Jump to content


Sign in to follow this  
enigma

Club finances and general CFC news


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Richard P said:

We should be ok with the prices for food and drink. I stupidly bought a bottle of coke for £3.30 last week and the smallest of mars bars for £1.40. Get 40,000 others to do it and we must rolling in it.

We shouldn’t be ok with it at all. If the prices were reasonable and the food edible then people might be inclined to spend money. I have barely bought anything at the bridge in the last two years.

They’ve even had the cheek to charge the full price of the pint you can buy 20 metres for a shot of beer to take advantage of people not wanting to queue twice. I’m surprised nobody has kicked off at that one yet!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/8113592/man-utd-tax-arsenal-chelsea/

PREM clubs paid less than £90m in tax BETWEEN them over nearly a decade, new figures have revealed.

In the period between 2008 and 2017, Arsenal were the biggest contributors to Inland Revenue funds by giving the Taxman £30m.

North London neighbours Spurs handed over £24m, with Manchester United paying £14m.

The rest of the Prem sides paid less than £19m between them, with Liverpool, Manchester City and Chelsea not paying anything, according to figures collated by football finance expert Swiss Ramble.

 

Clubs are able to use past losses to reduce tax on profits, although their players pay huge sums in Income Tax in addition to their National Insurance contributions.

 

Now I realise that companies use tax and accounting laws to their advantage but this is everything that is wrong in this country.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, MANoWAR said:

Guess we need to be careful in interpreting, I would assume this is an average over the 9 years.

Big takeway is the more you spend / earn means more success, just consider the top six here.

Anomalies:

Utd and Arsenal huge operations funding in Green 

Us and City have large owner donations.

We are the only club to have interest receipts, I guess this is money received form the loanees.

Spurs have the biggest funding of external loans.

Lastly looks like Bournemouth give tickets away for free.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, charierre said:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/8113592/man-utd-tax-arsenal-chelsea/

PREM clubs paid less than £90m in tax BETWEEN them over nearly a decade, new figures have revealed.

In the period between 2008 and 2017, Arsenal were the biggest contributors to Inland Revenue funds by giving the Taxman £30m.

North London neighbours Spurs handed over £24m, with Manchester United paying £14m.

The rest of the Prem sides paid less than £19m between them, with Liverpool, Manchester City and Chelsea not paying anything, according to figures collated by football finance expert Swiss Ramble.

 

Clubs are able to use past losses to reduce tax on profits, although their players pay huge sums in Income Tax in addition to their National Insurance contributions.

 

Now I realise that companies use tax and accounting laws to their advantage but this is everything that is wrong in this country.

 

 

You want football clubs to act like normal companies?

Cut spending on transfers etc to maximise profit. The reason Premier League teams don't pay much in company tax is that most teams are either not profitable, or make little profit. Arsenal payed the most tax as they are a business first and a football club second. I doubt many Chelsea fans want the club to act like Arsenal has in the last decade. 

 

Though I must say taxation is theft, the state stealing your property under threat of violence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kiwi1691 said:

You want football clubs to act like normal companies?

Cut spending on transfers etc to maximise profit. The reason Premier League teams don't pay much in company tax is that most teams are either not profitable, or make little profit. Arsenal payed the most tax as they are a business first and a football club second. I doubt many Chelsea fans want the club to act like Arsenal has in the last decade. 

 

Though I must say taxation is theft, the state stealing your property under threat of violence. 

When i I'm paying more tax yes. What the duck do you think pays for the services we all use. Football clubs and other companies like Amazon are being allowed by governments to get away with theft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/01/2019 at 20:45, charierre said:

When i I'm paying more tax yes. What the duck do you think pays for the services we all use. Football clubs and other companies like Amazon are being allowed by governments to get away with theft.

Everyone working for the club, players, stewards, tea lady, security guards at Cobham, they're all paying tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Delnino said:

Everyone working for the club, players, stewards, tea lady, security guards at Cobham, they're all paying tax.

And paying it themselves. Similar to Amazon and a host of other companies. Is it right the tea lady pays her dues whilst corporations use laws to circumvent paying. Sorry  we have a social care crisis, NHS underfunded, Schools chronically underfunded not to mention cuts to the police etc, these devices all need paying for. None of us like paying tax, we have to and so should the major companies who are operating within this country. As a footnote there is many a cleaner / tea lady who will be working hard within a company earning a small wage but paying more tax than the CEO, that can't be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, charierre said:

And paying it themselves. Similar to Amazon and a host of other companies. Is it right the tea lady pays her dues whilst corporations use laws to circumvent paying. Sorry  we have a social care crisis, NHS underfunded, Schools chronically underfunded not to mention cuts to the police etc, these devices all need paying for. None of us like paying tax, we have to and so should the major companies who are operating within this country. As a footnote there is many a cleaner / tea lady who will be working hard within a company earning a small wage but paying more tax than the CEO, that can't be right.

I don't know how you can compare us, a football club with year on year losses for the past 20+ years until recently, to Amazon/Google etc and their huge profit/ability to print money. Completely different situations. Yes, I 100% agree with you that there are a lot of very successful companies out there that do not pay their fair share in tax - the likes of Amazon and Facebook that have all the benefits of accessing the UK market but find loopholes to avoid paying as much tax as the average Joe. That's not right. I wouldn't paint us with the same brush though. And I can guarantee to you that the likes of Bruce Buck will be paying a lot more in tax at Chelsea than any of the cleaning staff, stewards, etc. If we're making an annual net loss, what should we be paying tax on? Do you think Abramovich is making huge money from us? He's not. He'll be making his profit from the club when he eventually decides to sell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DannyVblue said:

 And I can guarantee to you that the likes of Bruce Buck will be paying a lot more in tax at Chelsea than any of the cleaning staff, stewards, etc.

Given the recent story about how Kante has refused to use offshore accounts and will pay the full tax amount on his wages meaning he now pays more UK tax than the rest of the squad I don't know if I would be so sure that our Chairman is paying any significant amount of tax in the UK. 

Tax havens and tax loopholes are a massive issue in the UK. 

There are far too many large companies and well paid professionals not paying their share... Chelsea included. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DannyVblue said:

I don't know how you can compare us, a football club with year on year losses for the past 20+ years until recently, to Amazon/Google etc and their huge profit/ability to print money. Completely different situations. Yes, I 100% agree with you that there are a lot of very successful companies out there that do not pay their fair share in tax - the likes of Amazon and Facebook that have all the benefits of accessing the UK market but find loopholes to avoid paying as much tax as the average Joe. That's not right. I wouldn't paint us with the same brush though. And I can guarantee to you that the likes of Bruce Buck will be paying a lot more in tax at Chelsea than any of the cleaning staff, stewards, etc. If we're making an annual net loss, what should we be paying tax on? Do you think Abramovich is making huge money from us? He's not. He'll be making his profit from the club when he eventually decides to sell. 

The original article said premier league clubs had paid a total of 90 m between them over the past 8 years with some paying no tax at all.   i.e that equates to myself and most members on here having paid more tax than these multi million pound enterprises in the last week. There are huge amounts of money floating around football, how they spend it is totally upto them but yes they should pay their fair share of tax. Loopholes allow these companies and some individuals to circumvent paying whilst they are happy to still enjoy the services we have available. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×