Alan Nixon Breaks Silence on American Billionaire Bid

[PistoldPete]

5 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

That's where the rules have changed,football creditors and MSD may still be above HMRC but if HMRC says the percentage on offer is not enough or they hold out for the full amount then that kills the offer stone dead.

And how is that an advantage? How is killing a deal stone dead of benefit to Hmrc?

[Rev]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

And how is that an advantage? How is killing a deal stone dead of benefit to Hmrc?

Previously they'd have had to accept the 25% offered, now they are not obliged to.

Whatever figure they settle for now will be the benchmark of any future football administrations, so it makes sense to set the bar as high as they think possible. 

Whatever that amount is.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

1 hour ago, Sparkle said:

The one thing that could seriously affect someone buying the club would be if more covid restrictions are imposed which could seriously affect anyone wanting to buy us ( it could nail a few other clubs as well) 

Absolutely,  surprised more have noted this .  

[atherstoneram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

And how is that an advantage? How is killing a deal stone dead of benefit to Hmrc?

I wouldn't imagine HMRC will look at it that way,now being classed a preferential creditor gives HMRC a vote on what is on offer where as before they didn't get a say. They can say what percentage they will accept, if any.

Personally i think this is where the delay for a new owner is coming from ,,the administrators are probably finding it harder to come to a resolution with them as they have not had to include HMRC in any clubs in administration before.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

2 minutes ago, Rev said:

Previously they'd have had to accept the 25% offered, now they are not obliged to.

Whatever figure they settle for now will be the benchmark of any future football administrations, so it makes sense to set the bar as high as they think possible. 

Whatever that amount is.

With HMRC when it comes to payment plans it's - what have you spent the money on .  They will certainly pay attention to the fact that we did not have the covid 8 million pound assistance which effectively would reduce current liability down to 20 million and the fact that possibly a few million was lost on the gate in passing trade.  They won't be impressed we signed a management team on 4 million a year and committed to 13 million quid of future payments on players pre covid as it appears cash was rather tight.  My experience suggests we need to find around 18 million quid here with 40% up front and the remainder payable over 24 months. This plan will be monitored tighter than a gnats chuff and we can't default ideally.  Effectively, at the moment any cash paid towards tax is going against oldest debt and we are owing the most current liability.  That helps with interest but there will be plenty, so add that to any payment plan.   With the right buyer we'll be ok with that but it will be all servicing debt for 3 years and no players id were on League 1 money.  Not sure how much there telling Wayne but if we need to sell a player/s to make goodwill additional payments to creditors to reduce liability prior to agreement, that will happen.

[i-Ram]

Surely football creditors are only preferential on a going concern basis - I.e. to retain EFL League status? In a liquidation and winding up status, I would imagine that football creditors AND other unsecured creditors become of no great importance to the Liquidator. So they wind the Club up, paying MSD, and HMRC (in part, from what is left). Everybody else swings? That would have been the case many years ago. Have the rules of liquidation changed?

[PistoldPete]

15 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

I wouldn't imagine HMRC will look at it that way,now being classed a preferential creditor gives HMRC a vote on what is on offer where as before they didn't get a say. They can say what percentage they will accept, if any.

Personally i think this is where the delay for a new owner is coming from ,,the administrators are probably finding it harder to come to a resolution with them as they have not had to include HMRC in any clubs in administration before.

 

But the admin team are acting for all the creditors including HMRC. So they have made a proposal of what they think is best for all creditors.  I do not see given the list of creditors that HMRC gains very much from saying , you cannot pay Joe's Electrics Contractors  anything until you have paid us in full.

No one loses more than HMRC if a deal is not struck.

 

[atherstoneram]

5 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

With HMRC when it comes to payment plans it's - what have you spent the money on .  They will certainly pay attention to the fact that we did not have the covid 8 million pound assistance which effectively would reduce current liability down to 20 million and the fact that possibly a few million was lost on the gate in passing trade.  They won't be impressed we signed a management team on 4 million a year and committed to 13 million quid of future payments on players pre covid as it appears cash was rather tight.  My experience suggests we need to find around 18 million quid here with 40% up front and the remainder payable over 24 months. This plan will be monitored tighter than a gnats chuff and we can't default ideally.  Effectively, at the moment any cash paid towards tax is going against oldest debt and we are owing the most current liability.  That helps with interest but there will be plenty, so add that to any payment plan.   With the right buyer we'll be ok with that but it will be all servicing debt for 3 years and no players id were on League 1 money.  Not sure how much there telling Wayne but if we need to sell a player/s to make goodwill additional payments to creditors to reduce liability prior to agreement, that will happen.

I agree with most of that but are the administrators in a position to prove that had we received the 8 million MM would have used that to pay HMRC or to pay wages,saving his own money knowing that a winding up order couldn't be issued,we don't know if the debt to HMRC began to build up before the grounds closed. We also don't know what dialogue was taking place between HMRC and MM, even though a winding up order couldn't be issued i would imagine he would have been notified of the clubs debt growing and payments requested.

[PistoldPete]

8 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Surely football creditors are only preferential on a going concern basis - I.e. to retain EFL League status? In a liquidation and winding up status, I would imagine that football creditors AND other unsecured creditors become of no great importance to the Liquidator. So they wind the Club up, paying MSD, and HMRC (in part, from what is left). Everybody else swings? That would have been the case many years ago. Have the rules of liquidation changed?

I think the money owed to Arsenal for Bielik for example would be a priority. EFL League staus wouldn't change that I don't think, you still have FA for example. Anyway if we lost our League status we would have no means of paying anyone anything at all.   

[PistoldPete]

18 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

With HMRC when it comes to payment plans it's - what have you spent the money on .  They will certainly pay attention to the fact that we did not have the covid 8 million pound assistance which effectively would reduce current liability down to 20 million and the fact that possibly a few million was lost on the gate in passing trade.  They won't be impressed we signed a management team on 4 million a year and committed to 13 million quid of future payments on players pre covid as it appears cash was rather tight.  My experience suggests we need to find around 18 million quid here with 40% up front and the remainder payable over 24 months. This plan will be monitored tighter than a gnats chuff and we can't default ideally.  Effectively, at the moment any cash paid towards tax is going against oldest debt and we are owing the most current liability.  That helps with interest but there will be plenty, so add that to any payment plan.   With the right buyer we'll be ok with that but it will be all servicing debt for 3 years and no players id were on League 1 money.  Not sure how much there telling Wayne but if we need to sell a player/s to make goodwill additional payments to creditors to reduce liability prior to agreement, that will happen.

That sort of payment plan would not be acceptable to a commercial buyer I suspect. Finding £10 million from revenue over 2 years when you are in League One is not going to happen.

[atherstoneram]

3 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

 

But the admin team are acting for all the creditors including HMRC. So they have made a proposal of what they think is best for all creditors.  I do not see given the list of creditors that HMRC gains very much from saying , you cannot pay Joe's Electrics Contractors  anything until you have paid us in full.

No one loses more than HMRC if a deal is not struck.

 

The HMRC won't look at it that way, HMRC and the club (MM) may have had a payment plan in place which has not been honoured. If they were to accept 25% they lose 18million,if they don't accept that they lose the lot which is only another 7million 

[PistoldPete]

36 minutes ago, Rev said:

Previously they'd have had to accept the 25% offered, now they are not obliged to.

Whatever figure they settle for now will be the benchmark of any future football administrations, so it makes sense to set the bar as high as they think possible. 

Whatever that amount is.

There is no benchmark. HMRC should aim to get what they can , but not end up with nothing.

[atherstoneram]

2 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

That sort of payment plan would not be acceptable to a commercial buyer I suspect. Finding £10 million from revenue over 2 years when you are in League One is not going to happen.

Then things change,if you want to enter into a payment plan with HMRC longer than 2 years then a minimum payment of 35% is required as a down payment.

[PistoldPete]

1 minute ago, atherstoneram said:

The HMRC won't look at it that way, HMRC and the club (MM) may have had a payment plan in place which has not been honoured. If they were to accept 25% they lose 18million,if they don't accept that they lose the lot which is only another 7million 

Isn't that what I just said? I hope they can get more than 25% . But if not I hope they don't end up with nothing. £7 million plus even more importantly future lost future tax revenues from the club in perpetuity is an awful lot of money to kiss goodbye to. 

[atherstoneram]

3 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

There is no benchmark. HMRC should aim to get what they can , but not end up with nothing.

Therefore the amount plays into HMRC hands as to setting a benchmark.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

5 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

That sort of payment plan would not be acceptable to a commercial buyer I suspect. Finding £10 million from revenue over 2 years when you are in League One is not going to happen.

We might have an issue then.  Depends how sponsorship revenue is structured- does it reduce if were relegated? Don't know. They may consider a plan over a longer time but it would be very much against the norm.  

[PistoldPete]

1 minute ago, atherstoneram said:

Then things change,if you want to enter into a payment plan with HMRC longer than 2 years then a minimum payment of 35% is required as a down payment.

A payment plan of any kind is of limited use without a significant reduction in the claim from HMRC.

[atherstoneram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

Isn't that what I just said? I hope they can get more than 25% . But if not I hope they don't end up with nothing. £7 million plus even more importantly future lost future tax revenues from the club in perpetuity is an awful lot of money to kiss goodbye to. 

But players and backroom staff will find other teams so HMRC still get taxes going forward. Fans who won't buy season tickets anymore will spend their money on something else paying VAT so they still don't lose out

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

16 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

I agree with most of that but are the administrators in a position to prove that had we received the 8 million MM would have used that to pay HMRC or to pay wages,saving his own money knowing that a winding up order couldn't be issued,we don't know if the debt to HMRC began to build up before the grounds closed. We also don't know what dialogue was taking place between HMRC and MM, even though a winding up order couldn't be issued i would imagine he would have been notified of the clubs debt growing and payments requested.

I think the 8 million could only be used to assist HMRC liability,  HMRC would have been contacted to see if such liability existed and payment would have been made directly to them on a lump sum or ad hoc basis as debt became due.- or should have been.  I can't see logically that amount of debt accrued during covid alone as sponsorship and other payments to the club outside of normal match day revenue was paid as normal apparently.  

[PistoldPete]

2 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

We might have an issue then.  Depends how sponsorship revenue is structured- does it reduce if were relegated? Don't know. They may consider a plan over a longer time but it would be very much against the norm.  

Are you comparing with personal tax situations? As I say a payment plan is of limited use in a business situation. We are asking buyers who do not owe the money to take on debt that is currently not theirs. Why should they accept this debt? They may be willing to make a contribution, but  only a smaller part of it I suspect.