Are you trying to insinuate that the City management and legal teams may be more commercially, financially, and legally astute than a bunch of red twats who have no idea what they are talking about on their vacuous rants?
theres enough crackpots on here to do that bit ;)
www.lawinsport.com
The duty to cooperate - questions arising from the Man City v UEFA decision - LawInSport
This article is written by Björn Hessert, University of Zurich. By way of disclosure, Björn works as a research assistant for Prof. Dr. Ulrich Haas, who was one of the three CAS arbitrators in the Manchester City FC v UEFA proceedings. Björn would like to stress that he himself was not...
There's no sensationalism in us being cleared. I'd imagine, as much as we'd like the club to go nuclear on our enemies, it would be a case of "as you were" and everyone moves on. That doesn't create website clicks and ad revenue.
I thought that was all about image rights, which don't attract tax or NI at source as they're paid gross to limited companies set up by the players. Obviously the more you pay as image rights, the less tax & NI goes to HMRC. They set a rule of thumb on how much of a player's overall remuneration could be paid as image rights, which was 10% unless there's a good reason for it to be more. That's usually because the player is more marketable (think Haaland, Ronaldo, etc.)It’s relevant albeit loosely but thought this little snippet was interesting
Newcastle cough up £10MILLION to settle HMRC spat from Mike Ashley's ownership
NEWCASTLE UNITED have coughed up £10million to settle a long-running tax battle with HMRC – including millions in legal fees and costs from the row. The club faced a £6.25m bill – befor…www.thesun.co.uk
Without having all the dots it wouldn’t seem likely that Newcastle have had to settle with HMRC the tx/nic/interest re payments made to agents.
The reference to Nic would suggest to me that the payments in question relate to sums paid by NUFC in relation to players own liabilities in effect making them Benefits in Kind.
If that is correct that has to mean is that NUFC have understated the sums paid to players if for no other reason that NUFC paying the tax means the initial P11D submissions re benefits in kind almost certainly will have been grossed up but by making further tax/nic payments to HMRC the original numbers will be incorrect
I believe that Man U still have a similar matter on going .
It's only Martin Samuel's who hasn't got us hung, drawn, and quartered.
No clicks in that. Plus no one in the media really has much, if any, understanding of the situation, which is why we still get comments like "115 charges, so they have to be guilty of something".
Suntan Charlie on Talkshite was patronising Stefan on our irrefutable claim,as if we should present our defence before the prosecution charges.Keeps the clicks and money rolling in for our redshirt bitters.