Rooneys agent under investigation

Does the right thing by so many people and it could end up being the wrong thing.

Might by that WR channelled it through his agent?
 
It’s not illegal to transfer money. In reality if he did it with a cheque it is hardly being hidden way.

Obviously there could be tax ramifications or if something that isn’t legal expected in return, it would cause big issues.

It’s a free country, he can give it to who he wants within reason 👍
 
Costero Poderoso said:
The FA just do not have a ** clue, they are happy to overlook all kinds of financial shenanigans (and a lot more besides) with owners purchasing and running clubs. I cannot see how paying a clubs wages could in any way be construed as being problematic.
Click to expand...
Quite. Any old charlatan can take over with minimal oversight.
 
My question is where does this chap sit in the payout queue, he presumably doesn't have any security over the money, I doubt he counts as a football creditor, so is he in line for a payment of 25p in the £1, or less?

A £1,200,000 haircut for him because he believed whatever line of bulls*** Kirchner fed him, that's gonna hurt.
 
Lost Seasider said:
My question is where does this chap sit in the payout queue, he presumably doesn't have any security over the money, I doubt he counts as a football creditor, so is he in line for a payment of 25p in the £1, or less?

A £1,200,000 haircut for him because he believed whatever line of bulls*** Kirchner fed him, that's gonna hurt.
Click to expand...
Maybe it wasnt his own money, maybe Rooney paid the 1.6m through this guy
 
Are you allowed to gift such a large amount of money without informing the HMRC ?
 
Strange how people jump on the moral bandwagon when no-one yet knows the full story.
On the face of it, it does appear odd that an agent would donate such a considerable sum without getting something in return.
 
Scaramanga said:
Are you allowed to gift such a large amount of money without informing the HMRC ?
Click to expand...

I think it was intended as a loan, but as a gift, as an individual you can give your money to whoever you want, it would only be a matter for HMRC if you died within 7 years.

The other taxation implications are he might try to claim this as a business expense, whether that succeeds or not will depend upon the facts.
 
The other thought I have is that Mr Kirchner is potentially guilty of fraud in this case, depending upon what was said to persuade Mr Stretford to transfer the money, the fact that he has suffered a loss is sufficient for the offence to be complete, the fact that Mr Kirchner did not personally benefit is irrelevant.
 
Lost Seasider said:
I think it was intended as a loan, but as a gift, as an individual you can give your money to whoever you want, it would only be a matter for HMRC if you died within 7 years.

The other taxation implications are he might try to claim this as a business expense, whether that succeeds or not will depend upon the facts.
Click to expand...
I'm sure it wasn't done through altruism as some on here have suggested.
Agents, of all people, don't do something for nothing.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
I'm sure it wasn't done through altruism as some on here have suggested.
Agents, of all people, don't do something for nothing.
Click to expand...

Yep, presumably he offered to pay him back with interest, somehow convinced him that the funds were on the way and would be there in a couple of days, I think at this point Mr Kirchner may have drifted beyond whatever game he was playing into outright fraud in a strict criminal sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top