When tax is too taxing.

...and FYI I'm not "nearly 70" as you keep saying. I'm in my mid 60's and reasonably fit so far, so will you please just f*** off and let me enjoy every last minute I can get playing the game I love whilst I can still play it. I know it won't last but I'm bloody well determined to do it as long as I possibly can and the day that I'm the worst player on the park will be the day I pack it in - but that isn't yet. When that day comes I'll be sure to let you know so you can crack one off whilst typing how you were right all along.

 If that was the case with me i would have packed in years ago 

As its  the second anniversary of Ken Dodd's death today, a few Doddy jokes wouldn't go amiss

You've ruined enough threads going off tangent already Ten Bob so keep your trap shut 

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Am I allowed to say that this thread is supposed to be about Dale Vince and tax dodging? But as its  the second anniversary of Ken Dodd's death today, a few Doddy jokes wouldn't go amiss

Ken Dodd is dead. Why wasn't I told? 

 On his famous tax fraud trial: "I told the Inland Revenue I didn't owe them a penny because I lived near the seaside."

I have one of these that may get shoved up a members arse due to my current mood unless it improves

boltonbonce wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Am I allowed to say that this thread is supposed to be about Dale Vince and tax dodging? But as its  the second anniversary of Ken Dodd's death today, a few Doddy jokes wouldn't go amiss

Ken Dodd is dead. Why wasn't I told? 

 On his famous tax fraud trial: "I told the Inland Revenue I didn't owe them a penny because I lived near the seaside."

The trouble with Freud is that he never played the Glasgow Empire on a Saturday night after Rangers and Celtic had both lost.

karlypants wrote:I have one of these that may get shoved up a members arse due to my current mood unless it improves

You'll have to take it out of your own arse first KP 

A couple of interesting comments from Ecotricity Group's latest Annual Report:

• 'The Group operates a 'not for dividend' model which enables the re-investment of profits back into the mission'. You bet it does. Tax has to be paid on dividends by the recipients. As for 're-investment of profits', there haven't been any for several years.
  
• 'The financial position of the Group remains strong with net assets at £54,477K'. Only because of an historic upward re-valuation of assets when the Group were actually reporting small profits. Its now reporting large losses.
  

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Its not really accountancy, Sluffy, its just business. Everyone trying to protect their own positions against a tidal wave of problems.

Ken Anderson had never agreed to fund BWFC's debts but when he borrowed £5m from Eddie to pay off Blumarble and keep the club afloat he'd done just that and put himself in the firing line. To protect himself (and his family) he took every bit of security there was available, allowing for the fact that there were other unsatisfied charges including PBP's on the hotel.

I expect that before the 'merry dance' there had been skirmishings involving notice being given of the intentions of different parties and a significant amount of disagreement and bad feeling. If it had been in the interests of PBP or EDT to put the hotel into administration and further frustrate KA they might have done it but I doubt that any of them wanted any of these outcomes.

But with the club having lost in excess of £4m in the 2018/19 year, it was simply impossible for the club debt to have gone down in the way implied by the Administrators statement. The Blumarble debt hadn't evaporated into thin air, it had been replaced by a debt owed to Ken Anderson with Anderson taking the same security that Blumarble had (plus a bit more from memory). All the details are on the Companies House website

As for Sharon and Emma's visit to FGR, I don't doubt that there would have been prior discussions  but I'd expect Sharon to prefer to use her undoubted skills on a person to person basis rather than over the phone. Vince seems to me to be extremely vain, so mix a bit of flattery with a bit of anti-Ken dust and sprinkle it over him and hey presto, job done.

Thanks Bob.

Just out of interest IF the £5m was seen by the Administrator to be an equity input into the business by its owner rather than a loan secured on assets and used to pay off BM would that explain the above?

Maybe the BM loan was never secured on any assets other than on paper and was never intended to be anything other than a 'bridging loan' type thing whilst Holdsworth brought in his 'moneyman'.

Anderson tells us that the BM was to be redeemed just 16 days from when he bought the club with Holdsworth and claimed he knew nothing about it.

If that had happened and BM was paid on time everything would have been ok.

Whilst the club was trading it wasn't an issue as such (ok it still had to be paid back and all that went with it) but as in a game of musical chairs when the music stopped and everything had to be sorted out, it would have resulted in their not being enough assets to pay all those listed as secured and the Johnny come lately to the game - BM, being the one who would have lost out?

The same scenario as played out with Ken's 'secured' loan?

That's basically what I think this has all been about, namely the plan was for Holdsworth (and/or his partner) to put £5m equity into the club, he couldn't, took out the BM loan hoping that his newest partner - KA, would, who told him he was never here to do that - and this fatal mismatch of initial expectations led to all that went on to happen with Anderson protecting himself from any personal loss.

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:You're actually jealous. Wow!

Err No!

How did you ever come to that conclusion?

mentalist
/ˈmɛnt(ə)lɪst/
noun
noun: mentalist; plural noun: mentalists

informal•British
an eccentric or mad person.

Again, interesting editing by you. The actual definition is:


mentalist¹
/ˈmɛnt(ə)lɪst/
noun
noun: mentalist; plural noun: mentalists
1.
a magician who performs feats that apparently demonstrate extraordinary mental powers, such as mind-reading.




..so thanks for that, but I'm not actually a magician. Nor do I claim to be although I could have a decent guess at what's going on in your bitter mind.





...and FYI I'm not "nearly 70" as you keep saying. I'm in my mid 60's and reasonably fit so far, so will you please just f*** off and let me enjoy every last minute I can get playing the game I love whilst I can still play it. I know it won't last but I'm bloody well determined to do it as long as I possibly can and the day that I'm the worst player on the park will be the day I pack it in - but that isn't yet. When that day comes I'll be sure to let you know so you can crack one off whilst typing how you were right all along.

meltdown
/ˈmɛltdaʊn/
noun
noun: meltdown; plural noun: meltdowns
1.
a disastrous collapse or breakdown.

Norpig wrote:wum
It is an acronym meaning [url=https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Wind-Up Merchant]Wind-Up Merchant[/url]. 

It refers to someone who posts on message boards and newsgroups with the intention to cause as much disruption as possible by goading others.
He's a WUM, just ignore his posts.

flirt
/fləːt/
Learn to pronounce
verb
gerund or present participle: flirting

   1.
   behave as though sexually attracted to someone, but playfully rather than with serious intentions.

Who am i flirting with KP?

Norpig wrote:Who am i flirting with KP?

 It wasn’t aimed at you mate

Bob might like to have a look at the mess developing at poor old Charlton. Talk about out of the frying pan.

As predicted, Rishi Sunak has taken a cleaver to Entrepreneurs Relief reducing the lifetime allowance to £1m from £10m. Maybe not good news for Dale Vince.


And here's Mr Sunak having a go at 'aggressive tax avoidance' as referred to recently in this thread.


https://www.ftadviser.com/your-industry/2020/03/11/budget-2020-funding-pledged-for-4-4bn-hmrc-evasion-crackdown/

Tbf, most of the former BWFC players and managers referred to were not at BWFC at the time they bought into the film schemes. Some might also have been relatively inexperienced and badly advised but the combination of self-satisfied, high-horsed media luvvies (no names mentioned) and aggressive tax avoidance just grates.

Sluffy wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Its not really accountancy, Sluffy, its just business. Everyone trying to protect their own positions against a tidal wave of problems.

Ken Anderson had never agreed to fund BWFC's debts but when he borrowed £5m from Eddie to pay off Blumarble and keep the club afloat he'd done just that and put himself in the firing line. To protect himself (and his family) he took every bit of security there was available, allowing for the fact that there were other unsatisfied charges including PBP's on the hotel.

I expect that before the 'merry dance' there had been skirmishings involving notice being given of the intentions of different parties and a significant amount of disagreement and bad feeling. If it had been in the interests of PBP or EDT to put the hotel into administration and further frustrate KA they might have done it but I doubt that any of them wanted any of these outcomes.

But with the club having lost in excess of £4m in the 2018/19 year, it was simply impossible for the club debt to have gone down in the way implied by the Administrators statement. The Blumarble debt hadn't evaporated into thin air, it had been replaced by a debt owed to Ken Anderson with Anderson taking the same security that Blumarble had (plus a bit more from memory). All the details are on the Companies House website

As for Sharon and Emma's visit to FGR, I don't doubt that there would have been prior discussions  but I'd expect Sharon to prefer to use her undoubted skills on a person to person basis rather than over the phone. Vince seems to me to be extremely vain, so mix a bit of flattery with a bit of anti-Ken dust and sprinkle it over him and hey presto, job done.

Thanks Bob.

Just out of interest IF the £5m was seen by the Administrator to be an equity input into the business by its owner rather than a loan secured on assets and used to pay off BM would that explain the above?

Maybe the BM loan was never secured on any assets other than on paper and was never intended to be anything other than a 'bridging loan' type thing whilst Holdsworth brought in his 'moneyman'.

Anderson tells us that the BM was to be redeemed just 16 days from when he bought the club with Holdsworth and claimed he knew nothing about it.

If that had happened and BM was paid on time everything would have been ok.

Whilst the club was trading it wasn't an issue as such (ok it still had to be paid back and all that went with it) but as in a game of musical chairs when the music stopped and everything had to be sorted out, it would have resulted in their not being enough assets to pay all those listed as secured and the Johnny come lately to the game - BM, being the one who would have lost out?

The same scenario as played out with Ken's 'secured' loan?

That's basically what I think this has all been about, namely the plan was for Holdsworth (and/or his partner) to put £5m equity into the club, he couldn't, took out the BM loan hoping that his newest partner - KA, would, who told him he was never here to do that - and this fatal mismatch of initial expectations led to all that went on to happen with Anderson protecting himself from any personal loss.

Sorry, Sluffy, but I cannot justify the Administrator's treatment of this matter. I believe the facts were clear. The repayment of the Blumarble loan was long overdue and in order to repay it KA persuaded ED to lend him (not BWFC) the money to repay it.

That's what happened but the Administrator did not acknowledge it had happened in his Statement. It was just plain wrong imo whilst its motive appeared to be to improve EDT's position at the expense of KA.

Its getting away from the main point to dwell on the technicalities of the security but, perhaps surprisingly to many, KA always proved to be a much more reliable witness than Dean Holdsworth.

Maybe one could be forgiven for saying that wasn't a high bar but I accept what KA said about the repayment date of the loan. I also believe that KA was able to hold off Blumarble for so long because Blumarble weren't able to prove that KA had agreed to the terms of the loan and without his signature the security might not stand up in Court.

boltonbonce wrote:Bob might like to have a look at the mess developing at poor old Charlton. Talk about out of the frying pan.

I had a brief look the other day but forgive me if I don't get into this one.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Sorry, Sluffy, but I cannot justify the Administrator's treatment of this matter. I believe the facts were clear. The repayment of the Blumarble loan was long overdue and in order to repay it KA persuaded ED to lend him (not BWFC) the money to repay it.

That's what happened but the Administrator did not acknowledge it had happened in his Statement. It was just plain wrong imo whilst its motive appeared to be to improve EDT's position at the expense of KA.

Its getting away from the main point to dwell on the technicalities of the security but, perhaps surprisingly to many, KA always proved to be a much more reliable witness than Dean Holdsworth.

Maybe one could be forgiven for saying that wasn't a high bar but I accept what KA said about the repayment date of the loan. I also believe that KA was able to hold off Blumarble for so long because Blumarble weren't able to prove that KA had agreed to the terms of the loan and without his signature the security might not stand up in Court.

I'm getting a bit confused now?

We agree that Eddie loaned Ken (not BWFC) the money to pay off BM - so why would the Administrator for BWFC) comment on an external contract between two separate legal entities to the matter he was dealing with?

Once the money came into the club would be the time he would be concerned with it wouldn't it?

It must have been received by BWFC because Ken 'secured' assets against it - hence the documentation at Companies House - and the BM loan was settled.

The Administrator therefore as far as I'm aware could only consider this money to either have been a loan secured against assets, an unsecured loan as there were no surplus assets to be secured against or an equity injection.

The Administrator reported this "...The companies records disclose that the balance outstanding to Mr Anderson as £1,578,042" (Section 10 page 17 of 39) - but goes on to say KA believed it to be circa £7.5m.  

He also didn't show BM as a creditor to BWFC thus proving that the debt had been settled - which is also shown as being settled at Companies House, under 'Charges' on the 24th September.

They also show that Anderson created his secured charge on the 27th September - three days After BM had been paid.

My reasoning of all of the above is that Rubin's took the £5m loan from Eddie to Ken being put into BWFC by Ken as money to pay off a secured creditor.

The £5m could not be secured on other assets - as there were none - and such the money was put in as an unsecured loan initially.  Once what was left from the £5m after BM was settled it was then (3 days later) filed as being secured on assets - the ones BM had just vacated due to being paid.

Without looking up the details outstanding on the BM loan, I believe it to have been somewhere around £4.6m (£4m to repay on the loan plus interest) so I conject that the payment was comprised of roughly £3.4m from the money Ken had just put in and £1.2m from the club's coffers - thus leaving the balance of £1.6m, being the amount Rubins construed Anderson actually had left to secure against the now available assets free of the BM charge - three days later.

Hence why the Administrator specifically used the phrase "balance" outstanding when referring to Andersons as a Secured Creditor, whilst he referred to both EDT and Warburton as the "amount" outstanding to them - ie it is an amount less than what was initially put in whilst the other two remained at the full amount.

I'm happy to be shown to be wrong but that's how I view what had happened.

First signs of a thaw in the Sluffy/Ten Bob love in?