You are having so much fun with this. Everywhere I go on the forums - there you are.

Probably as much fun as FA did with the Harris case.

As a SE person myself - tax is not always boring but

Tax + RL + HMRC + Possible rule violations (some clubs) + scandal + possible penalties + finger pointing + possible vindication for other clubs = as you succinctly put it - wow!

You might suppose that; I could not possibly comment...



Seriously, though - we learnt from the Harris case debacle that it can be dangerous to speculate when we lack some key facts - and in that case it sure seems we did. And I remain very angry with at least one individual over that.

In THIS case, I strongly suspect that some clubs other than us will be in some difficulties over all this right now; but I've yet to see it demonstrated that we are not ourselves implicated. I'd be very surprised if we were significantly exposed, not least because of the comparison of the relative perceived quality (and therefore probable cost) of squads; your use of the word "vindicated" was interesting. But I'd feel a lot happier with a few more hard facts to work with, and to be more sure that we need not worry overmuch.

It would seem to be a fairly simple task for the Bulls to issue a denial if we aren't caught up in it.

Would it be a simple majority vote (what constitutes a vote etc) or 2/3 majority? Can anyone remember the voting system used when the penalties for salary cap breach were increased - from 2/4/6 to 4/8/12 points a couple of years ago?

I know. That's one thing that's concerning me.

But it looks like the clubs have handed this issue over to the RFL to try and sort out on a global basis with HMRC. If that's the case, maybe all the clubs have agreed (or been told to agree) to keep their traps shut and close ranks so as not to prejudice those negotiations?

Dunno - it may be in the Operational Rules somewhere - if anyone fancies a trawl?

Wasn't this 'off shore payments' issue brought to light when St Helens 'allegedly' offered a contract to Sonny Bill Williams? I seem to remember a lot of accusations and denials at the time...about 2-3 years ago?

There are a number of "off-shore issues", and they go back a lot further. Didn't someone report quite a bit ago that a certain Pie player, stated to be playing for free, was actually being paid offshore? Allegedly. Think it was in a paper and don't remember any defamation actions over it, but I may be wrong.

I've had an operational rules trawl - is a simple majority. The votes are divvied up with a formula depending on the proportion of SL clubs to NL clubs present so that (for example) the 14 votes of SL clubs equal the 20 votes of NL clubs. BARLA gets 3 votes. A few other organisations get a vote as well.

I don't know if they are having a purely SL discussion if they could limit the voting to the SL clubs only

Good man!



Logically, the SL salary cap rules would only be voted on by SL clubs, you'd assume?

Warrington are heavily implicated.. www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... L_Tax.html

Warrington are heavily implicated.. www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... L_Tax.html

Quote ="rhinoms"Warrington are heavily implicated.. www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... L_Tax.html'" And in other breaking news... You've not checked out the link in the post I made to start this thread then? Do keep up...

Quote ="rhinoms"Warrington are heavily implicated.. www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... L_Tax.html'" And in other breaking news... You've not checked out the link in the post I made to start this thread then? Do keep up...

Sorry!!!
Your apparent desperation for leeds to be involved is amusing though.

Although if you see what I've said, I've said I'd be surprised if they are to any significant extent!

It does stretch that far and we have nothing to worry about. All the Bulls Image Rights deals are lodged with the RFL.

MAybe I should change my sig to Bradford ImpeccaBulls?

Non-deductabulls

Uncorruptabulls

the supporters group could be named the unbearabulls?

I'm led to believe that the Championship (that's NL to most of you!) clubs decide on their own cap, so I think it's safe to assume that the same applies to SL

I'll believe it when Stuart denies it...



I guess the questions I'd love to have an unequivocal answer to (but don't expect to get) are:

1. Are any of the Bulls' current image rights deals with players likely to attract claims from HMRC for underpaid tax/NIC?

2. Ditto for players no longer with us;

3. Confirmation that we have not used EBTs, or if we HAVE then the RFL salary cap auditor was fully aware AND we do not envisage any tax/NIC claims from HMRC?

I't not realistically expect an answer, and if I read the situation right we are not likely to be anywhere near the forefront of clubs with worries here - if indeed we need to worry at all. Still be nice to have mind put completely at rest though! (Although I suspect that would open the floodgates for Bulls supporters to play hell with fans of certain other clubs who gave us hell for the technical and non-deliberate cap breaches...

You are chris caisley and i claim my £5!!

You and I are going to have to have serious words, my friend!!! How dare you!!!

Nevermind the words Chris, litigate.

I fear I will need to send for the 'Vark then...