Page 8 of 24 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 18 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 349

Thread: Pressure on ASIC to investigate Rugby Australia’s Melbourne Rebels dealings

  1. #106
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    27
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Alison View Post
    I hope the ATO are shadowing the ASIC investigation as the MRRU is a taxable entity. If the MRRU provided “services” to the ARU to the value of $10million in 2013 and 2014 as per their official financial statements, why was that not shown as income and why was tax not paid on it?
    I posted previously I believe the services are the provision of a super rugby team and the $10 million is the 2 years of grant money all super teams receive. It's in a note which means the money is already declared in a line item above. I doubt there's anything here significant.
    Things that I see to be hopeful for based on what's publicly available:
    - ARU board and executive for not exercising fiduciary responsibility
    - Gray or anyone else who has an undisclosed imperium interest
    - General contempt of Senate inquiry for dickheadedness.

    Otherwise i don't see North having done anything that will get him trouble, being a slimeball isn't a crime unfortunately. Same for Cox, he benefited but he definitely acted in the best interests of his companies; playing nice with incompetents isn't a requirement either - unless he gifted imperium units to someone as a payoff for arranging the rebels sale to him.

    Just my view based on what's available publicly. I won't speculate in what isn't available publicly.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  2. #107
    Veteran Bakkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    3,728
    vCash
    5000000
    It's in a note which means the money is already declared in a line item above. I doubt there's anything here significant.
    That's fine if the notes make sense a lot of them don't.

    Otherwise i don't see North having done anything that will get him trouble, being a slimeball isn't a crime unfortunately. Same for Cox, he benefited but he definitely acted in the best interests of his companies; playing nice with incompetents isn't a requirement either
    Depends if North had anything to do with the sale to Cox who was technically insolvent at the time. He also signed off on dodgy deals on behalf of the VRU.

    He may get some slack for tipping off the unit trusts.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    'I may be a Senator but I am not stupid'


    https://omny.fm/shows/the-alan-jones-breakfast-show/cameron-clyne

    Link to Senate Report http://www.aph.gov.au/senate_ca

    https://www.change.org/p/rugby-australia-petition-for-cameron-clyne-to-resign-as-chairman-of-the-rugby-australia-board

  3. #108
    Legend Contributor Alison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    7,308
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmydubs View Post
    I posted previously I believe the services are the provision of a super rugby team and the $10 million is the 2 years of grant money all super teams receive. It's in a note which means the money is already declared in a line item above. I doubt there's anything here significant.
    Things that I see to be hopeful for based on what's publicly available:
    - ARU board and executive for not exercising fiduciary responsibility
    - Gray or anyone else who has an undisclosed imperium interest
    - General contempt of Senate inquiry for dickheadedness.

    Otherwise i don't see North having done anything that will get him trouble, being a slimeball isn't a crime unfortunately. Same for Cox, he benefited but he definitely acted in the best interests of his companies; playing nice with incompetents isn't a requirement either - unless he gifted imperium units to someone as a payoff for arranging the rebels sale to him.

    Just my view based on what's available publicly. I won't speculate in what isn't available publicly.
    I'll have a look back at all the paperwork but I seem to remember that the grants were separately identified and of a different amount. If it was grant money, why was it not described as such? Why was it specifically called "services" (which implies a taxable supply)? And if it was the grant money, why were the figures different to those in the ARU's accounts?

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Proudly Western Australian; Proudly supporting Western Australian rugby

  4. #109
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    27
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Alison View Post
    I'll have a look back at all the paperwork but I seem to remember that the grants were separately identified and of a different amount. If it was grant money, why was it not described as such? Why was it specifically called "services" (which implies a taxable supply)? And if it was the grant money, why were the figures different to those in the ARU's accounts?
    I believe it was a note on 'related party transactions' and only appeared the years the ARU effectively controlled the MRRU. When it was privately held, they aren't related parties, so no footnote required.
    The $ line up exactly one year. The other year it's a bit off, would need detailed breakdowns to know why, my guess ia something to do with shared personnel when you had people with both ARU and MRRU hats on in that period. I.e. Grant money plus/minus portion cost of people doing something for both?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  5. #110
    Immortal GIGS20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockingham
    Posts
    20,508
    vCash
    1296000
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmydubs View Post
    I believe it was a note on 'related party transactions' and only appeared the years the ARU effectively controlled the MRRU. When it was privately held, they aren't related parties, so no footnote required. The $ line up exactly one year. The other year it's a bit off, would need detailed breakdowns to know why, my guess ia something to do with shared personnel when you had people with both ARU and MRRU hats on in that period. I.e. Grant money plus/minus portion cost of people doing something for both?
    I assume you have a reasonable explanation for the millions of dollars Cox paid to himself as consultancy fees or the similar millions he paid to North as legal fees or the money that has been siphoned into a unit trust held by ARU and vru heavyweights.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    C'mon the

  6. #111
    Legend Contributor Alison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    7,308
    vCash
    5000000
    All sounds a bit hit and miss but at least they bothered to file accounts! (thanks to Leahy who took over after Clarke left to go back to the ARU)

    We have not seen any MRRU accounts since then as none have been filed. Except maybe as part of the maze-like group structure that Cox wrapped all his companies up in.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  7. #112
    Player lou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    313
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Alison View Post
    All sounds a bit hit and miss but at least they bothered to file accounts! (thanks to Leahy who took over after Clarke left to go back to the ARU)

    We have not seen any MRRU accounts since then as none have been filed. Except maybe as part of the maze-like group structure that Cox wrapped all his companies up in.
    After Cox took over, he transformed / converted the company into a Pty Ltd entity from a Ltd entity - in this way, he did not need to publish the accounts. At this stage the VRU has not transformed/ converted the company back into a Ltd entity and until they do, we may not see their accounts except as referenced to by the RA accounts (they are still Ltd).

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by lou; 16-01-18 at 18:16.

  8. #113
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    27
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    I assume you have a reasonable explanation for the millions of dollars Cox paid to himself as consultancy fees or the similar millions he paid to North as legal fees or the money that has been siphoned into a unit trust held by ARU and vru heavyweights.
    The last bit about a trust held by heavyweights would be damning, but we're not talking about enough money to make it worthwhile for more than a couple people. Most of these guys don't need a few hundred gorillas bad enough to risk it. Gray seemed touchy though so wouldn't be surprised if he was in on it.
    The rest is ARU stupidity. Cox signed a contract that gifted him millions to try and run the rebels with no strings attached. I can't see any laws broken.

    Don't get me wrong I hate the whole fucking mess. These dimwits have ruined Oz rugby and led to the Force getting axed. It's utter BS. But when it comes to whose going to get in trouble you have to deal with the reality of the law of the land and what was actually done that was illegal or in contravention of someone duties as a company office holder. Unfortunately, pitchforks and bonfirea have gone out of fashion.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  9. #114
    Veteran Bakkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    3,728
    vCash
    5000000
    A taxable entity using a not for profit organisation which the RA is to avoid tax should raise a red flag straight away. Unit trusts are also taxed so if they sent money back to the RA to avoid paying tax, that's another red flag.

    Throw in 'consultancy' work that's another.

    Then you have the RA giving Tim North the access to the confidential Alliance Agreement then getting it photocopied. Red flag.

    Which ARU/MRRU/VRU directors signed off on the sale to Cox who was technically insolvent in NZ at the time? Despite what de Clyne says Cox has to supply his ACN and ABN to NZ Companies Office due to bilateral agreements. That means ASIC and the ATO can request information. The ATO can ask him to pay tax on the NZ registered company and he has registered it with an Australian address.

    North said it only takes an ASIC search to find out who the Unit Trust holders are. Having run the search for Imperium Sports Management Holding Ltd I take it this will reveal the 'shareholders'

    11/12/2017 7E9732338
    Change To Company Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address (484A1)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    15/12/2016 7E8624002
    Change To Company Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder (484E)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    15/12/2016 7E8623953
    Notification Of Resolution Changing Company Name (205A)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    19/11/2016 7E8541138
    Change To Company Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder (484E)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    4/08/2014 7E6260801
    Change To Company Details Changes To (Members) Share Holdings (484N)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    4/08/2014 7E6260750
    Show sub documents Change To Company Details (484)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    25/07/2014 7E6241028
    Notification Of Resolution Changing Company Name (205A)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    18/07/2011 7E3818917
    Change To Company Details Changes To (Members) Share Holdings (484N)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    19/05/2011 7E3677407
    Change To Company Details Changes To (Members) Share Holdings (484N)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    3/05/2011 7E3641138
    Change To Company Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder (484E)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document

    The information that Nick Taylor has accessed is from a confidential submission which we wouldn't have seen during the Inquiry.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    'I may be a Senator but I am not stupid'


    https://omny.fm/shows/the-alan-jones-breakfast-show/cameron-clyne

    Link to Senate Report http://www.aph.gov.au/senate_ca

    https://www.change.org/p/rugby-australia-petition-for-cameron-clyne-to-resign-as-chairman-of-the-rugby-australia-board

  10. #115
    Immortal GIGS20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockingham
    Posts
    20,508
    vCash
    1296000
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmydubs View Post
    The rest is ARU stupidity. Cox signed a contract that gifted him millions to try and run the rebels with no strings attached. I can't see any laws broken
    I'm pretty sure there are laws about company directors and fiduciary duty. Being on the committee of an incorporated body I know I'm often warned about the impact that poorly made decisions in that capacity will have on my personal life, I assume the same applies to the company directors and executives in the body who threw uncounted millions at a trust for their mates, causing the organisation to shed 20% of its workforce to stave off insolvency. Surely somebody will need to pay the piper.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    C'mon the

  11. #116
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    27
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by Bakkies View Post
    A taxable entity using a not for profit organisation which the RA is to avoid tax should raise a red flag straight away. Unit trusts are also taxed so if they sent money back to the RA to avoid paying tax, that's another red flag.

    Throw in 'consultancy' work that's another.

    Then you have the RA giving Tim North the access to the confidential Alliance Agreement then getting it photocopied. Red flag.

    Which ARU/MRRU/VRU directors signed off on the sale to Cox who was technically insolvent in NZ at the time? Despite what de Clyne says Cox has to supply his ACN and ABN to NZ Companies Office due to bilateral agreements. That means ASIC and the ATO can request information. The ATO can ask him to pay tax on the NZ registered company and he has registered it with an Australian address.

    North said it only takes an ASIC search to find out who the Unit Trust holders are. Having run the search for Imperium Sports Management Holding Ltd I take it this will reveal the 'shareholders'

    11/12/2017 7E9732338
    Change To Company Details Change Officeholder Name Or Address (484A1)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    15/12/2016 7E8624002
    Change To Company Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder (484E)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    15/12/2016 7E8623953
    Notification Of Resolution Changing Company Name (205A)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    19/11/2016 7E8541138
    Change To Company Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder (484E)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    4/08/2014 7E6260801
    Change To Company Details Changes To (Members) Share Holdings (484N)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    4/08/2014 7E6260750
    Show sub documents Change To Company Details (484)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    25/07/2014 7E6241028
    Notification Of Resolution Changing Company Name (205A)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    18/07/2011 7E3818917
    Change To Company Details Changes To (Members) Share Holdings (484N)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    19/05/2011 7E3677407
    Change To Company Details Changes To (Members) Share Holdings (484N)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document
    3/05/2011 7E3641138
    Change To Company Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder (484E)
    2
    $19.00 Select uncertified document
    $38.00 Select certified document

    The information that Nick Taylor has accessed is from a confidential submission which we wouldn't have seen during the Inquiry.
    1. How could MRRU use ARU not to pay tax even the money was flowing the other way? And MRRU was still making a loss?

    2. What money back to the ARU? The rebels were draining it the other way and passing it up against the wall.

    3. The consulting line is a wild stab in the dark so I'll let it go to the keeper.

    4. RA are in breach of the confidentiality clause of the contract and RugbyWA can pursue them for remedy and haven't so won't because it doesn't help. North has done nothing wrong in receiving it.

    5. Yes. Not fulfilling their fiduciary duties in handing cash to Cox. The fact he was technically insolvent is embarrassing and adds to the lack of duty in handing him cash and ignoring the Whinney bid. but there's nothing illegal in the act of signing a deal with an entity that's technically insolvent; that's how they tend to become solvent again by continuing to do business. Or they go properly insolvent.

    6.? He pays tax where it's due on the entity that makes money. There no evidence this hasn't occurred. We are back in wild stabs in the dark Territory again.

    7. Yes.The only issue with the unit trust is if it concealed a conflict of interest that wasn't declared. ASIC can ddetermine that quickly with the relevant documents. But an ASIC search won't tell you the beneficial holders of a trust. I'm a beneficiary of a trust and you won't find it in a websearch, even by paying.

    I know this is an internet forum but I prefer to stick to the reality of the situation.

    I admire your passion but need to take the blinkers off every now and again.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  12. #117
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    27
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    I'm pretty sure there are laws about company directors and fiduciary duty. Being on the committee of an incorporated body I know I'm often warned about the impact that poorly made decisions in that capacity will have on my personal life, I assume the same applies to the company directors and executives in the body who threw uncounted millions at a trust for their mates, causing the organisation to shed 20% of its workforce to stave off insolvency. Surely somebody will need to pay the piper.
    Agreed. This is the most likely way someone will get in trouble,not exercising fiduciary duty correctly at ARU level. I did note that in my original post but just addressed other issues in the more recent ones.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  13. #118
    Immortal GIGS20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockingham
    Posts
    20,508
    vCash
    1296000
    Senator Reynolds also implied there might be anomalies in the annual reports of the ARU and suggested that Clyne and Pulver might be in trouble over declarations they signed.

    That not being my area of speciality I won't comment further.

    I too have a king sized scoop of scepticism about the mrru tax evasion story, they were so far in the red that they could have easily stashed several million dollars a year directly into the mrru accounts without Paying a cent.

    The unit trust OTOH would be a taxable entity.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    C'mon the

  14. #119
    Veteran Bakkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    3,728
    vCash
    5000000
    1. How could MRRU use ARU not to pay tax even the money was flowing the other way? And MRRU was still making a loss?
    Read the books again money was going both ways. Tax departments across the world are cracking down on shifting money to deliberately record a loss to avoid paying corporation/company tax. You still have to file a return even if you make a loss.

    3. The consulting line is a wild stab in the dark so I'll let it go to the keeper.
    Clarke was providing consulting services to the Rebels (still is as far as we know), told a bad story to say that he wasn't involved with the sale to Cox and was sent to Perth on a hatchet job to say why the Rebels should stay.

    Consulting was brought up more than a few times in the inquiry.

    North has done nothing wrong in receiving it.
    He gave a bullshit excuse for having it photocopied in a meeting he couldn't recall and knew how the RA could axe the Force legally from reading the terms. Throw in how to save his bottom feeding team from getting the chop.

    Nick Taylor also obtained emails that Richard Hawkins the former legal counsel for the RA sent to North about a Deed of Amendment to the Put Option that was required to sell the Rebels back to the VRU

    https://thewest.com.au/sport/rugby-u...-ng-b88679229z

    but there's nothing illegal in the act of signing a deal with an entity that's technically insolvent; that's how they tend to become solvent again by continuing to do business. Or they go properly insolvent.
    If it wasn't a red flag than why did Reynolds raise it to more than one witness? You don't go selling business with multi million dollar expenses to a business that is broke.

    But an ASIC search won't tell you the beneficial holders of a trust. I'm a beneficiary of a trust and you won't find it in a websearch, even by paying.
    Are you saying that North lied in his testimony as he pointed out that the Unit holders can be found on a ASIC search?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by Bakkies; 16-01-18 at 22:10.
    'I may be a Senator but I am not stupid'


    https://omny.fm/shows/the-alan-jones-breakfast-show/cameron-clyne

    Link to Senate Report http://www.aph.gov.au/senate_ca

    https://www.change.org/p/rugby-australia-petition-for-cameron-clyne-to-resign-as-chairman-of-the-rugby-australia-board

  15. #120
    Veteran Bakkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    3,728
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    Senator Reynolds also implied there might be anomalies in the annual reports of the ARU and suggested that Clyne and Pulver might be in trouble over declarations they signed.
    She recommended that ASIC investigate the RA's books which are of course signed off by Bonnie and de Clyne.

    This is a quote from a post from UAU Driver on one of the Inquiry threads

    It never ends, a $500,000 loan provided in 2012 by a related party was forgiven.
    In 2013 the MRRU received a loan of $5,500,000 - ultimately forgiven
    In 2014 the MRRU received a loan of $8,750,000 - ultimately forgiven
    Then
    In 2013 the MRRU provided services to the ARU $3,700,000
    In 2014 the MRRU provided services to the ARU $5,986,404

    To me, a taxable entity (MRRU) was providing services in 2013/14, to the not for profit organisation (ARU) for $9,686,404.
    Reading through the posts others said that services received from the MRRU didn't show up on the RA's books.


    Another poster put up a clip from the reports which showed Brumbies operations and Western Force operations. The RA tried to set the Brumbies up on a strategic alliance when they were under review without purchasing the IP than backed off when they found out that the organisation was going to make a profit. Yet Anthony French said in the infamous meeting on August 18th 2016 that the Brumbies were close to being insolvent. He also lied about the state of the Force's finances in his report which was used as a recommendation to axe a side. Yes the Force were struggling but not as bad as the Rebels and certainly weren't going to become insolvent that year.

    The Force agreement was signed on August 26th 2016 and they agreed at the meeting on the 18th the recommendation for the teams to be up for the cull was going to be discussed at a further meeting in October that year.

    For a meeting that went for four hours the minutes were awfully short in detail and were signed off by de Clyne in December 2016.

    The RA said it was only discussed early last year that a team was going to be culled and yet when asked about the meeting in August the year before they couldn't tell a decent lie. Same goes when questioned about the financials yet kept on throwing out close to insolvency and being debt free.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by Bakkies; 16-01-18 at 22:22.
    'I may be a Senator but I am not stupid'


    https://omny.fm/shows/the-alan-jones-breakfast-show/cameron-clyne

    Link to Senate Report http://www.aph.gov.au/senate_ca

    https://www.change.org/p/rugby-australia-petition-for-cameron-clyne-to-resign-as-chairman-of-the-rugby-australia-board

Page 8 of 24 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 18 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-05-11, 01:07
  2. Rugby newcomers Melbourne Rebels to stand down Brian Waldron
    By travelling_gerry in forum Melbourne Rebels
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 24-04-10, 01:56
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-01-10, 05:13
  4. Melbourne Rebels on the rugby march
    By Burgs in forum National Rugby Championship (NRC)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 30-03-07, 11:14
  5. Rugby WA fined over Kanaar dealings
    By NewsBot in forum News Feeds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-05-06, 16:16

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •