IT was the legal timebomb that led to the downfall of one of Scotland's oldest and most famous football clubs.
Rangers' so-called "Big Tax Case" was seen as the catalyst for the disastrous eventual sale of the club to disgraced former owner Craig Whyte, the holding company's fall into liquidation and the team's humiliating demotion to the third division.
Yesterday upper tier tribunal judge Lord Doherty threw out an appeal by the taxman relating to the club's £50 million tax liability over the use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs) to make payments to players, managers and other staff.
Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HRMC) contended that the EBTs were used by Rangers' former owner Sir David Murray as a way of avoiding income tax, and insisted payments made to players and other employees should be taxable.
Sir David successfully argued the payment had been loans rather than wages and therefore not subject to tax.
Many believe the prospect of the EBT tax debt was the key to Rangers' financial difficulties, with Lloyds Banking Group insisting club debts were cleared, sparking the calamitous sale to Mr Whyte in May 2011.
If the HMRC appeal had been successful, the debt would have been added to the millions left behind by the old club company RFC 2012 plc, with little effect on the newco company.
The ruling was seen as vindication for fans over the persistent allegation the club had effectively cheated its way to titles through the use of EBTs..
EBTs were commonly used to enable companies to minimise the income tax and National Insurance paid by high-earning employees and directors, and to allow those companies to claim corporation tax deductions on payments into the trust.
The concern over Rangers' tax liability grew when in May 2012 a BBC documentary team claimed 63 players and 24 staff members received EBT payments and 53 of them were provided with "side letters" detailing the structure of payments.
However, many of the previous tax advantages of that particular arrangement were removed as part of the 2011 Finance Act.
HMRC contends that EBTs were used by more than 5000 UK firms, including football clubs in England. The decision is seen as a blow to its bid to claw back many millions of pounds from the use of the scheme.
Football finance expert Neil Patey, a partner at Ernst and Young, said he did not believe the ruling would stop HRMC pursuing firms operating EBTs.
"Losing the appeal doesn't help them. You could say that publicly it is more an embarrassment that they pursued this so aggressively and lost it, but they will say, rightly, it is taxpayers' money at the end of the day and if they think tax is due it is right that they pursue it," he said.
"But the fact they lost this one won't necessarily put them off the other ones because every case is slightly different."
Mr Patey said the case result vindicated the oldco board, as it affirmed it was not doing anything illegal with the use of the EBT scheme.
"This was tax planning, which I think Rangers will admit themselves was at the aggressive end of the scale, but it has been found to be at the right side of legality."
In December, 2012, a panel found that the oldco, owned by Murray Group Holdings through a subsidiary at the time, was not liable to pay tax on its EBTs after it won the appeal "in principle".
Three months later HMRC launched an appeal.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article