Bratt Gets It Wrong Again

[fairportnick]

Been out at the seaside all day:D

 

Sat down on the beach and opened the Sentinel rag.

 

 

What Bratt says is ********.

 

Income and Corporation Tax !988 eh Amos. It is a matter of Company Law eh Amos?

 

ICTA 1988 deals with how Companies and individuals etc are TAXED. It has absolutely nothing to do with Company Law. The Companies Act deals with company law. Didnt your weasels tell you that Amos? ICTA has nothing to do with how companies are run, managed, deal with shareholders etc etc , that is the Companies Act and the Memorandum and Articles.

The schedule Bratt refers to is prevent individuals etc reducing their tax liabilities by putting shares into the hands of spouses, family members, business partners etc etc

 

I suppose the more gullible will have been completely taken in (BHF you should have listened to me from the start:razz:). I expect a retraction from the plonker at the Sentinel too.

 

Back to the wine.

[Utch]

From whine to wine.

[Birches Head Fred]

Soz Nick, I'll be more attentive from now on.

[Timothius]

Been out at the seaside all day:D

 

Sat down on the beach and opened the Sentinel rag.

 

 

What Bratt says is ********.

 

Income and Corporation Tax !988 eh Amos. It is a matter of Company Law eh Amos?

 

ICTA 1988 deals with how Companies and individuals etc are TAXED. It has absolutely nothing to do with Company Law. The Companies Act deals with company law. Didnt your weasels tell you that Amos? ICTA has nothing to do with how companies are run, managed, deal with shareholders etc etc , that is the Companies Act and the Memorandum and Articles.

The schedule Bratt refers to is prevent individuals etc reducing their tax liabilities by putting shares into the hands of spouses, family members, business partners etc etc

 

I suppose the more gullible will have been completely taken in (BHF you should have listened to me from the start:razz:). I expect a retraction from the plonker at the Sentinel too.

 

Back to the wine.

 

A vatman I know said similar earlier :D

[Andyregs]

Post this on the sentinel website.

[Timothius]

Soz Nick, I'll be more attentive from now on.

 

I should think so to, bet you have needed that floppy grandad hat on these last few days ;)

[fairportnick]

A vatman I know said similar earlier :D

 

Ask him to Pm me I have something I wish to discuss.

[Birches Head Fred]

I should think so to, bet you have needed that floppy grandad hat on these last few days ;)

 

I could have done with it walking up th'Hamil Satdee bud.

 

Worry for me is that Nick seems to think proving me an idiot is the hightight of his year. ;)

[Timothius]

I could have done with it walking up th'Hamil Satdee bud.

 

Worry for me is that Nick seems to think proving me an idiot is the hightight of his year. ;)

 

With that hat on that is all the proof we needed

[Timothius]

Ask him to Pm me I have something I wish to discuss.

 

Who am I your PA? Pm him yourself yer lazy git

[Birches Head Fred]

With that hat on that is all the proof we needed

 

You don't really need the hat bud the face gives it away.

[MarkB2]

Can you feel the love? Do the other former members of Pan's People fall out like this?

[Birches Head Fred]

Back to the topic though, I read Bratt's statement myself, I don't know legally who is right or wrong although (and this would be a difficult choice) I would hazard that Nick may just be ahead on points.

Either way it's a lame excuse either way to dismiss over a million pounds worth of 'investment'.

I am sure if ALL parties were to sit down and discuss things like CIVIL Human Beings they could thrash out a compromise whereby the real winners are Port Vale Football Club.

Worry now is with Mr. Bratt supposedly meeting Mr. Sims tomorrow is Mr. Bratt trying to pull a 'fast-one', divide and conquer?

[Birches Head Fred]

Can you feel the love? Do the other former members of Pan's People fall out like this?

 

Nick and I are like brothers Mark.....................................................................Cain and Abel. ;)

[melv]

Back to the topic though, I read Bratt's statement myself, I don't know legally who is right or wrong although (and this would be a difficult choice) I would hazard that Nick may just be ahead on points.

Either way it's a lame excuse either way to dismiss over a million pounds worth of 'investment'.

I am sure if ALL parties were to sit down and discuss things like CIVIL Human Beings they could thrash out a compromise whereby the real winners are Port Vale Football Club.

Worry now is with Mr. Bratt supposedly meeting Mr. Sims tomorrow is Mr. Bratt trying to pull a 'fast-one', divide and conquer?

 

Is Bill Bratt clever enough to pull one over Mark Sims?