Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

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.

 

Goodison Park : New Exterior.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Esk said:
Because infrastructure spending is not included in the calculations relating to profitability and sustainability rules there is no reason at all to fund infrastructure spending from outside the club.

Without being an expert on corporation tax in the UK, the club is not going to be disadvantaged by meeting the costs themselves, in fact the opposite.

Can't think of a single reason why Moshiri would pay for improvements directly and indeed by doing so might he not create a tax liability for the club dpeening on how the payment is treated ?
Click to expand...

Because of how TV revenue and other revenue is treated under the STCC regulations in conjunction to FFP mate.

Any commercial revenues should be used in wage calculations.

Any outside money that is unrestricted and can be written off - to an unlimited extent - should come from outside and not impact our other regulatory calculations
 

bizzaro said:
Because of how TV revenue and other revenue is treated under the STCC regulations in conjunction to FFP mate.

Any commercial revenues should be used in wage calculations.

Any outside money that is unrestricted and can be written off - to an unlimited extent - should come from outside and not impact our other regulatory calculations
Click to expand...

This is all capital expenditure on infrastructure so it is not relevant as far as STCC is concerned. It does not alter our STCC or profitability and sustainability status one iota.

The costs of the improvement will no doubt have been included in the capital requirement budgets calculated prior to his acquisition of shares.
 
The Esk said:
This is all capital expenditure on infrastructure so it is not relevant as far as STCC is concerned. It does not alter our STCC or profitability and sustainability status one iota.

The costs of the improvement will no doubt have been included in the capital requirement budgets calculated prior to his acquisition of shares.
Click to expand...

Thats the point.

If the club pays for it out of a 'short term commercial deal' it takes away from what is available for wage STTC calculations.

If its take out of tv money it goes against us in transfer budget terms.


If it comes out of Moshiri's pocket it doesn't matter to either.
 
bizzaro said:
Thats the point.

If the club pays for it out of a 'short term commercial deal' it takes away from what is available for wage STTC calculations.

If its take out of tv money it goes against us in transfer budget terms.


If it comes out of Moshiri's pocket it doesn't matter to either.
Click to expand...

With respect it doesn't. That's not how it works at all. The regulations look at the rise in non broadcasting revenues to calculate the permitted rise in wages. That's the important figure, but it makes no difference what goes on in the rest of the business and how those revenues are spent.
 

bizzaro said:
Thats the point.

If the club pays for it out of a 'short term commercial deal' it takes away from what is available for wage STTC calculations.

If its take out of tv money it goes against us in transfer budget terms.


If it comes out of Moshiri's pocket it doesn't matter to either.
Click to expand...

Damo with respect stop talking about things you simply dont understand.
 
[QUOTE="The Esk, post: 4700467, member: 93"

Without being an expert on corporation tax in the UK, the club is not going to be disadvantaged by meeting the costs themselves, in fact the opposite.

Can't think of a single reason why Moshiri would pay for improvements directly and indeed by doing so might he not create a tax liability for the club dpeening on how the payment is treated ?[/QUOTE]
Cost would be capitalised and depending on the level of expenditure either AIA or WDA claimed imho.
Could only impact the profit if it were treated as repairs and renewals, but no-one in their right mind would argue a case for that given FFP etc.
 
Damo suggesting a Club whos revenues will surpass 150m in the next year cant afford to pay for a few licks of paint without help from The Mosh.

SMFH
 
The Esk said:
With respect it doesn't. That's not how it works at all. The regulations look at the rise in non broadcasting revenues to calculate the permitted rise in wages. That's the important figure, but it makes no difference what goes on in the rest of the business and how those revenues are spent.
Click to expand...

We're subject to two sets of regulations. STTC and FFP.

You've previously said that our team building plans are potentially impacted because STTC calculations mean that tv money revenue related rises are limited; further non-broadcast related revenues will unlikely rise fast enough.

That means the non-broadcast related monies are going to be tight - limited.

Meaning that for our purposes they should ONLY be used for STTC purposes.

TV monies however, can be used on transfer fees.

Since we have such a high level of demand for new players - that means that tv revenue should be allocated to transfer fees themselves.

Given Moshiri under FFP is limited in what he can use of his own personal wealth (to write off) in this regard.


Moshiri is however, not limited in what he can write off or spend in infrastructure terms. It neither impacts us in STTC or FFP terms

From a compliance perspective the logic of it all is very simple for us.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top