Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:59 am
PR,S view on paying tax is frightening.It emerged thru questioning by Since 62 last night that PR who had given himself a half million pound bonus of getting the stadium built and then took that in a share option, but at a preferential rate of ten pence.Those were paid into his management company and he then purchased them off his own company for his personal use for £20,000 but telling the tax man that's all they were worth.
Now he also said that the share price they were looking at for our Malaysian friends is in the 42 pence region, so that half a million bonus (or £20,000 if the tax man had believed it)would now be worth £2,125,000.00, good work if you can get it and one hell of a bonus.
So under those maths and if I'm wrong someone correct me, if the Malaysians invested 40 million pounds, in reality it would only mean a huge profit for the original share holders, especially PR at 10 pence a share and not bad for PMG etc. who believe paid 15 pence a share. So the club or fans would see little if no benefit from a 40 million pound investment and in reality it would produce no extra money for the club.
Is it any wonder there as been little if any investment in our club, with our original shareholders wanting to hold onto their nest egg and let no others have a part.
Would any financial experts please add their ten penneth and tell me if I'm badly wrong.
AM I right in thinking that he also stated that he'd naively hoped that the clubs problem with the HMRC got have got through the media net and we'd have been unaware of this little tax avoidance hiccup. Surely if they had nothing to hide then it would have been better to warn people of it first and put his usual spin on things in the Echo.
It was quite apparent that our friend in the East new nothing of this tax problem, because someone in the crowd had an e mail of TG telling him that for fact.
Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:31 pm
A £20,000 transfer of such shares would lead to a DTI investigation for sure, but the DTI very rarely go for prosecution to which Ridsdale will clearly have gambled on that basis albeit being second time around.
Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:34 pm
TNT wrote:A £20,000 transfer of such shares would lead to a DTI investigation for sure, but the DTI very rarely go for prosecution to which Ridsdale will clearly have gambled on that basis albeit being second time around.
Sorry, and that would be dependent on the basis if Ridsdale had as promised paid the revenue by this Christmas. If he has then there will not be any other likely creditors to WH Sports Ltd.