[article] - Revenue Launches Probe Into Irish Football Clubs

Roar

from the Sunday Business Post front page

http://thepost.ie

The Revenue Commissioners have launched a major investigation into the financial affairs and tax liabilities of football clubs in the Eircom League.

The Revenue has confirmed that it has designated the 22-team league as an ‘‘area of specific risk’’, and is conducting audits on a number of clubs within the league.

The league was highlighted as an area of risk by a dedicated Revenue unit that examines sectors of the economy on an ongoing basis. The move came after it emerged that some clubs have significant tax bills.

The Revenue is concerned about financial transparency within a number of clubs, particularly in relation to the tax liabilities on players’ wages. Players have regularly complained that they have not been receiving payslips, or that the amount on their slips does not match their actual income.

A Revenue spokesman said: ‘‘All of the clubs in the Eircom League are engaged with the Revenue at present, and we expect this to continue for a while.”

Two weeks ago, the Revenue issued a High Court petition to wind up the company that runs Shelbourne FC. The club owes about €300,000 in back taxes.

Shelbourne’s chief executive, Ollie Byrne, called on the government to grant a tax amnesty for Eircom League clubs. Byrne said this would give clubs the chance of a fresh start.

---

lol @ Byrne looking for a tax amnesty...

KdjaCL

Roar wrote:

Shelbourne’s chief executive, Ollie Byrne, called on the government to grant a tax amnesty for Eircom League clubs. Byrne said this would give clubs the chance of a fresh start.

---

lol @ Byrne looking for a tax amnesty...

The guys got some neck afaik Longford also have tax Issues, Rovers have an agreement with revenue and others considered ok.


kdjac

redspider

ok, I've found out more of the details of this from listening to the Newstalk 106 FM sports show last night.

It seems that he problems with tax issues in LOI clubs came up first when Shamrock Rovers was put into receivership last year. At that point, the receivers found a tax liability hole, a whopping 1.5m was owed in Tax to the Revenue. There was a major negotiation, there was talk that Shamrock Rovers was going to go to the wall and the name would be lost forever, etc, and a deal was done, in fact a very favourable one to Shamrock Rovers. They only had to pay 40,000 in tax !!!

This didnt come out at the time but it got the Revenue alerted that this area was one that was not being looked at. Clubs were companies but were not being ran as such, Auditing was poor and full Tax payments were not being made.

Revenue set-up a unit to look at ALL clubs, and to gather the tax owed. The line they are taking is however much tougher than the line they took with Shamrock Rovers. They want that to be a once off, and hence they have come down hard on Shelbourne looking or all/most of the money owed. They are stating that the let-off for Rovers wa a mistake.

Now, my position on this is as follows and I'd like to hear your thoughts. If Rovers got what was effectively 1.46m from the Government (ie, an amount of tax they didnt have to pay) and as they used that money over the years, surely it is only fair if ALL clubs get the same amount of funding, to make it a level playing field as it were.

Clubs (companies) do owe tax and should pay it, that is fair enough, and Revenue is not the dept which should support the soccer sporting clubs in Ireland, therefore my suggestion is as follows, that the Dept of Sport give a grant of 1.5m to each LOI club. That they each must put in place a proper system for managing their clubs, that they each come clean and pay all their back taxes, etc, etc.

To me that is the fairest and most equitable way out of this mess. It will be a bonus to clubs that have been honest and have paid all or most of their taxes. I will write a letter to the Minister suggesting such change and will lobby a few of my local TD's. Btw, I understand that Bray are in 1m of debt so this will save them.

What do you think?

redspider

blu_sonic

LOL were clear either way.but yeah give us all 1.5mil that would go down a treat on the tallaght front

Dont be at yourself

I dont think that more tax-payers' money should be wasted on what has been admitted as a mistake. I'd rather see some sort of penalties put in place on Shamrock Rovers, to even out any advantage they may have received (though, it must be said, the circumstances in which they received this tax break was fairly extenuating).

blu_sonic

No No I Couldn't Agree less, I've not argument here so, no no, no penalties 40k is more than enough to impose

_blank_

redspider wrote:

Now, my position on this is as follows and I'd like to hear your thoughts. If Rovers got what was effectively 1.46m from the Government (ie, an amount of tax they didnt have to pay) and as they used that money over the years, surely it is only fair if ALL clubs get the same amount of funding, to make it a level playing field as it were.

In all your postings about the eL, this is the only point I have ever agreed with.

blu_sonic wrote:

LOL were clear either way.but yeah give us all 1.5mil that would go down a treat on the tallaght front

Didn't he mean that because Rovers already got let off the debt, that in effect they have already gotten their grant, and would not be entitled to the one all the other clubs would be getting (under his ideas)?

blu_sonic

Yeah i think so but i'm just being cheeky will we get the 40k back? lol

redspider

blu_sonic, I dont think Rovers have a leg to stand on. They've already received what is effectively 1.46m of taxpayers money. So to make it fair, either all clubs should get the equivalent amount or else Rovers should be forced to pay the 1.46m over the forthcoming years. That will be a noose around the club's neck. The payments should be in real terms, so interest and penalties should apply (if they already havent een added in that amount).

By the way, was the Revenue guy who signed off on this a Rovers fan. Its unheard of in business terms with other companies to be let-off such a huge amount. 40k is a joke.

NekkidBibleMan: I understand that you may not think the LOI is worthy of Government support, but the Government already support the LOI and FAI as it is, and this amount would be welcomed at this point in time to get the league into a better and more sound financial position. It can be traded off with perhaps no grants for next season. The Revenue position on this is that it will be better if these companies/clubs are going concerns that can pay their taxes rather than being financially burdened, in large debts, having to pay the bank for loans with mortgaes taken out on assets, etc, for those that have them.

seansouth: I am not anti-LOI, far from it, my critiques in the past have been aimed at improving the LOI, and its good to hear that we can agree on something!

I think that the principle of equal treatment for all clubs is hard to argue with and if I was a club owner, thats what I would be looking for.

redspider

Dont be at yourself

NekkidBibleMan: I understand that you may not think the LOI is worthy of Government support, but the Government already support the LOI and FAI as it is, and this amount would be welcomed at this point in time to get the league into a better and more sound financial position. It can be traded off with perhaps no grants for next season. The Revenue position on this is that it will be better if these companies/clubs are going concerns that can pay their taxes rather than being financially burdened, in large debts, having to pay the bank for loans with mortgaes taken out on assets, etc, for those that have them.

It's not that I don't see the LOI as worthy of government investment, but I dont see why so much taxpayers' money should be spent as a means of sweeping a past mistake under the carpet.

blu_sonic

redspider wrote:

blu_sonic, I dont think Rovers have a leg to stand on. They've already received what is effectively 1.46m of taxpayers money. So to make it fair, either all clubs should get the equivalent amount or else Rovers should be forced to pay the 1.46m over the forthcoming years. That will be a noose around the club's neck. The payments should be in real terms, so interest and penalties should apply (if they already havent een added in that amount).

I'm being tongue in cheek, i don't think the gov should give us money, i'm quite glad they didn't nail us for the cash, if it ment that in the interest of fairness every other club get 1.5mil then so be it, once we don't get nail with a huge tax burden. but remember it was a former ill run club that ran that bill up or rather a ill kept owner that ran up that bill in the name of the club, he should be nailed for it

mchurl

It is very unfair on all f the other EL clubs that rovers should receive sch a lare amount of money, albeit in the form that they got it. Surely some of the clubs must of made a complaint about this? Now dont get me wrong, i didnt want to see Rovers go out of business, but if a financial company for example owed 1.5 million in taxes, would they be let off as well??

gimmick

Re Redspider - while I see your point, I think it is a poor idea. For too long clubs in this country have gotten away with murder, and by giving them this grant, will only let them away with it again.

Monies should maybe be given to clubs who have their houses in order as an incentive to other clubs, so they will see that if they sort themselves out, they have this carrot dangling for them.

I have little sympathy with any club who is in such trouble, least of all Shels. For too long Ollie has been saying tey are the most progressive club in the league etc, yet they allow this to happen behind the scenes? That said, i would hate to see them be wound up. Irish football has enough probelms without that happening.

Also, on the Shams affair last season, well that was a pile of crap, and i can guarantee that if it were any other club they would have been punished to the fullset degree. If a precedent has been set out of this, the league as a whole is screwed, as an attitude of "sure Rovers got away with it, so they have to look after us as well" will prevail.

blu_sonic

gimmick wrote:

Also, on the Shams affair last season, well that was a pile of crap, and i can guarantee that if it were any other club they would have been punished to the fullset degree. If a precedent has been set out of this, the league as a whole is screwed, as an attitude of "sure Rovers got away with it, so they have to look after us as well" will prevail.

what gives you the idea that we were treated differently from anyone else? Whats the basis for such a comment?

gimmick

The fact that Rovers were left away with the majority of the tax bill.

The fact that Rovers still have no home ground, 19 years after last having one (any other club would have been booted out).

blu_sonic

But seeing as it's never happened to another club yet why do you think they'd be treated any different?

gimmick

Pure specualtion on my behalf. That said, in the mid 90s, Cork City were faced with a winding up order, and guesss what, they werent left off any money, they had to pay in full to their creditors.

DaveH

I dont agree with you at all Redspider. I want to say first of all I am not a Shamrock Rovers fan, I actually follow Shelbourne. Here are my points.

RedSpider Wrote:
Now, my position on this is as follows and I'd like to hear your thoughts. If Rovers got what was effectively 1.46m from the Government (ie, an amount of tax they didnt have to pay) and as they used that money over the years, surely it is only fair if ALL clubs get the same amount of funding, to make it a level playing field as it were.

Not True. Rovers did not get a grant. Rovers went into examinership and the aduitors went through their books. The auditors found the club was in debt of €3M, €1.5M was in unpaid TAX. However Shamrock Rovers had NO FIXED ASSESTS(Premisses, Leases, etc). There for the auditors gave Rovers credioters two option's. Option 1,Liquidate the club, since there was no fixed assests all creditors would go unpaid. Option 2, That all creditors accept 1c(maybe 2c) for every outstanding €1. Option 2 was accepted there for The reveune commison recieved €40,000 and as with the other Shamrock Rovers creditors continue to do business with SRFC.

RedSpider Wrote:
By the way, was the Revenue guy who signed off on this a Rovers fan. Its unheard of in business terms with other companies to be let-off such a huge amount. 40k is a joke.

Again This is not true. AIB had a outstanding debt of something like IR£9billion for DIRT Tax in 2000. Yet they settled with the revenue commisson for IR£300 Million.

The difference with shelbourne is they have fixed assests. They all also have a fixed stream of income(bar!) So they will have to settle their debt with revenue.
Thats my post. Your dealing with accountants here, its a different ball game. Its like Rio Ferdinands statement when he was on trail for beating up the asian's, "your dealing with something completely different in court Lawyers, and judges and big words, like solicotors(cant spell)":D

blu_sonic

DaveH wrote:

I dont agree with you at all Redspider. I want to say first of all I am not a Shamrock Rovers fan, I actually follow Shelbourne. Here are my points.

RedSpider Wrote:
Now, my position on this is as follows and I'd like to hear your thoughts. If Rovers got what was effectively 1.46m from the Government (ie, an amount of tax they didnt have to pay) and as they used that money over the years, surely it is only fair if ALL clubs get the same amount of funding, to make it a level playing field as it were.

Not True. Rovers did not get a grant. Rovers went into examinership and the aduitors went through their books. The auditors found the club was in debt of €3M, €1.5M was in unpaid TAX. However Shamrock Rovers had NO FIXED ASSESTS(Premisses, Leases, etc). There for the auditors gave Rovers credioters two option's. Option 1,Liquidate the club, since there was no fixed assests all creditors would go unpaid. Option 2, That all creditors accept 1c(maybe 2c) for every outstanding €1. Option 2 was accepted there for The reveune commison recieved €40,000 and as with the other Shamrock Rovers creditors continue to do business with SRFC.

RedSpider Wrote:
By the way, was the Revenue guy who signed off on this a Rovers fan. Its unheard of in business terms with other companies to be let-off such a huge amount. 40k is a joke.

Again This is not true. AIB had a outstanding debt of something like IR£9billion for DIRT Tax in 2000. Yet they settled with the revenue commisson for IR£300 Million.

The difference with shelbourne is they have fixed assests. They all also have a fixed stream of income(bar!) So they will have to settle their debt with revenue.
Thats my post. Your dealing with accountants here, its a different ball game. Its like Rio Ferdinands statement when he was on trail for beating up the asian's, "your dealing with something completely different in court Lawyers, and judges and big words, like solicotors(cant spell)":D

DaveH I love you now, you just posted everything I couldn't explain or was 100% sure about