RANGERS chairman Dave King has accused Celtic of trying to achieve victories off the pitch which their players could not manage on it as he claimed the oldco Ibrox club received no benefit from their discredited tax avoidance scheme.
King, a former oldco Rangers director, argued the club would still have signed all the players that received Employee Benefit Trust payments even if they had not used the scheme.
The claim was in direct contradiction to former chairman David Murray’s recent assertion in court that EBTs “gave us an opportunity to get players that we perhaps would not be able to afford”.
Calls for Rangers to be stripped of titles won during the EBT years have intensified after five Supreme Court judges unanimously ruled that Rangers should have paid tax on about £50 million in payments made to dozens of players and staff.
Celtic quickly stated that they expected the Scottish football authorities to review the case — a 2013 commission appointed by the Scottish Premier League and led by judge Lord Nimmo Smith ruled that Rangers received “no unfair competitive advantage” after failing to disclose “side letters” detailing the contentious payments, in breach of SPL rules. Sporting sanctions were ruled out but Rangers were fined £250,000 for the disclosure breaches.
In a lengthy statement on the Rangers website, King said: “The Celtic board issued a statement agitating for a re-opening and reversal of the decisions previously made when, in fact, nothing has changed.
“It is disappointing that they have attempted to influence the footballing authorities to alter its historic football honours by calling on administrators and lawyers to achieve off the pitch what its teams failed to do on the pitch.
“As an investor and board member during the period of the so-called benefit I can categorically assure all supporters that the club received no benefit whatsoever. The opposite is true as the effect on the club was wholly negative.”
King argued the Murray Group, the former majority shareholder, had been the “real beneficiary”, claiming the tax scheme merely reduced the amount of money it put into the club to fund transfers.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel