sweetsheri Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 15 minutes ago, cbirks said: Well I'd better pipe down, then, if I don't have the same insights as I did nearly a decade ago. Incidentally, though, this is exactly why Mandaric didn't sell to Mammadov, as he and most of the Azerbaijan super rich are knee-deep in this stuff. Bills... is that you? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casbahowl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 18 minutes ago, cbirks said: Well I'd better pipe down, then, if I don't have the same insights as I did nearly a decade ago. Incidentally, though, this is exactly why Mandaric didn't sell to Mammadov, as he and most of the Azerbaijan super rich are knee-deep in this stuff. The only person disappointed when that deal fell through was Mandaric! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage owl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 21 minutes ago, cbirks said: Well I'd better pipe down, then, if I don't have the same insights as I did nearly a decade ago. Incidentally, though, this is exactly why Mandaric didn't sell to Mammadov, as he and most of the Azerbaijan super rich are knee-deep in this stuff. The only reason he didn't sell to Mammadov is that he couldn't provide the funds. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roscoe P. Coltrane Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 7 hours ago, Ever the pessimist said: Expect it will be something to do with DC's family business. @Att.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwokenGiant Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, cbirks said: It's not good news. It means our club is now participating in the world of offshore international finance. Our money that we pay into the club is now being siphoned abroad, never returning in taxation that will benefit our society. It's part of the exact same legislation-dodging world that the superrich have been indulging in, the exact same processes that Cameron, Yanokuvic, Putin, Trump, everyone have used to plunder their countries. Welcome to klepocracy. Those that think it'll benefit our club are short-sighted. This is the short of stuff that keeps the poor poor and rich ever, ever richer, the stuff that means most of London is technically foreign territory. I would LOVE to be proved wrong. But I'm also 100% not. But doesn’t our club make a loss, so how can out money be siphoned off anywhere. The system is broke, Chansiri has found a way around it. Edited June 24, 2019 by AwokenGiant 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 1 hour ago, mike84 said: What money do you expect is being moved off shore when we are losing tens of millions of pound per year. We don't even generate enough money inturn over to pay the players wage bill. There certainly won't be anything going back to the owner. Somebody should tell DC that this offshore stuff is about taking money from the UK and putting it overseas not the other way round ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 1 hour ago, cbirks said: So, sadly not. This is unfortunately a very well documented thing that we're very much fighting a losing battle to contain. The telltale signs are in this Sheffield 2, 3, 4 & 5 business. One owns the other, which is in turn director of the first which is joint owned by the next two and around and around. It's a process my which individuals take advatage of the legal status of a limited liability company. At best, it is a way of hiding income and avoiding taxation - something I reiterate that we DO NOT WANT, expecially with our individual hard earned cash going into it, and especially with the EFL making its own rules to combat this sort of thing; what's legal may not be ok in football. At worst, its a way to hide true ownership and thus a way to embezzle money for individuals, as money is moved into one of these companies (as even The Star says seemingly offshore companies) where is passed to individuals. Call me every name under the sun but I'm not wrong in this. This is what the Panama Papers was all about. It must be said I don't think DC is going for option 2, but nonetheless we should be very disappointed that our club has gone this way, particularly if we don't even own our own ground. What we're hoping for in all of this is for DC to be benevolent, to be doing this with genuinely the clubs interests at heart, with some sort of magnanimous plan to hand it all back to us if/when he's out. You obviously have a bug bear on this. However as others have said what tax liabilities are SWFC seeking to mitigate here. In fact the holding company registered in an overseas jurisdiction may be to enable the huge corporate tax losses to be utilised in those countries Payroll taxes will be as before VAT as before Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthefish2002 Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 I can remember a time when being a football fan didnt mean you also had to an expert in International finance and taxation. 3 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted June 24, 2019 Author Share Posted June 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, matthefish2002 said: I can remember a time when being a football fan didnt mean you also had to an expert in International finance and taxation. Forget jumpers, it’s international financial reporting standards for goalposts these days... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 hours ago, cbirks said: It's not good news. It means our club is now participating in the world of offshore international finance. Our money that we pay into the club is now being siphoned abroad, never returning in taxation that will benefit our society. It's part of the exact same legislation-dodging world that the superrich have been indulging in, the exact same processes that Cameron, Yanokuvic, Putin, Trump, everyone have used to plunder their countries. Welcome to klepocracy. Those that think it'll benefit our club are short-sighted. This is the short of stuff that keeps the poor poor and rich ever, ever richer, the stuff that means most of London is technically foreign territory. I would LOVE to be proved wrong. But I'm also 100% not. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 20 minutes ago, matthefish2002 said: I can remember a time when being a football fan didnt mean you also had to an expert in International finance and taxation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted June 24, 2019 Author Share Posted June 24, 2019 11 hours ago, HarrowbyOwl said: Hong Kong was was my guess too but nothing comes up on the Hong Kong register - Integrated Companies Registry Information System (ICRIS): https://www.icris.cr.gov.hk/csci/ Although there is a Sheffield Wednesday International Developments ltd... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrowbyOwl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, kobayashi said: Although there is a Sheffield Wednesday International Developments ltd... Yes, saw that. Intriguing. Registered Sept 2014, dissolved 2017. Wonder who was involved? I couldn’t see any director information. Not the most user friendly site. Edited June 24, 2019 by HarrowbyOwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prowl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 1 hour ago, cbirks said: Well I'd better pipe down, then, if I don't have the same insights as I did nearly a decade ago. Incidentally, though, this is exactly why Mandaric didn't sell to Mammadov, as he and most of the Azerbaijan super rich are knee-deep in this stuff. Mandaric didn't sell to Mammadov because he didn't come up with the money. If he had MM would have said he was an ideal owner for us and a fine upstanding citizen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobayashi Posted June 24, 2019 Author Share Posted June 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, HarrowbyOwl said: Yes, saw that. Intriguing. Registered Sept 2014, dissolved 2017. Wonder who was involved? I couldn’t see any director information. Not the most user friendly site. Just saw the name listed but didn't see any details...nothing to see there then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 On 23/06/2019 at 09:32, big_al1985 said: It's interesting how we've made this work, the ground is in the books for c23m... so it needs to have sold for what, 40m, to make enough profit to assist ffp. (hopefully someone will correct me if I'm wrong here) I'm guessing it must have been valued on an investment basis with us as tenant, Leeds used to pay 2m, that means we're going to have to pay upwards of that and with a pretty generous yield calculation to get anywhere near 40m. Sure they'll be a meltdown when everyone sees a wacking big rent through next years books!! Of course, I could be completely wrong!! Am i looking at this the wrong way but wouldn't he be paying himself rent albeit through a subsidary company? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) On 23/06/2019 at 09:50, mkowl said: Well that is the West Stand for sure I can't say I understand what the flip the valuer does. In my cynical mind it will be about being given a figure and then work backwards to get that answer. I have done work for too many farmers A farmer once tried to explain to me how they claimed tax back due to depreciation on new tractors and stuff like that. Sort of understood it. Seemed to me that after claiming tax back after about 4 years they'd got a lot of their money back. This was many years ago mind. Edited June 24, 2019 by darra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 15 minutes ago, darra said: Am i looking at this the wrong way but wouldn't he be paying himself rent albeit through a subsidary company? Well SWFC would be paying rent to another company he presumably controls. The point most of us make is the potential risks down the line of ownership of the ground being divorced from the owner of football operations. It never seems to end well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 14 minutes ago, darra said: A farmer once tried to explain to me how they claimed tax back due to depreciation on new tractors and stuff like that. Sort of understood it. Seemed to me that after claiming tax back after about 4 years they'd got a lot of their money back. This was many years ago mind. Well you get a tax deductible amount against the profit for amounts spent on capital equipment So if spend £1000 as a higher rate taxpayer it reduces your tax bill by £400. Still costs you £600 ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plonk Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 21 minutes ago, mkowl said: Well SWFC would be paying rent to another company he presumably controls. The point most of us make is the potential risks down the line of ownership of the ground being divorced from the owner of football operations. It never seems to end well Not done the porkers any harm. IF this is an easy way to get money out of a business / UK, then maybe it’s an easy way to move money the other way? If HMRC can’t get the bottom of it I’m sure the EFL can’t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts