MadridThe Association of State Tax Inspectors brings together 70% of the 2,000 inspectors in Spain. They claim that as an entity they have no ideology and ask that their technical knowledge be valued to fight against fraud.
Do they pay attention to them when they propose measures to fight tax fraud?
– Half made, half done. In 2014 we produced a document entitled Black holes of tax fraud, in which we collected 238 essential measures. The anti-fraud law of 2021 picked up quite a few, such as limiting cash payments. Now I made a reissue, with only 105 measures.
Tax fraud is constantly evolving, isn’t it?
– Yes. Cases like Shakira’s or the king emeritus need a regulatory response to be resolved. And we have made proposals in this regard.
But can there be an ideologically neutral taxation?
— Tax policy is political, it depends on the ideological filter. But in the end taxes have to be reasonable, and there is an important technical component. Our organization avoids the ideological component by not giving an opinion. You will never see us opining about whether taxes should be raised or lowered. Our point of view is the fight against fraud, there is no ideology here.
For example, does more inspectors mean more fight against fraud?
– Of couse. The cuts of recent years mean that we have very limited resources. The Tax Agency is one of the three European administrations with the smallest budget per citizen. This makes us a hyper-efficient treasury. We achieve a lot with little. And why? Well, because we are one of the most computerized tax agencies in the whole world. And this is recognized by many international awards.
We are one of the most computerized tax agencies in the whole world”
Ranses Perez Boga Association of State Tax Inspectors
Who made this bet on computerization?
— It starts in 1986. Behind us, in terms of degree of computerization, would come the Social Security, and then the rest. The Tax Agency is a pioneer, we introduced the NIF before the police.
And how was it done before?
— It was crazy. When I arrived at the Agency, in 1988, there was only one computer per plant. The big leap was when we launched self-liquidation, because that allows us, instead of liquidating everyone, to do it only to those who have done wrong. From here is when we start cross-referencing information in such a way that today fraud in the IRPF is pursued by the computer, which makes the request automatically, so that the first thing that reaches the official is the taxpayer’s response, that you don’t even need to come to the office.
Today the fraud in the IRPF is pursued by the computer”
Ranses Perez Boga Association of State Tax Inspectors
Is the Spanish Treasury the envy of other countries?
— Yes, we are. When we do exchanges they are amazed by our efficiency and degree of computerization. And this means that of the 28,000 officials we had in 2007, we now have 25,000 and manage more files than before.
However, do you think that resources are lacking?
— Yes, because there is a fraud that is pursued via IT. We have more and more cross information and we detect if something has not been declared. We now have bank account information from OECD countries. If you have an account in Switzerland we know. If you ask for help from the government of your autonomous community to change the windows in your house, we know. We have a duty of secrecy. We can be proud that the data our organization has does not go outside. There are thousands of cases. Imagine the case of a certain singer of Colombian origin settled in Spain…
If you have an account in Switzerland we know. If you ask for help from the Generalitat to change the windows too”
Ranses Perez Boga Association of State Tax Inspectors
Shakira?
– Indeed. Well, we do an inspection for many years and no one knows. Even within the Agency the right hand does not know what the left is doing. It is when it reaches the courts that you know, because justice is public.
Is it difficult to pursue these celebrity cases?
— The big problem we have is international fraud. For example, a very famous multinational that broadcasts television content in streaming he said he had only paid the “whopping” of 75,000 euros to the Treasury, having millions of customers in Spain. Why? Because it was a company dedicated only to marketing, they said, and since the contents were edited from a territory with very low European taxation that later triangulated with a tax haven here I only paid 75,000 euros; it’s shameful. It breaks the principle of the tax residence nexus. The tax residence is no longer useful because I can put it wherever I want. The multinationals are very clear about this.
Did the case of the king emeritus help show that all Spaniards are equal before the tax office?
– Clearly. The Tax Agency has dealt with merit, and I know it’s not popular to say so, as has another taxpayer. And I know that the feeling in society is very different. And I’ll explain. The Tax Agency has powers to prosecute tax fraud, but when this tax fraud is so large that it reaches the threshold of the crime, which is 120,000 euros, we are obliged by regulations to stop the investigation and put it in our hands of the judges What’s going on? In the case of the king emeritus, we had no evidence of any kind of fraud. Because? Well, because the signs that were there were discovered by a journalist in Switzerland, who published that the king emeritus had very high accounts. Then it was the Prosecutor’s Office who verified it, who made the commission rogatory and who went to the Agency to request judicial assistance. The report is public.
So is it when the king makes the extraordinary liquidations?
— Before that, a rogatory commission is made in Switzerland to ask for information about bank accounts. The problem is that we do not have access to bank data from other jurisdictions. For three or four years we have had access to the metadata: ownership, account, returns generated and balance at 31 December. But not the movements, which is what the raw material would give us. They must be requested with a rogatory commission through the judges. But it is complicated for them to give it because they ask that there be signs of fraud. It’s a fish that bites its tail. In the case of the king, we only had the journalistic information. If we had access to the moves, we would have had the clues. But neither the bank nor the king wanted to give the data.
And in the case of Shakira, did he want to give them?
— None. We had to order them from the US. But in this case we did have solid indications. And that’s why the Americans gave us the information. On the other hand, in the case of the emeritus, the Prosecutor’s Office did what it had to do and they gave him the information they gave him. And he made a report in which he determined there was no evidence of a crime. From the Tax Agency, the only thing we could do was act on what was not a crime.
And did they?
— We can’t say. The Prosecutor’s Office report said that this was not a crime, but that there could be an administrative violation. [El País va publicar que Hisenda havia reclamat a l’emèrit 30.411,14 euros per l’impost de donacions de tres escopetes de caça no declarades, una xifra inferior als 120.000]. Our duty of secrecy means that we can neither deny nor confirm this information. Now, what we can say is that when the judge returns a case to us because there is no crime, we are obliged to continue the procedure until the end to evacuate responsibilities.
What do you think when it is said that the Agency can be used as a political weapon? For example, making more inspections in Catalonia during the Process.
— The inspection plan is national, the lines of action are designed, for example control youtubers, and then each special delegate of each autonomous community must specify. Based on the program and the resources we have, we decide which candidates to be inspected.
In the case of Catalonia, would you say that they have few tax inspectors?
– Certainly. There are autonomous communities where it is much easier to get an inspection because there are more inspectors per inhabitant. For example, it is much easier to get an inspection in Galicia than in Madrid.
Do they have a hole in Madrid?
— The problem we have in Madrid is that there are many companies that generate 20% of GDP and there are not enough inspectors. The chances of a tax inspection in Madrid are lower than in the rest of Spain.
And in Catalonia?
— The problem with Catalonia is that the civil servants do not take root there. There is a very strong productive fabric that means that those who take the A1 exams elsewhere have an alternative to the private company. That is why there is a deficit of civil servants in Catalonia. There is no tradition of civil service.
A1s also go to private enterprise, don’t they?
— Yes, the number 1 of my promotion, the lawyer Luis Atienza, is now in the private company. And he is a gentleman from Barcelona. As much as it is said that the civil servant is paid little, what he has is more stability. It is common that, for those who take a leave of absence, the first offer already doubles or triples the public salary. But it also means that the competition system works well and is able to attract talent. The Ibex-35 is full of A1, and a prime minister was a tax inspector [José María Aznar].