Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No sell on clause Jake cohen a sports lawyer who works for chelsea confirmed this a year or so ago
Yes true not sure thinking back it was him who directly answered the sell on question but it was supposed to have come from him he has definitely done work for Chelsea but agree I think your right he doesn't actually works for chelsea.Jake Cohen is I believe a Chelsea supporter and I am not sure he works for Chelsea irrespective I think his statemnt about any transfer fee was base on a press report. In truth the point I was tring to make was that there are all sorts out costs involved when you sell a player. I mentioned some but when a transfer happens just about everybody wants a cut
christ mate just stop it*****Boring post alert*****
If Lukaku gets sold for 80m pure cash deal and has a current book value of 12 mil, a 68 mil profit is made which would be deemed a chargeable event so liable to tax at 20%, ie 13.6mil. This means that 66.4 mil after tax is available to spend.
The above is based on the profit from Stones taking out the accumulated losses for tax purposes.
Hopefully @ToffeeTim will agree with this.
So just cos you get 80mil, doesn't follow that you can spend 80mil.
Just saying.
Im calling this now. Its a strange time to call it as the team and managed have been on a brilliant run. But mosh is going to be under big big pressure and a hugh whip lash from us in the summer. To me is is as clear as a summers day. Rom will be sold. Barkley will follow him by not signing a new contract forcing the club to sell him. They will have no choice with 1 year left on his contract. There will be no stadium up date or worse it will have fallen through. Ye might think im negitive but look at there individually and if u had to put money on each u nearly put ur money on the negitive result. The board and mosh are going to have their hands full. Barkleys contract should have been sorted last summer. So stupid.
Ya it is worring. Wondering why it wasnt sorted last summer with all the positive news of new manager, money to spend etc. It was the time to grab in into a new one.I think everything you predicted there will likely happen
Lukaku is all but gone and Barkley for me has had his head turned, Why else would he stall on signing a new contract?
Ya it is worring. Wondering why it wasnt sorted last summer with all the positive news of new manager, money to spend etc. It was the time to grab in into a new one.
I was under the belief that accumulated tax losses in a business are 'lost'/forfeited if shareholding structure over a certain ratio occurs (which it has with Moshiri's purchase of shares). Perhaps the rules are different in the UK?*****Boring post alert*****
If Lukaku gets sold for 80m pure cash deal and has a current book value of 12 mil, a 68 mil profit is made which would be deemed a chargeable event so liable to tax at 20%, ie 13.6mil. This means that 66.4 mil after tax is available to spend.
The above is based on the profit from Stones taking out the accumulated losses for tax purposes.
Hopefully @ToffeeTim will agree with this.
So just cos you get 80mil, doesn't follow that you can spend 80mil.
Just saying.
Maybe Koeman wasn't sure if he fancied him and a long term contract would've made selling him harder. He had been given zero defensive responsibility under Martinez and Koeman might thought he didnt have the stamina to press how he wants.Their was talk about signing Mata so a playmaker was been looked at. Who really knows.Ya it is worring. Wondering why it wasnt sorted last summer with all the positive news of new manager, money to spend etc. It was the time to grab in into a new one.
Im calling this now. Its a strange time to call it as the team and managed have been on a brilliant run. But mosh is going to be under big big pressure and a hugh whip lash from us in the summer. To me is is as clear as a summers day. Rom will be sold. Barkley will follow him by not signing a new contract forcing the club to sell him. They will have no choice with 1 year left on his contract. There will be no stadium up date or worse it will have fallen through. Ye might think im negitive but look at there individually and if u had to put money on each u nearly put ur money on the negitive result. The board and mosh are going to have their hands full. Barkleys contract should have been sorted last summer. So stupid.
Fair point this. Also it'll point to whether we can actually buy without selling a major asset first. We want 3, 4 or 5 players of quality added to the squad, and Rom and Ross to stay. Thats a statement. Will it happen? Time will tell.I think this summer is a defining point in which way Everton go under the mosheri leadership, if we can't keep lukaku and Barkley questions on ambition needs to be asked, would top clubs sell their prized assets
It is mate, under normal circumstances the losses are carried forward until all are used. From memory there is a note in EFC accounts indicating tax losses to be utilised of c55-60m.I was under the belief that accumulated tax losses in a business are 'lost'/forfeited if shareholding structure over a certain ratio occurs (which it has with Moshiri's purchase of shares). Perhaps the rules are different in the UK?