Celtic expect the Scottish football authorities to review the Rangers tax case after the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs - but the governing body has already dismissed the prospect of disciplinary action on its part.
Only the Scottish Professional Football League can now reopen the case after the tax authority's binding victory following a long-running dispute over about £50million in payments made to Rangers players and staff through Employee Benefit Trusts (EBT) from 2001 until 2009.
Rangers were given a £250,000 fine, which was ultimately paid by the newco club, in February 2013 after a Scottish Premier League-appointed commission ruled they had breached rules by deliberately failing to disclose "side letters" which detailed many of the payments in advance.
However, the three-man panel, chaired by judge Lord Nimmo Smith, ruled Rangers had gained no "unfair competitive advantage" and should suffer no sporting sanction.
That ruling was made in between two tax tribunals which decided largely in favour of the Murray Group, the former majority shareholder of the liquidated club. But those decisions were reversed in the Court of Session in 2015 and there is no avenue for appeal following the unanimous decision by five Supreme Court judges.
Arguments that Rangers won trophies with players they would not have been able to afford if they had been paying the correct tax have now been strengthened by the final verdict.
A statement from Parkhead read: "Celtic's position on this issue has been consistent - that this has always been a matter for the courts of law and also the Scottish football authorities, whose rules are intended to uphold sporting integrity.
"In 2013, we expressed surprise - shared by many observers and supporters of the game - over the findings of the SPL commission that no competitive or sporting advantage had resulted. Today's decision only re-affirms that view.
"We are sure now that the footballing authorities in Scotland will wish to review this matter. Celtic awaits the outcome of their review."
The Scottish Football Association (SFA) quickly ruled out any disciplinary action after its board sought legal advice in advance of the verdict.
A statement read: "Specifically, senior counsel was asked to anticipate whether a determination in favour of HMRC, as announced today, could imply that there had been a breach of the Scottish FA's disciplinary rules as they applied at the time of the EBT payments.
"The clear opinion of senior counsel is that there is a very limited chance of the Scottish FA succeeding in relation to any complaint regarding this matter and that, even if successful, any sanctions available to a judicial panel would also be limited in their scope.
"Accordingly, having had time to consider the opinion from senior counsel, and having examined the judgement of the UK Supreme Court, the board has determined that no further disciplinary action should be taken by the Scottish FA at this time."
The Scottish Professional Football League (SPFL), which assumed control of the top flight following a merger in June 2013, had earlier issued a brief statement.
A spokesman said: "We will now take time to examine the judgement in detail and to consider any implications for the SPFL."
The ramifications extend beyond Scotland and beyond football with HMRC set to target firms which used similar schemes.
The liquidators of oldco Rangers, BDO, will open discussions with HMRC over the liability but the situation with the beneficiaries of the EBT payments, many of whom live abroad, remains uncertain.
Andrew Watters, specialist tax, trusts and estates partner at Irwin Mitchell Private Wealth, said: "As the old Rangers company is now in liquidation, HMRC may try to switch tax liability to the players. If that is successful, some may struggle to pay large tax bills coming years after their high-paying playing days are over."
Andy Wood, technical director of Enterprise Tax Consultants, was involved in a six-figure settlement between HMRC and a club in the English leagues in relation to one senior official, and was aware of "five or six" other deals being struck.
Wood added: "Those clubs which used EBTs and did not similarly engage with HMRC may well now be ruing their failure to do so.
"Some of those organisations which used EBTs to reward star players and directors may well not still be in the Premier League and, therefore, discomfited by being asked to come up with substantial sums of money at short notice without still having access to the sort of income associated with being in English football's top flight.
"In addition, I have no doubt that HMRC will feel emboldened by this judgement as it expands its ongoing enquiries into football's use of image rights payments."
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel