latest from trevor birch

Sluffy wrote:Latest from The Telegraph -

(Doesn't really tell us much more than we already knew).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

HMRC can only issue an order if they haven't been paid.

We certainly don't owe any Employers' NIC on wages we haven't paid.
And the Employers' NIC on wages that have been paid isn't due until the middle of the month following payment so I think the Telegraph is jumping the gun here in order to create a story.

WL we owe Class 1 employee NICs and their PAYE tax that should've been deducted on their wages. The fact that we failed to pay the wages does not detract from the fact that it is owed. Telegraph has it correct. An employee performs a task and is contractually due pay which is taxed. He has performed his task (debatable with our senior players) and we owe them their contractual money of which the tax and ni should be deducted by bwfc and paid direct to HMRC.

As I've already said on here (twice) Gordon Taylor confirmed that we owe "a significant sum" to HMRC already.

He said it on Talksport on Tuesday after he sat in on the meeting with Birch and the players.

The hold up with the takeover is that the club wants £10 million upfront to cover wages and debts.

The club could owe tax to HMRC for various reasons.
It could be a VAT bill which is normally paid on a quarterly basis.
It could be the NICs and PAYE on wages paid in previous months which was due three weeks after the month in which it was paid. Thus they might have defaulted on paying over PAYE and NICs from any of the previous months- and that sounds quite likely.
With a community entity like BWFC, HMRC are usually quite tolerant and will allow time for a solution to be found. Thus they will be aware that there are attempts to buy the club and settle outstanding liabilities before they will take action.
If the bill is a long standing liability then they may be willing to act now. If the liability is fairly fresh, then they'll bide their time to see what might emerge from the morass.
HMRC dislike bad publicity like killing off a major recreational business like BWFC- it really will be the last resort - but they will take action eventually as its their statutory duty to collect tax where it is due.
There's still hope !!

Every week HMRC are in court "winding up a football club". But it never happens.

Natasha Whittam wrote:Every week HMRC are in court "winding up a football club". But it never happens.

Slight exaggeration there Nat-, but HMRC do go for a winding up as a last resort.
The football club exemption ( to pay all football related debt before others) is being challenged in court by HMRC .
Watch for the winding up petition to be 'advertised' usually 7 days before the petition is heard in the High Court to give the club a last chance to sort itself out.

In a number of similar cases( like Northampton, Bury and others) the local council has stepped in and either made an emergency loan to stave off the winding up petition, or paid the debt itself - and it would be good to see if Bolton Council will rise to the challenge of doing so.  The club has been owned and run by wealthy Boltonians (ED and the Warburtons) ,whose relationship with Bolton has been mutually beneficial- and so as a last resort the Council might feel a moral pressure to join in the fray to save what is one of the most significant historical aspects of the social and recreational life of Bolton that we have ever possessed.. Like it or not- BWFC is a really significant part of the Bolton 'story' and its up to our civic leaders to get their finger out and get involved.
They can't simply wash their hands of the issue ,in a moral sense. They can of course decide to do nothing on the basis that its a commercial entity like many others- but the relationship between the citizens of this town and it's football club are deep and historical.
The Town Hall should get off its backside and do something if the worst comes to the worst.

Boggersbelief wrote: the club wants £10 million upfront to cover wages and debts.

Why?

wanderlust wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote: the club wants £10 million upfront to cover wages and debts.

Why?

Nixon reported it in the paper this morning, maybe he'll elaborate on twitter later.

If that's true, it's more than a bit naughty and ED needs a slap.

As things stand right now at 10:00 am on the 03rd of December, he still owns BWFC, so he's squarely liable for paying wages and / or any "debts" we may have to HMRC.

I'd tell him to get fucked.

If he's doing it to play the potential buyers off each other it's a dangerous game and it could cost the club dear.

NL: I've spoken with Trevor Birch and I'm hearing positive things. Regardless, we'll keep going and focusing on what we can do.

NL: "Seems to be some green shoots of recovery. Has been 3, maybe 4 interested parties, I think it's a case of first past the post."

That's what I wondered. How can he just suddenly decide he's not paying wages anymore? He is still the owner of the club and people have contracts, so surely he is liable for the wages. Is he not breaking some kind of employment law or something?

Neil Lennon would do well not to believe everything that someone from the boardroom says to him. I thought he would have learned that lesson by now.

Boggersbelief wrote:NL: "Seems to be some green shoots of recovery. Has been 3, maybe 4 interested parties, I think it's a case of first past the post."

So I was right about TB's press release i.e. it was designed to introduce a sense of urgency amongst potential buyers?

Very risky strategy IMO.

On possibility of going into admin tomorrow, NL: "I don't think that's the case. Trevor's said that's just not going to happen."

On "increasingly perilous" situation, NL: "That scenario has changed. Over the last 24 hours, things have improved in that aspect."

Boggersbelief wrote:On possibility of going into admin tomorrow, NL: "I don't think that's the case. Trevor's said that's just not going to happen."

Can I just say to all the doom mongers.. I told you so

Bwfc1958 wrote:That's what I wondered. How can he just suddenly decide he's not paying wages anymore? He is still the owner of the club and people have contracts, so surely he is liable for the wages. Is he not breaking some kind of employment law or something?

Obviously I'm no expert so I'm probably wrong but my rudimentary understanding of these things is that he should be liable and legally obliged to pay his staff.

The only way he's not is if he can demonstrate that the money's physically not there to pay them.

And if that's the case, we're already technically insolvent.

So the administrators should be setting up camp as we speak.

So I think he's just trying it on.

The necky bastard.......

Bwfc1958 wrote:That's what I wondered. How can he just suddenly decide he's not paying wages anymore? He is still the owner of the club and people have contracts, so surely he is liable for the wages. Is he not breaking some kind of employment law or something?

The reason I asked why was because I assume that the new owners would take on that responsibility as soon as contracts are exchanged so it shouldn't make any difference if they pay the money up front or later when they own the business.

So why make a potential deal-breaker out of it?