PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

wolviedinho said:
I am not sure we will see any seismic change tbh. I wouldn’t be surprised to find a joint statement by city and the premier. Something along the lines of the dispute has been settled. The league is happy with the evidence provided. Probably try to take the moral high ground by stating that they have a duty to investigate any club blah blah to ensure transparency and fairness.

The league seems to be going after areas Uefa did not touch. @tolmie's hairdoo could be correct when he said 95% is off the table as it mainly pertains to Cas. It’s the other stuff that is the only concern, Fordham etc.

Far too much at stake. My gut is telling me a quiet settlement behind closed doors.
Click to expand...
Hope you’re right I really do
 
terraloon said:
The point I was trying to make is

Was it because of FFP City Group paid Mancini in the way they did, outsourced IR or because they did the FFP charges followed?

Why I make the point is the MancinI money for instance really was insignificant in the overall scheme of things

You are talking about what happens if the charges are proven around unpaid personal taxes then being disclosed . At this time that really isn’t an issue but even if the charges are proven I really can’t see that there are any extra tax implications save image rights.

HMRC we’re already all over image rights issue within the industry and yes the way in which City dealt with them for the period in question complicates matters but their structure isn’t or wasn’t illegal at worse it will be viewed as contrary to PL rules.

Almost certainly going forward City will or have had to agree a settlement with HMRC but that would be the case even if these charges hadn’t been laid

Again I really can’t see that Mancini’s dual contracts were contrary to UK taxation rules and I would be staggered if his accountants or the City group haven’t declared the income meaning it will have already been taxed be it in the UK, in the UAE or most likely in Italy.

edit. the fact there is a contract between Mancinis company and the UAE club is fact. Was it a way of disguising income that will be a subjective call by the tribunal using a lower burden of proof than will be required if the UK tax authorities decide to get involved but my view was and still is HMRC will steer well clear of this if the money has been declared elsewhere

You then come on to the sponsorship that was neither understated or indeed did it come from illegal sources .
That isn't what is being said.
Unless I have missed something I am pretty sure that all the disputed payments can be tracked back to the likes of Ethiad. The claim is that the not all of it originated from the sponsors. I am not sure what if any tax implications there are or could be.

Then finally you are into the failure to engage with the investigation no tax implications there for me.
Click to expand...
First off it wasn’t City Football Group that paid him this extra money it was a UAE club owned by the Sheik but outside the group.

I don’t believe anything dodgy happened but if it did it was because of FFP and now the charges follow for effectively being dishonest.

Your telling me you cannot see how there are tax issue in a high profile football manager of a Premier League club being paid 1-2 million in a lower tax jurisdiction for work done at another club when it should have been paid for by the premier League in the higher tax jurisdiction it surely has meant that NI and Income tax have been avoided.

I never said the sponsorship money came from illegal sources or was understated. If anything I think if the allegations where true we would have paid more tax than needed by disguising owner investment as sponsorship money but it does have serious none FFP implications about accurate accounting which is why it’s been discussed in that way by others and myself but I am less knowledgeable than most on this.
 
Centurions said:
I would suggest they actually have more knowledge of the subject than many on here, I'm not sure which bit you think is wumming but I've not seen anything.

If posts were restricted to only people who knew what they were talking about on here then we'd have only around 5 pages rather than 1,700 plus.
Click to expand...
That would be the forum total ;-)
 
wolviedinho said:
I am not sure we will see any seismic change tbh. I wouldn’t be surprised to find a joint statement by city and the premier. Something along the lines of the dispute has been settled. The league is happy with the evidence provided. Probably try to take the moral high ground by stating that they have a duty to investigate any club blah blah to ensure transparency and fairness.

The league seems to be going after areas Uefa did not touch. @tolmie's hairdoo could be correct when he said 95% is off the table as it mainly pertains to Cas. It’s the other stuff that is the only concern, Fordham etc.

Far too much at stake. My gut is telling me a quiet settlement behind closed doors.
Click to expand...
I hope you are right but I think there is too much poison around. To charge City with 100 plus offences and accuse our senior leaders of false accounting is going nuclear. It is not a tactic which suggests compromise.
I believe the PL leadership is motivated by malice.
 
I don't even pretend I understand all this heavy-duty legal and accounting shit. As Shakespeare says, '...in these nice sharp quillets of the law, Good faith, I am no wiser than a daw.'

But, although we look at it purely from a City perspective, it seems to me that this case has high stakes for the UAE and could bring that whole state into disrepute. As Khaldoon and Mansour are very serious players, I find it hard to imagine that they have been anything but ultra-careful not to allow such a hazard to develop. Imagine from their point of view, that it all goes tits up and they have to explain to the top guy at home. Won't be nice, will it?
 
terraloon said:
Charming

Why I think the issue around Swiss Law is relevant is quite simply this there are differences around such issues as admissibly of evidence but the main point is even then CAS isn’t a court of law but UEFA are bound by Swiss Law

The whole process that the PL and City are now engaged in is different in terms of time baring etc but many of the charges that City face weren’t put before CAS quite simply it wasn’t within their remit
I tried to make the point in a previous post if the issues around Mancini’s contract and of course the IR issue if they are proven , and I say if, then other charges around FFP and Profit and Sustainability then have to be looked at differently

The point I was making , or should I say was trying to make when saying FFP allowances I was talking about the sums an owner can inject by way of equity
Click to expand...
& if my auntie had bollocks, she’s be my uncle. If, buts & maybe’s

You categorically said that the fact that it’s going to be judged by a panel of people who speak English as their first language & the evidence will be presented by people who speak English as their first language will make a difference

How will that make a difference?

The difference between Swiss law & UK law is time barring etc? So UK law has no time barring?

I’ll say again, you have no idea what you’re talking about fella. I’ll take my lead from the board members with actual experience & knowledge of what they’re talking about, instead of a wum know nowt such as yourself :)
 
Been following this thread for weeks, I’m not a legal mind but I just cannot see the people that have transformed the club I’ve followed since being a boy, created the CFG principle which is the envy of everyone and the model to follow, amateur enough to commit widespread accountancy fraud. I just don’t see it
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I hope you are right but I think there is too much poison around. To charge City with 100 plus offences and accuse our senior leaders of false accounting is going nuclear. It is not a tactic which suggests compromise.
I believe the PL leadership is motivated by malice.
Click to expand...
I can see that being the prevailing view considering the charges. I am looking at it through self preservation for both city and the league. We hated Uefa for a long time until Ceferin seemingly offered an olive branch.

The Italian league is blighted with scandals and so is la liga with Barca bribing refs. The only way I see the premier wanting the brand diminished is if they know a super league is on the way and don’t give a fuck anymore and blame city for disrupting the cartel clubs.

Over time I hope cool heads prevail leading to an agreement that leaves both parties with a moral victory while maintaining both brands. Albeit city have once again been dragged through the mud. A lot can and will change by the time a settlement is reached.

I expect a few big figures to be involved to make this go away as quietly as possible.
 
WRicko said:
First off it wasn’t City Football Group that paid him this extra money it was a UAE club owned by the Sheik but outside the group.

I don’t believe anything dodgy happened but if it did it was because of FFP and now the charges follow for effectively being dishonest.

Your telling me you cannot see how there are tax issue in a high profile football manager of a Premier League club being paid 1-2 million in a lower tax jurisdiction for work done at another club when it should have been paid for by the premier League in the higher tax jurisdiction it surely has meant that NI and Income tax have been avoided.

I never said the sponsorship money came from illegal sources or was understated. If anything I think if the allegations where true we would have paid more tax than needed by disguising owner investment as sponsorship money but it does have serious none FFP implications about accurate accounting which is why it’s been discussed in that way by others and myself but I am less knowledgeable than most on this.
Click to expand...
For all intents and purposes he had two contracts . I don’t think there is any dispute both as I understand singed in December 2009.
Ok in terms of the legal entity that is City Group the UAE club isn’t in it but in terms of ownership and or control they would group it with City
I maintain my stance re taxation
 
Maly said:
& if my auntie had bollocks, she’s be my uncle. If, buts & maybe’s

You categorically said that the fact that it’s going to be judged by a panel of people who speak English as their first language & the evidence will be presented by people who speak English as their first language will make a difference

How will that make a difference?

The difference between Swiss law & UK law is time barring etc? So UK law has no time barring?

I’ll say again, you have no idea what you’re talking about fella. I’ll take my lead from the board members with actual experience & knowledge of what they’re talking about, instead of a wum know nowt such as yourself :)
Click to expand...
Bless you.

If I said people giving evidence in English I didn’t mean to but the likelihood is that will be the case.But it’s a fact that the panel almost certainly will have English as their first language.

UEFA are governed by Swiss Law the PL arent. Also it’s worth noting that CAS carried out an arbitration function under Swiss Law.

The Swiss law and English law had nothing to do with time barring that was a UEFA issue no such issue exists in the PL rulebook.
 
terraloon said:
For all intents and purposes he had two contracts . I don’t think there is any dispute both as I understand singed in December 2009.
Ok in terms of the legal entity that is City Group the UAE club isn’t in it but in terms of ownership and or control they would group it with City
I maintain my stance re taxation
Click to expand...
Where are they grouped together. Answer no where. Other than in affect by the allegations Not that it matters.

Please tell me why does not matter from a tax point of view ? Are you disputing that tax in UAE and UK are different ? Is there some arrangement in place ?
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
Whatever we paid Mancini, double it.

What that man did for my football club you just can’t put a price on.

He needs a statue as much as any of the players.

Fuck the league and this financial witch hunt.
Click to expand...
51155173-10259087-image-a-51_1638289107335.jpg
 
WRicko said:
Where are they grouped together. Answer no where. Other than in affect by the allegations Not that it matters.

Please tell me why does not matter from a tax point of view ? Are you disputing that tax in UAE and UK are different ? Is there some arrangement in place ?
Click to expand...
There isn’t any income tax on individuals in the UAE . But re read my previous comments on this as I believe it was an company registered in Italy that invoiced and almost certainly accounted for the money under the Italian tax regime
 
Regarding the alleged Mancini contracts, were the hacked emails ever shown? I can only find:-

"According to Der Spiegel, citing documents the Guardian has not seen or been able to verify, City executives agreed a deal whereby the holding company that controlled City, the Abu Dhabi United Group, would circulate funds to Al Jazira which would then be paid back to Mancini via an offshore company in Mauritius named Sparkleglow Holdings."

from a Guardian article.
 
terraloon said:
For all intents and purposes he had two contracts . I don’t think there is any dispute both as I understand singed in December 2009.
Ok in terms of the legal entity that is City Group the UAE club isn’t in it but in terms of ownership and or control they would group it with City
I maintain my stance re taxation
Click to expand...
Why are you so interested in us?

You're putting a lot of posts in here, i haven't read all of them but you obviously have an unhealthy interest in city.

Do you know chelsea are playing?

I just don't get it unless you're doing it to take the piss and have a dig
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top