PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Stoned Rose]

How come we got the Manchester City player values so wrong? | Untold Arsenal: Supporting the club, the manager and the team

untold-arsenal.com

Untold-Bollocks more like.

 

[deano ou812]

Cheers, just his usual waffle then that peters out after him forgetting what he was talking about.

I presume this "in football there is a big argument going on as to how the money from sell-on deals is accounted" is purely in his own little head then as I can't recall that ever coming up before.

That fella is an idiot..

 

[OntarioBlue]

Let me help you out with a couple of quotes.

On add-ons:
"Let’s imagine: in 2021/22 Wilberforce Wanderers sell player X for £20m plus add ons depending on performance. Mr X does very well and so his add-on value rises dramatically. In 2023/4 the club with the player decide to cash in and sell him for £100m. It’s a good deal. Wilberforce Wanderers get a load of extra cash spread over five years and use it (including money not yet received) to pay off some of the debts and buy some new players. But then two years later the Revenue want a load of that money as taxation on the profitable sale of X. Wilberforce go back to the club they sold to, and say, “could you find any way to adjust your accounts…”

On sell-ons:
"But in football there is a big argument going on as to how the money from sell-on deals is accounted. Does it come into the tax year when the sale takes place or is it added back into the year when the contract is signed? And if they don’t have it…?"

I hope that helps.

I have one question. Surely football Clubs pay income taxes on annual Corporate profits, not on profits made on individual transactions such as the sale of a player. So why would HMRC a be going back to the selling Club looking for tax on the profit on the sale of player x ? Doesn’t make sense to me. Am I missing something ?

 

[Norbiton]

I have one question. Surely football Clubs pay income taxes on annual Corporate profits, not on profits made on individual transactions such as the sale of a player. So why would HMRC a be going back to the selling Club looking for tax on the profit on the sale of player x ? Doesn’t make sense to me. Am I missing something ?

Isn’t VAT payable on sales between UK clubs?

 

[Legal Alien]

Let me help you out with a couple of quotes.

On add-ons:
"Let’s imagine: in 2021/22 Wilberforce Wanderers sell player X for £20m plus add ons depending on performance. Mr X does very well and so his add-on value rises dramatically. In 2023/4 the club with the player decide to cash in and sell him for £100m. It’s a good deal. Wilberforce Wanderers get a load of extra cash spread over five years and use it (including money not yet received) to pay off some of the debts and buy some new players. But then two years later the Revenue want a load of that money as taxation on the profitable sale of X. Wilberforce go back to the club they sold to, and say, “could you find any way to adjust your accounts…”

On sell-ons:
"But in football there is a big argument going on as to how the money from sell-on deals is accounted. Does it come into the tax year when the sale takes place or is it added back into the year when the contract is signed? And if they don’t have it…?"

I hope that helps.

So this scenario would apply to every club who includes add ons then?
I haven't read the article, but why is he targetting us? especially as his own club has previous in tax dodging!

 

[OntarioBlue]

Isn’t VAT payable on sales between UK clubs?

I just looked it up and yes VAT is payable for domestic transfers.

Even so, in the hypothetical case described the original selling Club would have already remitted to HMRC the VAT paid by buying club on the sale. They would have no further liability in respect of this transaction as buying club two would have to pay VAT on the second sale and selling club two would be responsible for remitting this VAT to HMRC.

 

[Norbiton]

I just looked it up and yes VAT is payable for domestic transfers.

Even so, in the hypothetical case described the original selling Club would have already remitted to HMRC the VAT paid by buying club on the sale. They would have no further liability in respect of this transaction as buying club two would have to pay VAT on the second sale and selling club two would be responsible for remitting this VAT to HMRC.

The whole article is complete fantasy. The idea that Wilberforce Wanderers might ask another club if they could adjust their accounts - yeah, that would end well.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

Let me help you out with a couple of quotes.

On add-ons:
"Let’s imagine: in 2021/22 Wilberforce Wanderers sell player X for £20m plus add ons depending on performance. Mr X does very well and so his add-on value rises dramatically. In 2023/4 the club with the player decide to cash in and sell him for £100m. It’s a good deal. Wilberforce Wanderers get a load of extra cash spread over five years and use it (including money not yet received) to pay off some of the debts and buy some new players. But then two years later the Revenue want a load of that money as taxation on the profitable sale of X. Wilberforce go back to the club they sold to, and say, “could you find any way to adjust your accounts…”

On sell-ons:
"But in football there is a big argument going on as to how the money from sell-on deals is accounted. Does it come into the tax year when the sale takes place or is it added back into the year when the contract is signed? And if they don’t have it…?"

I hope that helps.

It’s helps alright- to demonstrate just how desperate some are to find us guilty of something/anything, even if they have to go to lunatic extremes to do it.

 

[Centurions]

The whole article is complete fantasy. The idea that Wilberforce Wanderers might ask another club if they could adjust their accounts - yeah, that would end well.

It's just one of those weird modern things where clicks are more important than actual facts or logic. He's probably doing very well off it from desperate Arsenal fans along with others (I do wish City fans would just ignore him). They read it and go away convinced we're guilty. They have no clue what we're supposed to be guilty of, just that we're guilty. If you asked them to explain to yourself they'd start off confident but would then start spluttering when they realised they don't have a clue. "Well you must be guilty of something".

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

It's 117 charges now.

I thought the skiving twat had a bad back???? Another one pulling a fake sickie.