2023-07-13 15:49:32
The Spanish Association of Tax Advisors (AEDAF) launches a recommendation to taxpayers affected by the Solidarity Tax that came into force at the end of 2022: you have to declare the tax and then appeal it.
Also known as the tax on large fortunes tax on assets greater than 3 million euros and, according to tax advisers, it seems to be unconstitutional. But, in order to recover the amounts paid if the Constitutional Court finally agrees with the taxpayers, they see it necessary to declare it and then initiate an appeal to challenge it.
As you have remembered José Manuel Almudí Cid, Professor of Financial and Tax Law at the Complutense University of Madrid, During the presentation of an AEDAF study, the refund would only be for those taxpayers who “have initiated the appeal process.” And he has insisted that these cases have weighty legal grounds to be considered, especially after the Constitutional Court has admitted the appeals of several autonomous communities, such as Madrid, Andalusia and Galicia.
“If the Constitutional Court agrees with the appellants, everything paid with the tax plus interest will have to be returned,” he explained. Stella Raventós Calvo, president of AEDAFwho has criticized that, with this tax figure, which in principle is temporary, “it is generating ‘bread for today and hunger for tomorrow'”.
In his opinion, the possibility that the courts overthrow this lien and that the amounts paid plus interest have to be returned causes “Immediate collection is prioritized and the interests of the State are penalized in the medium term. This is damaging the public coffers.” According to government calculations, the tax affects some 23,000 taxpayers throughout Spain and will raise some 1,500 million euros.
Let us remember that this tax establishes different escalations depending on the assets: 1.7% for assets of between 3 and 5.3 million euros; 2.1% for assets between 5.3 and 10.6 million, and 3.5% for assets greater than 10.6 million euros. For the determination of the taxable base of this tax, the rules contained in the Wealth Tax Law are applicable, in such a way that it includes a minimum exemption of 700,000 euros.
Tax advisers insist that the best formula to recover the amounts paid is to declare the tax “and challenge it later, past the voluntary payment term”. However, the voluntary period ends in July and August, the non-working month par excellence, so the association recognizes that “it is not a favorable time” and that It is convenient that the allegations are well prepared.
Thus, everything points to The challenges could be made from September and that at the end of the year a balance could be made of how many taxpayers affected by the tax on large fortunes have decided to appeal it, although from the AEDAF they see it as likely to be a fairly high percentage.
“We are not appealing to appeal, but because we are convinced that we are in the framework of the defense of the taxpayer and the rule of law,” stressed Raventós.
Criticism of the tax and signs of unconstitutionality
Tax advisers have criticized the way in which the Government carried out this fiscal change. Specifically, they have stressed their “reprehensible” parliamentary proceduresince it was included as an amendment in the bill to introduce new temporary taxes on energy companies and banks, and that its intended harmonizing effect with the Wealth Tax has been clearly blurred significantly, despite being “a reaction clear from the State to a lawful decision of the autonomous communities, such as subsidizing the Wealth Tax”.
In addition, they have insisted that the approval of measures with such “deficient technical quality” it contributes to the multiplication of litigiousness, in addition to the pressure on the taxpayer, the advisors and the judicial system.
For advisors, the anomaly in parliamentary processing it is decisive in order to determine the unconstitutionality of the tax. For example, that this new tax figure was incorporated into a bill, not as a bill, which was approved on December 27, published in the BOE on December 28 and entered into force a day later, without giving leeway for taxpayers.
From the AEDAF they have recognized that it is an “outrage” and a “possible fraud of parliamentary law that generates legal uncertainty”, which “makes us turn on all the alarms and all the alerts because there are many violations”. For his part, the tenured professor of Financial and Tax Law at the Complutense University of Madrid has stated that it is an “extravagant formula to approve a tax. Going to a kind of back door.”
Among other articles of the Constitution, the principle of political representation guaranteed by article 23.1 of the Magna Carta could be violated, since, according to the AEDAF, “the constitutional rights of minority parliamentary groups are undermined, while seriously undermining the essence of the social and democratic State of Law. The way in which it was approved undermines the rights of groups such as the principle of self-imposition enshrined in article 31.3”.
Another reason that the tax could be knocked down is that, according to the advisers and many other experts, it prevents the free movement of capital, a guarantee of the Treaty of the European Union, since it establishes a different treatment for resident and non-resident taxpayers. The latter, for example, do not enjoy the exempt minimum of 700,000 euros.
#Tax #advisers #recommend #resorting #wealth #tax #idealistanews