Quote tb="tb"As someone argued quite convincingly on one of the other threads, either here or on the VT, it is pretty unheard of for HMRC to renege on a repayment plan because of the actions of a third party. If the repayment plan was torn up, it would be more likely to be because WTWRLFC defaulted on current payments, making them doubt the commitment to repay historic debt.
The statement on the club site, which I quoted above, suggests that that is indeed the case: having agreed a plan to repay historic debt, the club then failed to make it's next scheduled payment of current NI and VAT money. Crusaders and any part played by the RFL in their administration are, in light of your board's statement, a total red herring.'"
No one’s trying to defend the current BoD here, least of all me, but neither am I going to ignore other factors that have exacerbated the problem.
There are a couple of ways to get HMRC on side,
One is by giving HMRC preferred creditor status under the rules of the competitions in which clubs play.
The second is for the RFL, as the governing body, to show that they will install and enforce heavy sanctions against any club seeking to avoid its TAX responsibilities through Administration.
In the absence of the first one being in place the HMRC look closely at the governing body complying with the second and will enter into a collective agreement on this understanding.
The second one is where the RFL have been complicit in aiding and abetting the Crusaders in their move into Administration thus costing the HMRC £440,353.
Further than that, the RFL then took steps to ensure that their own liabilities were covered by the phoenix company that bought the old Celtic Crusaders club from the Administrator.
That done, HMRC rightfully have zero confidence in the RFLs will or ability to protect HMRCs interests and thus Rugby League Clubs become a risk too far.
Clubs like Wakefield are refused the facility of a payment plan and their TAX becomes payable immediately.
