Ally McCoist has said that Rangers ‘could have handled’ a £20 million tax bill and the club would not have gone into administration or liquidation.
The former Rangers striker spoke on talkSPORT after a report from the Times revealed that tax authorities overcharged the Ibrox club by £50 million.
McCoist, who became Rangers’ record goalscorer by netting 355 goals, also believes that this is a ‘massive’ ongoing issue and questions need to be answered.
READ MORE: HMRC overestimated Rangers’ tax bill ‘by up to £50 million’
He said: “It’s probably safe to say it was the most traumatic time in Rangers Football Club’s history.
“If mistakes have been made then people have to answer questions.
“The legalities of it are still ongoing, I think Rangers won a couple of court cases and then lost one.
“I was manager and Sir David Murray was the chairman. But the EBT’s go all the way back to I think starting around 2000 I’d imagine.
“A lot of clubs had them. There is no doubt about it. A lot of people felt, and I don’t know if it is correct or not, Rangers were a test case for HMRC.
“But the fact of the matter is we were reading the front page of the Times up in Scotland and they reckon that the tax authorities have acknowledged that they claimed too much from Rangers. That’s according to reports.
“I think the figure that they are speaking about - they claim is around £70m for using EBT's to pay players but that figure is now believed to be around £20m.
READ MORE: Taxman error blamed for Rangers downfall amid reports true liability just £20m
"It is a completely different outlook because that is a debt Rangers, in my opinion in that time, could have handled.
“If this is true, Rangers would not have gone into administration or liquidation.
“If the debt was £20m that could have been handled quite easily. It is a lot of money but it’s only £2million a year between 2001 and 2010.
“The fact of the matter is, had that been the debt, if you think about it, it would have been a lot more lucrative a proposition for potential buyers than it was with the bigger debt.
“This is an on-going issue, particularly north of the border, and it’s massive. It’s absolutely massive."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel