Redknapp & Mandaric cleared
Discussion
Whether or not he’s guilty, I see this verdict as a winner for the working man. Who cares that a relatively nice bloke, who is doing well in his job, then takes a little on the side. Add to this that had he been found guilty he would never have been England coach, but now......
A victory for the common man I say.
A victory for the common man I say.
t sticks" mantra would mean a dignified fall from grace and employment, whereas in this case, old Harry will be England manager by the end of next week!! :-) Gargamel said:
DS3R said:
And just how much tax payers money has been wasted getting this far!?
Well, none of Harry's he doesn't pay any ! They may have lost with Harry but HMRC came up with a better result on this case -
http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2144781/sing...
http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2144781/sing...
This case will prove to be an absolute disaster for the Inland Revenue.
I have posted on the Football thread that the Revenue could not have made a better job of making themselves look like fools. I predicted the Ken Dodd defence would work. And is has. Big style.
This case is a far greater matter of concern than the Dodd case, in terms of Tax law, because it is now clear that there was no offence at all. That was the decision of the Jury. This is a major problem for the IR.
Offshore tax avoidance schemes have just received a massive boost from the arrogant fools at the the Inland Revenue who brought this case. In effect it means that the Revenue have no modus operandi outside the UK.
Their entire approach will need to be reconsidered.
The Revenue have always insisted that they can look through offshore mechanisms in business to identify tax avoidance as the primary reason for the devices and that the artificiality of the system means the IR can claim UK tax.
Not any more they cant.
The consequences to UK tax collection will be seriously large.
Well done Mr Redknapp and Mr Mandaric. The Inland Revenue deserved to fail.
I have posted on the Football thread that the Revenue could not have made a better job of making themselves look like fools. I predicted the Ken Dodd defence would work. And is has. Big style.
This case is a far greater matter of concern than the Dodd case, in terms of Tax law, because it is now clear that there was no offence at all. That was the decision of the Jury. This is a major problem for the IR.
Offshore tax avoidance schemes have just received a massive boost from the arrogant fools at the the Inland Revenue who brought this case. In effect it means that the Revenue have no modus operandi outside the UK.
Their entire approach will need to be reconsidered.
The Revenue have always insisted that they can look through offshore mechanisms in business to identify tax avoidance as the primary reason for the devices and that the artificiality of the system means the IR can claim UK tax.
Not any more they cant.
The consequences to UK tax collection will be seriously large.
Well done Mr Redknapp and Mr Mandaric. The Inland Revenue deserved to fail.
MEC said:
it seemed unlikely all along to me, particularly as we were only talking about £190K. Would he really risk evasion for the same amount of tax he probably pays every week?
That was the total payment, the tax would not have been more than 40% of that, plus interest. An insane decision to prosecute IMHO.Bluebarge said:
MEC said:
it seemed unlikely all along to me, particularly as we were only talking about £190K. Would he really risk evasion for the same amount of tax he probably pays every week?
That was the total payment, the tax would not have been more than 40% of that, plus interest. An insane decision to prosecute IMHO.The commissioners of the Inland Revenue responsible for this disgrace, should resign immediately. The prosecuting counsel, who out to have seen the risk given the apparent weakness of the case, should never receive an instruction from the revenue again.
And an apology should be issued to Mr Redknapp and Mr Mandaric.
This was an abuse of process from the start.
Redknapp is paying millions of pounds of tax a year.
I always thought he genuinely did not realise that this might be regarded as taxable. Clearly the Jury thought he was innocent.
And a decision in a major court case in less than 24 hours?
There never was a case.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff