I would be fine with that personally. Not taking away trophies means you are saying you still won even though you cheated.
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with 130 FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th Sep 2024 | Concluded 9th Dec 2024 - Awaiting outcome
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
I'd love it if they kept them as winners but with a big fat asterisk next to it. Would be even better than giving the title to the runner up.
I hope they get the Chris Benoit treatment
I would rather the titles to be stripped and leave a void there with an asterisk saying title holder stripped due to serious fraudulent & violation of rules. This will be a reminder to all future generation of their dirty past.
If it is given to the 2nd place team, it won't have the impact and doesn't really benefit the other teams at all.
Yes however the part that people are missing he is being paid in the UAE for work in the UAE, it was mentioned that a lot of city recruits would be asked to do 3 or 4 days ambassadors work in the contract with a separate contract for the players manager self employed company, so if they earned money in the US for 3 or 4 days work they would have to pay US tax on the payment which would normally be paid into a us bank account, he would only be liable for UK tax if the money was paid from a US company into a UK bank account.
Since there is no income tax in the Middle East and some players/managers like Manchini would 100% been shown how to set up a UAE bank account to facilitate these payments, providing he has proof that he attended the country to work, there is very little HMRC or the PL can do even though it’s clearly wrong.
It’s not a far fetched stretch to think that City during their early years made alternative and additional payments to circumnavigate FFP rules at the time, if and it’s a big if, because as yet no one has come forward with any proof, City said to Mancini that we can only pay you £6m yearly salary for 4 years in the UK to be complicit in PL rules and UK tax law but to make your salary up to the £10m that you want we will create a secondary ambassadorial contract and pay you in the UAE tax free a further equivalent to £4m and we’ll make sure that all the photo shoots and pre season tours are conveniently located in Abu Dhabi prior to the season start, I very much doubt the current Uk government, especially with how much they rely on the Middle East would ask HMRC to go after non UK residents for incomes that may or may not have been earned In foreign countries?
Its a joke.
No, if you are domiciled in the UK and go for 10 days to the UAE to do work in the UAE and get paid in the UAE you still have to declare that income and pay tax on it. If the UAE doesn't tax you that makes it even easier and far less protracted.
Of course, you can skip it and consider it untraceable, but if it gets traced or there is sufficient proof from all the 115 charges investigations you have a bigger problem than the tax due. You've lied to HMRC.
Mancini isn't the best example as he may well have made the case for non-dom successfully. There's no way they non-dom someone like Agüero applying for a work permit with a 5 year contract in hand.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. City are a horrible soulless entity. The most plastic of the plastic clubs. I know people joke about them being formed in 2008 but it's true isn't it. They're the MK Don's of the Premier League. The kind of club who could die off tomorrow and would be missed by basically nobody.
I would love nothing more than to see them booted down the pyramid and their owners piss off for good. At least the league seems to be more robust now against this kind of state owned financial doping, Newcastle for all their faults seem to be doing things by the book so I hope we're future proofed from this happening again.
I would love nothing more than to see them booted down the pyramid and their owners piss off for good. At least the league seems to be more robust now against this kind of state owned financial doping, Newcastle for all their faults seem to be doing things by the book so I hope we're future proofed from this happening again.
It's only a matter of time before they claim a jealous campaign of hate has been started by the 'cartel' when they ultimately get booed and chanted 'cheats' at every away day and by visiting away fans. When the whole world knows what you are, there's no shaking it off.
What you're saying is football is winning at the minute?
@antohan @Woziak
Not sure if this explains what either of you are discussing. There does appear to be language that keeps some income off UK tax rules. Also, the article mentions Haaland earned £865k per week salary this past season.
https://www.withersworldwide.com/en...he-whistle-on-the-‘non-dom’-regime-a-case-study
Not sure if this explains what either of you are discussing. There does appear to be language that keeps some income off UK tax rules. Also, the article mentions Haaland earned £865k per week salary this past season.
https://www.withersworldwide.com/en...he-whistle-on-the-‘non-dom’-regime-a-case-study
Been saying this for years. At least the scousers have a genuine football club. You can respect them.
That wage doesn't even surprise me. I'm pretty sure he's not getting what city say he is.
Do you think, based on what we know, that they have broken the law?
I get your view that they indeed will be rememberd as the team who set all these new records, and only current fans of their rivals will keep caring about the "aesterisks".
But, should they get punished, I believe it'd be a different story.
I'm not much of a follower of Italian football, but I don't think the Championship that Juve won just before the cheating scandal broke are taken with the same gravity or seriousness as other titles they have won since.
It does have an effect.
The PL would put itself in a very inconvenient position if they don't punish City.
That's what I've always appreciated about Liverpool - though the rivalry is fierce, there has always been grudging respect between the two clubs, as each recognizes the other as being a genuinely big club.
Though I don't like Klopp for obvious reasons (and I'm bloody glad he's finally gone) there was always respect there for what he achieved with that Liverpool team, and fair play to them, they won the League and CL fair and square.
With Guardiola and City there's no respect as it's all obtained illegally. They can't really expect us to believe that they only paid 51 million for Haaland. They're so corrupt it's not funny.
A lot of the "fans" that follow City are the type of people who use aimbot in multiplayer video games, and then mock the other players for losing. Just shit humans in general.
I'd support Spurs...safe to say for me because that choice doesn't come into play, but any rival goes ahead of cheats.
Not sure why people keep bringing up the Haaland transfer. The structure of the deal is well known and it was also well known when he first joined Dortmund. Dortmund agreed to a contract where they would get him for a certain amount of years until his release clause kicked in, where they would then get a less than 50% of the total «transfer fee», where the rest of the transfer fee is agent fees to Raiolas company and Haalands father. In reality the fee was over £110mill. Haaland&Co wanted an agent that would bring in as much money as possible and Raiola was well known for doing exactly that. Every contract extension, every transfer, Raiolas company and Haalands father will bank millions.
That’s exactly why I don’t want them winning as much as a swimming certificate. It hurts more.
People keep bringing up the Haaland transfer because despite the player being hugely in demand and seemingly available for a bargain fee. There was no scramble for his signature. If it was such a cut price deal why didn't we hear about all the teams that were lined up to sign him. City signed him pretty much on the quiet. Most of us think that the situation just like City's declared finances, doesn't quite add up.
Ehm, but everyone knew he wasn't available for a bargain fee. The total costs of the transfer fees was over £110mill. Just because Dortmund got less than 50% of that it doesn't mean that the overall fee was a fecking bargain. Plenty of clubs were in contact with Raiola, just as they were in contact before he joined Dortmund in the first place, but not many clubs are going to accept deals where they end up losing the player for feck all in return for him potentially scoring a lot of goals over a short period of time at the club.
Also, there are rarely public scrambles for signatures, just as there's hardly any bidding.
There's nothing in it.
The Haaland deal cost at least £260 million in total.
£51 million fee.
£40 million to his agent.
£30 million to his dad.
£140 million over five years of his contract.
That's just what we know of. Some reports have his contract closer to £230 million over five years!
And that's just the official accounts.
This is going nowhere and neither are Abu Dhabi's city project.
Sorry to be the bust your bubbles, Apparently we are at the first trail stage so it has definitely gone somewhere.
How do you know this? Its highly unlikely City will be succesfull in their ridiculous court action thats currently ongoing and there is still a very real possibility that they will be found guilty and expelled when the face their hearing for the 115 charges in November.
You wonder how on earth it's legal for a fee to go to 3 different parties like that.
It's like that scene in The Big Short where they're explaining how the stock market went to shit
But this isn’t exclusive to City. Element of throwing stones from glasshouses here. Most of football, particularly at the top is full or corruption and unethical practice, and has been for years.
Yeah that's what needs to happen but sadly won't
This may been answered earlier in the thread, but do their substantial legal fees get logged on the club accounts? And do these then come under scrutiny for FFP as well?
Are the legal fees able to be offshored and kept off the books when the legal proceedings are so public?
Are the legal fees able to be offshored and kept off the books when the legal proceedings are so public?
True.
But clubs like City can just casually throw around a quarter of a billion on one player with no consequences if it doesn't work out!
Where does it end?
If clubs owned by Nation States are just allowed to spend whatever they like, then it's impossible for non state owned clubs to even get close. Even if they do manage to bring through good players they will just be picked off by City, Newcastle or Villa a year later when they offer to quadruple their wages.
The legal fees are will be borne by the owners.
The result of the court case will be fun.
The result of the court case will be fun.
Does this mean that they won't be on the books of the club?
Yes.
Thanks very much. Feels like something that should have to be accounted for in the accounting for the club, but I can't say I am surprised.
The oil states are a cancer on the English game.
They need to be eradicated.
They need to be eradicated.
Of course it should, the fact that it’s their owners paying and not the club is literally the entire point of the first lawsuit! It’s basically rubbing salt in the wound
If they are allowed to continue in this manner they will inevitably be joined at the top of the league by newcastle. Then it will be a fight for the other two spots. Maybe now and again someone will grab 2nd and even first if a miracle happens.
There will be no consequences if they fail in the transfer market or pick the wrong manager. They will just buy a whole new back line like Pep did when their signings all failed.
There will be no consequences if they fail in the transfer market or pick the wrong manager. They will just buy a whole new back line like Pep did when their signings all failed.
Yeah, that's what I was referring to. I'm surprised that for the first three years Non-Dom is granted as standard even with a longer contract but I guess the argument is you could be sold at any time.
The remittance basis they mention is off though. You pay on the higher of remittance or "% of time in UK x total global income".
I was non-dom, received my salary offshore because it was an EMEA role whereby I happened to be UK based by choice and only transfered (remittance) what I needed for bills and stuff. I still wound up paying tax on the larger amount that resulted from spending 7-8 months in the UK.
It's a pretty penny for a footballer if you add all the days they are NOT in the UK at all (hols, preseason abroad, international breaks, European fixtures). On an 865k a week salary every day abroad your spend is essentially financed by the 50k+ tax you are avoiding. I used to think of my holidays that way and I was making nowhere near that
