts on here and was wondering whether any of you might care to offer some words of comfort to distraught Pompey fans? I seem to detect a small amount of schadenfreude but am sure, deep down, you have some sympathy and your hearts go out to the fans? Surely? After all, they've done nothing wrong - just supported their team, as do you. Anyway, good luck for next season - I'm sure had you reached the play-offs, you would have been promoted. Hopefully we can have some more local derbies in the near future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 34.2 / (138 - 14 (secured loans) - 22 (player sales + wages) =102) = 33.5% Put that in your pipe and smoke it.... :weedman:, feels good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Thats a debt of £8,500 per fan, or only 22 years of season tickets. Its easy to see how they thought they could legitmately trade out of those kind of small cashflow issues. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 check my sums?? (100 / 138.6) * 34.2 = 24.6753247 tax man 24.6% of cva? Like Steve said - it's only the unsecured creditors. So you need to deduct Baloo's 14m. 34.2/124 or so = 27.5% approx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 6 May, 2010 Share Posted 6 May, 2010 Greetings, Have just been reading some of the posts on here and was wondering whether any of you might care to offer some words of comfort to distraught Pompey fans? I seem to detect a small amount of schadenfreude but am sure, deep down, you have some sympathy and your hearts go out to the fans? Surely? After all, they've done nothing wrong - just supported their team, as do you. Anyway, good luck for next season - I'm sure had you reached the play-offs, you would have been promoted. Hopefully we can have some more local derbies in the near future. Words of comfort... hmm.... you won't have to listen to that bell any more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts