BOROCHAT
Newest article: Re: Kemp by SevToday 13:11Today at 13:11:28view thread
Oldest article: Hate is a strong word.
by WASP30/11/2024 11:09Sat Nov 30 11:09:55 2024
2 peopleview thread
Next thread: Steve Evans back at Boro by WASP1/4 10:33Tue Apr 1 10:33:44 2025view thread
Hollywood FC
Views: 847
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/ce92zk757vlo
Look at their wage bill
PS Also Everton posted a 53M loss with their wage bill being 81% of turnover loss and Swansea £15.M loss today, crazy.
Edited by HitchinBoro exCalling at 15:20:52 on 31st March 2025
Edited by HitchinBoro exCalling at 15:26:34 on 31st March 2025
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 489
Wrexham are a cancer on football.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 646
Spurs also. Stockport. Doncaster. The list goes on. Obviously lots of clubs releasing accounts recently with a June year end as submission deadline today.
It amazes me with the amount of money in football and the large revenues and huge customers base, that across all the division rarely does anyone make a profit.
But most of the owners are fine with that and more people want to become owners or invest in football teams. The whole industry is bizarre from a business perspective.
Edited by Sev at 17:33:50 on 31st March 2025
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 614
Agree.Perhaps you knew I would say it , but what's odds main creditors are HMRC .
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 569
Don't pay much tax if you don't make a profit.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 546
Plus you pay IT or CT on profits.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 526
Yeah I meant if a club isn't making profits but has a creditor to HMRC then as Balders says it won't be CT as they haven't made profit so I would assume it's usually unpaid PAYE on wages or not paying over output VAT charged.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 513
What if a player has an image rights company based overseas and a proportion of their "salary" is paid that way? So they get £100k PA salary, on which they pay tax and NICs, and £300k PA paid for the use of their face/name, paid into a Monaco or Jersey registered company.
I believe HMRC have a set of tax avoidance criteria on what % of salary can legitimately be paid via such an IR company to ensure its not tax evasion?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 501
Don't the know the answer to that one specifically, but HMRC have a general anti abuse rule they can apply to any tax avoidance where the main reason for a transaction or scheme is to avoid tax and little commercial reason. So it's difficult to "get away with" any sort of tax avoidance planning now, as whilst it's not illegal as such, it will generally fail, plus you have a duty to tell them of the tax avoidance you came up with so they can they counter it!
There probably is therefore a level they deem commercially reasonable to have as image rights before it becomes a tax avoidance scheme.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 453
GAAR and Tax Avoidance schemes is the area I am involved In wish I could comment more but not allowed.But can comment on stuff In public domain , so a recent one was Frankie Dettori who was made bankrupt.Main creditor HMRC re Tax Avoidance
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 460
A lot of the sports industry get caught out by IR35, I see a lot of cases regarding presenters and commentators going through the courts.
Lineker won his case though. More info on that here for anyone interested https://www.taxadvisermagazine.com/article/yellow-card-ir35-what-lineker-case-means-hmrc
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 452
Phil Thomson just lost one.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 456
Avoidance is OK no?
Evasion is where it drops the wrong side of the criminal line, with lawyers getting fat arguing over where the line is.
Edited by BALDOCKBORO at 20:23:46 on 31st March 2025
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 445
Avoidance is ok if it is something parliament intended for eg tax relief on investing in a penson.What is not us eg Tax Avoidance schemes like Frankie was in .Google Rangers FC and Baxendale Walker or loan charge to get an idea Evasion is such as not registering for tax or income and is always wrong .
Over and out on this as footy forum
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 410
Season's basically over for us and if you or Sev can save us a few quid in tax it would liven the last few weeks up no end.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 481
Which for L1 footballers is probably quite a lot less than Beckham managed to secure.
Only so much value in a Harvey White tea towel and mug set.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 305
there is more value in a tea towel and mug set than a few of our players,i would bung in a tea-pot
for a manager as well.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Hollywood FC
Views: 502
Not if you make a loss.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Previous thread: Newcastle United v Stevenage Borough FA Cup 4th Rnd Replay by Celeron29/3 21:06Sat Mar 29 21:06:26 2025view thread