gullintwoplaces wrote: ↑12 May 2023, 10:11
...when I pointed out that this would stop him trading & generating cash to pay his VAT I was told by HMRC that this was a “punishment”. Yet this Southend owner goes to court repeatedly.
Sounds as though the Southend owner has the money but chooses not to pay the tax each time. You'd have to assume he gets some sort of benefit out of this rather than just paying it when its due - so it's a different situation to the publican who (presumably) didn't have the money to cover the VAT. At some point, though, surely HMRC will get tired of the constant rigmarole of threats, courts, and then payment?
None of this is the fans' fault - I wonder if the owner has actively been seeking to sell the club.
happytorq wrote: ↑12 May 2023, 13:59
Sounds as though the Southend owner has the money but chooses not to pay the tax each time. You'd have to assume he gets some sort of benefit out of this rather than just paying it when its due - so it's a different situation to the publican who (presumably) didn't have the money to cover the VAT. At some point, though, surely HMRC will get tired of the constant rigmarole of threats, courts, and then payment?
None of this is the fans' fault - I wonder if the owner has actively been seeking to sell the club.
The other dimension to this is of course fairness. While most of us carry on paying our taxes on time, mostly at source, people like the Southend owner are just taking the piss out of the rest of us, repeatedly. You’re right re the publican, but this was his first time late, he’d had some urgent & costly maintenance to pay for in the pub and temporarily ran out of cash. While HMRC staff waste hours of their time chasing the Southend owner, they have less time to catch tax dodgers. It’s time for the football authorities to stand up and stop clubs being bought out by these kind of people.
oh, of course. I think I said in a previous post that not paying the taxman is theft from the entire country, and so while I do have a certain amount of sympathy with the Southend fans ("there but for the grace of", etc) there should be consequences when the rules are flouted so flagrantly. The problem *there*, of course, is that those consequences are paid by the fans, whereas the ownerd (because of how limited companies work) probably won't have suffer directly as a result.
For me it speaks to the need for stronger 'fit and proper owner' guidelines, but the game has needed that for ages and nothing changes.
GULL 67 wrote: ↑11 May 2023, 22:16
Can't see why your posting on here chaps, it's got nothing to do with us. Me and the Boy are looking forward to a decent season in the NLS with loads of local derbies (one season only mind). Always felt a bit sorry visiting your Town and seeing a horrible West Ham shop in your town centre. Thought the cheeky bastards should have more class than to be encroaching on you territory. Best wishes.
There hasnt been a west ham shop in southend for about 20 years. It kept getting vandalised.
GULL 67 wrote: ↑15 May 2023, 18:54
Probably was. Don't remember the score but seem to recall it cost a lot to get in.A lot more expensive than Plainmoor at the time.
we won 2-1 to go up. And it was daylight robbery; we really weren't very good and Reuben Hazell got away with a nailed-on penalty. Even now I can't believe the referee didn't give it.
happytorq wrote: ↑15 May 2023, 19:04
we won 2-1 to go up. And it was daylight robbery; we really weren't very good and Reuben Hazell got away with a nailed-on penalty. Even now I can't believe the referee didn't give it.
We deserved it because we had to endure watching the Cheeky Girls sing before the game!
Wolborough wrote: ↑17 May 2023, 07:40
Southend will be reprieved surely?
According to a post on Shrimperzone, this is the 18th time in 25 years that Southend have been in front of HMRC. So it looks like their owner(s) know how to play the system but f**k knows how they keep getting away with it.
Reading the posts on their site, the fans really do fear for the future of their club.
