Has the transfer embargo been lifted?

[RoyMac5]

7 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Why do you think Marriott's contract extension was revoked? ?

Don't know, why?

[DCFC1388]

1 hour ago, Ken Tram said:

Have to pay taxes! HMRC can shut down businesses super-quick! 

Isn't there some rule that if one is not sure how much tax to pay, they are supposed to pay more and argue it later? Some sort of catchall rule!

Didnt the bbc article the other day state that we had an agreement with Companies House for the delayed accounts so we cant pay tax when we dont know the amount.

Submitting our accounts will clear 4 of the 5, the other one is money owed to others clubs

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, DCFC1388 said:

Didnt the bbc article the other day state that we had an agreement with Companies House for the delayed accounts so we cant pay tax when we dont know the amount.

Submitting our accounts will clear 4 of the 5, the other one is money owed to others clubs

Presumably it's VAT which isn't dependent on filing our annual accounts. It can't be corporation tax after all as we don't make any profits to be taxed on.

[JfR]

I might be reading it wrong, but looking at the regulations related to the transfer embargo, it seems we're only allowed to make signings to get the squad up to 23 players of "professional standing". What concerns me is the description of "professional standing":
"any Player who has made one first team appearance (including as a sub) for any Club in any first team competition (EFL Trophy appearances do not count)."
Doesn't this mean that, by the regulations of the league, every academy player that played for Derby in the Chorley game and is still at the club counts towards that 23? If so, I would imagine this is one of the first things that Derby must be trying to work out with the league. It would be an absurd situation if we were forced to count academy players, many of whom are still only U18s, as first team players because they were forced to fulfil one fixture that the first team could not postpone.
https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/embargoes/embargoes-faqs/

[Brammie Steve]

On 06/07/2021 at 23:03, seths-cap said:

Driving me baaaarmy all this is!

[Carnero]

3 hours ago, JfR said:

I might be reading it wrong, but looking at the regulations related to the transfer embargo, it seems we're only allowed to make signings to get the squad up to 23 players of "professional standing". What concerns me is the description of "professional standing":
"any Player who has made one first team appearance (including as a sub) for any Club in any first team competition (EFL Trophy appearances do not count)."
Doesn't this mean that, by the regulations of the league, every academy player that played for Derby in the Chorley game and is still at the club counts towards that 23? If so, I would imagine this is one of the first things that Derby must be trying to work out with the league. It would be an absurd situation if we were forced to count academy players, many of whom are still only U18s, as first team players because they were forced to fulfil one fixture that the first team could not postpone.
https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/embargoes/embargoes-faqs/

These sorts of things only ever happen to Derby FFS ?

[metalsheep02]

8 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

Presumably it's VAT which isn't dependent on filing our annual accounts. It can't be corporation tax after all as we don't make any profits to be taxed on.

It could be PAYE income tax and National Insurance on players' wages?

[Tamworthram]

4 minutes ago, metalsheep02 said:

It could be PAYE income tax and National Insurance on players' wages?

Yes could be and probably is. Certainly nothing to do with our annual accounts.

Edited July 8, 2021 by Tamworthram

[CBRammette]

1 hour ago, metalsheep02 said:

It could be PAYE income tax and National Insurance on players' wages?

Presumably we like many many businesses have entered into payment agreements with HMRC if necessary.  However if like EFL's stance on their rules trumping government rules on relaxation of delayed filing dates, that probably wouldnt matter anyway. 

[RoyMac5]

So EFL list says this:

"Hull City

Conditions under monitored loan agreement"

And this was yesterday:

"BREAKING:

@HullCity

have signed Brighton & Hove Albion forward Ryan Longman on a season-long loan."

 

So deals can be done.

[Spanish]

13 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Here's the EFL list of our misdemeanours!

"Derby County

Regulation 16.2 - Failure to provide audited annual accounts

Regulation 16.3 - Annual Accounts not filed with Companies House

Regulation 17 - Default in payments to HMRC

Regulation 51.2.3 - Default in paying transfer fee instalments

Profit and Sustainability Rules - non-submission of audited accounts"

EFL Official Website - Embargo Reporting Service

 

Surprised Stoke aren’t there.  We are the only ones not to file a CoHo which again seems odd.

[SparxTheRam]

On a related note tho, does Readings breach mean they have a points deduction heading thier way?? 

 

 

[Spanish]

1 minute ago, SparxTheRam said:

On a related note tho, does Readings breach mean they have a points deduction heading thier way?? 

 

 

I started a thread on this when their figures came out, all being equal they look like they will be heading for points penalty.  When, god knows.

[hintonsboots]

Following the release of the EFL “Naughty list”. Spanish, could you sum up what steps the football club need to take to get the embargo lifted, submission of accounts I presume, and will a takeover go along way towards stability?

Cheers mate.

[Foreveram]

6 hours ago, JfR said:

I might be reading it wrong, but looking at the regulations related to the transfer embargo, it seems we're only allowed to make signings to get the squad up to 23 players of "professional standing". What concerns me is the description of "professional standing":
"any Player who has made one first team appearance (including as a sub) for any Club in any first team competition (EFL Trophy appearances do not count)."
Doesn't this mean that, by the regulations of the league, every academy player that played for Derby in the Chorley game and is still at the club counts towards that 23? If so, I would imagine this is one of the first things that Derby must be trying to work out with the league. It would be an absurd situation if we were forced to count academy players, many of whom are still only U18s, as first team players because they were forced to fulfil one fixture that the first team could not postpone.
https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/embargoes/embargoes-faqs/

If you read further down on the faqs I think this is top trumped by the established players rule that allows 24 players over the age of 21 that has started in 5 or more games.

[Spanish]

9 minutes ago, hintonsboots said:

Following the release of the EFL “Naughty list”. Spanish, could you sum up what steps the football club need to take to get the embargo lifted, submission of accounts I presume, and will a takeover go along way towards stability?

Cheers mate.

Each one of the stated reasons needs to be resolved.  There is no restriction regarding P&S so if we pass the test then that should get us in the clear.  I don’t think they will forgive the sins of the past just because we have a new owner, they will need to be settled by the new or old one.  I assumed they would have breached us for not filing the P&S summaries so we must have done them already

[Ghost of Clough]

7 hours ago, JfR said:

I might be reading it wrong, but looking at the regulations related to the transfer embargo, it seems we're only allowed to make signings to get the squad up to 23 players of "professional standing". What concerns me is the description of "professional standing":
"any Player who has made one first team appearance (including as a sub) for any Club in any first team competition (EFL Trophy appearances do not count)."
Doesn't this mean that, by the regulations of the league, every academy player that played for Derby in the Chorley game and is still at the club counts towards that 23? If so, I would imagine this is one of the first things that Derby must be trying to work out with the league. It would be an absurd situation if we were forced to count academy players, many of whom are still only U18s, as first team players because they were forced to fulfil one fixture that the first team could not postpone.
https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/embargoes/embargoes-faqs/

In the hope that they don't count our U23 game vs Chorley, I count 19 to have played in a real first team game: Marshall, Roos, Byrne, Ebosele, McDonald, Buchanan, Forsyth, JBrown, Knight, Bird, Bielik, Shinnie, Sibley, Watson, Hutchinson, Lawrence, Jozwiak, Kazim, Stretton
Davies' extension would make it 20, Wisdom's 21.

The Chorley game adds 8 to the list: Bardell, Williams, Solomon, LThompson, Aghatise, Ibrahim, Duncan, Cybulski

I find it strange that a 'professional goalkeeper' is defined as someone with 5 starts, whereas someone of 'professional standing' only needs to have come on as a sub for the final second of a single game.

Further down on the EFL page, it is stated considerations will be given in the circumstances of Academy players. Given 3 of the Chorley 8 are still 2nd year scholars, they should be exempt from the 'professional' list.
They also state considerations will be made for Championship clubs with fewer than 24 'established players' - those with 5 starts. This would actually cut our list down to just 14, or 16 if Davies and Wisdom extend their deals. If excluding those under 21, it's even lower at 10.

Summary: it's up to the EFL if they want to let us sign anyone

Edited July 8, 2021 by Ghost of Clough

[StarterForTen]

2 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

In the hope that they don't count our U23 game vs Chorley, I count 19 to have played in a real first team game: Marshall, Roos, Byrne, Ebosele, McDonald, Buchanan, Forsyth, JBrown, Knight, Bird, Bielik, Shinnie, Sibley, Watson, Hutchinson, Lawrence, Jozwiak, Kazim, Stretton
Davies' extension would make it 20, Wisdom's 21.

The Chorley game adds 8 to the list: Bardell, Williams, Solomon, LThompson, Aghatise, Ibrahim, Duncan, Cybulski

I find it strange that a 'professional goalkeeper' is defined as someone with 5 starts, whereas someone of 'professional standing' only needs to have come on as a sub for the final second of a single game.

Further down on the EFL page, it is stated considerations will be given in the circumstances of Academy players. Given 3 of the Chorley 8 are still 2nd year scholars, they should be exempt from the 'professional' list.
They also state considerations will be made for Championship clubs with fewer than 24 'established players' - those with 5 starts. This would actually cut our list down to just 14, or 16 if Davies and Wisdom extend their deals. If excluding those under 21, it's even lower at 10.

Summary: it's up to the EFL if they want to let us sign anyone

Excellent information.

Your final sentence is the crux!

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

They may hate us (Mel) the EFL but they would need to be careful what precedents had been set before (and going forward).

They act on behalf of all other teams many of whom could easily fall into embargo at some point.

[Sparkle]

Us not paying instalments on transfer fees is a difficult one to address with no income 

Are we still paying Norwich for Rob Earnshaw ?