English FA’s trouble seem to be never ending, after Sam Allardyce’s sting operation and sacking, the new interim boss Gareth Southgate’s name has emerged in a tax evasion case.
Southgate has been named as one of the super rich client of the investment firm Ingenious in a £434 million tax avoidance dispute.
The 46-year-old invested in two firms that were set up by Ingenious, disputing the taxman’s avoidance allegations.
Gareth Southgate joined the Inside Track 1 LLP and Inside Track 3 LLP in 2004, back when he was still playing. But the England boss along with 400 other investors has been targetted by the HM Revenue and Customs department in a tax evasion case.
Ingenious had a glowing business between 2002 to 2010, with stars like Southgate, Gary Lineker and David Beckham as their clients.
Millions of pounds were invested to boost the British film industry, but the company somehow managed to show a loss of £1.6 billion, which allowed it’s clients to write off losses from the scheme against income from other businesses.
While others left, Gareth Southgate is still shown as a member of the firm.
Ingenious was involved with the funding of blockbusters like Avatar and Life of Pi, but now it’s clients face a £434 million tax suit after a ruling by tax tribunal.
Ingenious had claimed a tax relief of £620 million, but now face the £434 million tax which will cover all of its film and subsidiary schemes.
An Ingenious spokesman had said at the time of the tribunal ruling in August: “We have consistently maintained that our film production partnerships were bona fide businesses run for profit and we are pleased that the tribunal has recognized this.
“However we dispute the basis on which the tribunal has restricted loss relief to investors and are therefore considering an appeal.
“We are reviewing the judgement in fine detail and will comment further.”
Jennie Granger, the director general of enforcement and compliance at HMRC said the schemes had funded “some of the biggest films of all time”.
She added: “The schemes involved people claiming far more in tax than they invested in the first place.
“We always say that if something is too good to be true then it probably is.
“And in this case the long legal battle will mean that investors face even bigger bills for interest and legal costs.”
She added: “Both sides are likely to be considering onward appeals and the final decision may be years away.”
