2024-02-16 10:32:27
That is why Fidanka Ionevska, about whom “24 chasa” wrote, was not punished, says the tax chief
A day ago “24 hours – 168 stories” published an interview with Eng. Anastasios Dikos, executive director for Bulgaria of “Danaos Development”, owned by the Greek shipping magnate John Koustas.
In it, Dikos told about a systematic racketeering by the group of Martin Bojanov-Notariusa, who was shot two weeks ago. Government officials were also involved in the harassment, which lasted for 2 years. In the interview, he stated that one of these employees is Fidanka Ionevska, who holds a senior management position in the National Revenue Agency. Dikos points to Ionevska as the initiator of a report against the company and simultaneously as a person performing a tax audit of the same, which is why he accuses her of a conflict of interest. Dikos also claims that on this occasion there was a meeting at the National Revenue Agency and a letter to Finance Minister Asen Vasilev. According to him, Yonevska lives in an illegal house with many extras and cohabits on a family basis with the co-owner of a chain of gas stations and a fuel company. According to Dikos, this is also a conflict of interest. In order to answer these questions, “24 Chasa” sought out the surprising director of the National Narcotics Agency Rumen Spetsov.
– Does Fidanka Yonevska work in the National Revenue Agency and in what capacity, Mr. Spetsov?
– Yes. The employee is the head of the “Revisions” sector in the TD of the NRA – Sofia.
– I ask you because the Greek businessman Anastasios Dikos in an interview with Slavi Angelov for “24 hours – 168 stories” accuses her of using her official position to participate in blackmailing them?
– When an employee of the NRA has a private interest within the meaning of the ZPKONPI/ZPK, he is obliged to recuse himself from the performance of the specific authority and duty of office. If there is a hypothesis in which Yonevska would appear in the conditions of a conflict of interest, fulfilling her official duties, she should recuse herself according to the prescribed legal order. If we are talking about the company “Danaos”, then it is registered in the territorial directorate of GDO, and Mrs. Yonevska works in the TD of the NRA Sofia.
– If the “Yonevska” case is known, including to Minister Asen Vassilev, why does she continue to hold this position?
– If the “Yonevska” case refers to the conflict of interest report submitted by “Danaos”, it is important to specify that in relation to Yonevska in 2022, proceedings were initiated to establish a conflict of interest. It was initiated following a report by the company mentioned in the article in “24 Chasa”, containing data on a conflict of interest. The proceedings were concluded by a decision of the executive director of the National Revenue Agency in the same year. It established the existence of a conflict of interest in relation to of Yonevska. The decision was appealed and confirmed by Decision No. 5212/04.08.2022 of the ACSG and canceled by Decision No. 3247/27.03.2023 of the Supreme Court. The decision of the Supreme Court is final and not subject to appeal. As a result of the cancellation of the decision to establish a conflict of interest by the SAC in relation to the employee, no follow-up actions were taken according to law – imposition of an administrative sanction – fine and dismissal from the position held (Article 80 of the Labor Code of Ukraine).
– According to Dikos, she lives in an illegal property with a lot of extras. Do you have an answer to the question about the origin of the money and whether there are other tax officials with similar wealth?
– The employees of the NRA annually submit declarations of property status to KPCONPI. This is a requirement that is followed by all. With regard to the question of whether there are other “employees with similar assets”, it is necessary to emphasize that in accordance with the requirements of the normative documents regulating the powers and obligations, verification of the declarations of assets and interests of the employees, in particular of the National Revenue Agency, regarding the reliability of the declared facts and circumstances (actual verification), is admissible under the following conditions:
1. When filing a report against an employee of the National Narcotics Agency for a corruption violation or conflict of interest within the meaning of ZPKONPI.
2. When disciplinary proceedings are instituted, when evidence of a corruption violation or conflict of interest is discovered.
3. In the course of another inspection, where indications of a corruption violation on the part of the employee regarding the credibility of the declared facts in the declarations were established.
4. At units with an established high corruption risk.
The circumstances related to the property status of the agency’s employees are established by conducting an inspection in accordance with the relevant legal order. The declarations of the NRA employees who do not hold senior positions within the meaning of the ZPC/ZPKONPI are not public. In the presence of any of the above hypotheses, the NRA takes appropriate actions to carry out inspections. However, the possession of property of considerable value should not necessarily be identified with an unproven origin of the funds.
– It is clear that the decisions of the Supreme Court are not appealed, but are implemented. But is there a mechanism to prevent such a conflict of interest?
– A total of 16 inspections were carried out on the company – 1 to establish facts and circumstances and 15 to intercept or refund in connection with establishing the presence/absence of grounds for VAT refund. They are traditional when requesting a VAT refund from companies. 4 audits were also initiated against the company to establish the company’s value added tax obligations, the first of which was in the period December 2018 – October 2018, and the last from March 2021 to June 2021. Mrs. Ionevska assigned only one of the 4 revisions performed. Also, revisions are not done by one person, but by a team.
– It is also claimed that Yonevska lives on a family basis with Atanas Dimov, who owns a chain of petrol stations “Cruise” and the SAKSA fuel trading company. There would be no problem in this, unless Yonevska is responsible for the inspections of the “Fuel” sector for TD – Sofia, from which another conflict of interest would appear. Is there one?
– The NRA received several reports against Ms. Yonevska for conflict of interest. The first is from KPCONPI, providing information about a report filed with them, but without implementing the report itself. In it, it is alleged that Ms. Ionevska cohabits on a conjugal basis with a person who has participations and ownership in several specifically identified commercial companies, in relation to which she exercised official powers. A preliminary investigation was launched at the National Narcotics Agency, during which sufficient evidence was not collected for the exercise of powers by Yonevska against the targeted persons. The second report of January 11, 2022 was from “Danaos Development” EAD. It contains information about a conflict of interest in relation to Yonevska. Proceedings to establish a conflict of interest were initiated at the National Revenue Agency. The proceeding ends with a decision on May 9, 2022. , which establishes a conflict of interest in relation to Yonevska. The decision was appealed and confirmed on August 4, 2023 by the Administrative Court – Sofia-city. On March 27, 2023, the Supreme Administrative Court annulled the decision of the first-instance magistrates, not establishing the presence of conflict of interest. Decision No. 3247/27.03.2023 of the Supreme Administrative Court is final and not subject to appeal. Until the court’s final ruling on the case, Yonevska was not removed from work.
A third report was also filed, again by KPCONPI, which refers to Yonevska for a conflict of interest. It has the same content as the previous ones. For this reason, a response was prepared from the National Revenue Agency to KPCONPI that a proceeding has already been initiated, according to which a decision has been made, in view of which no further actions should be taken.
– How do you monitor the property status of tax officials in order to preserve the authority of the institution and protect them from temptations?
– Each NRA employee submits a property declaration to KPCONPI upon assuming office, and thereafter annually. In the event that proceedings have been initiated to verify the declarations of the employees’ property and in the event of a discrepancy between the declared property status and the actual one, which is in the amount of more than BGN 5,000 and the same has not been removed in accordance with the procedure provided for in the regulations, actions are taken control actions in accordance with the Tax and Insurance Procedural Code (DOPK). In the event that during the inspections, data on committed administrative violations or crimes are established, actions are taken to initiate administrative criminal proceedings, as well as the competent authorities for criminal prosecution are referred. In the specific case regarding F. Yonevska, specifically on the occasion of a report against the employee in 2019, an inspection of the declarations of property and interests submitted by her was commissioned and carried out in accordance with the rules of the ZPKONPI. These actions were taken to clarify allegations that she owned multiple properties and that she had submitted false information in the declaration of assets and interests. In the course of the inspection, data were found on inconsistencies between the facts declared by her and the data available in the public registers, as well as that she did not declare facts in relation to a related person for whom such prerequisites were present. The person was duly notified of what was found during the inspection, having taken steps to submit a corrective statement. If actions are taken to eliminate the inconsistencies, the law does not provide for taking follow-up actions.
– And how is the entire auditing activity of the agency monitored, so that it becomes clear that the “Yonevska” case is a single breach in the system, and not a practice?
– One cannot speak of a breach in the system after the court has decided otherwise. The NRA Inspectorate carries out both alert and regular inspections. The legislator has provided an order and actions that should be taken in order to prevent and establish a conflict of interest. They are specifically listed in chapter eight of the ZPKONPI/ZPK and chapter three of the Ordinance on the organization and procedure for checking declarations and establishing conflicts of interest. The NRA strictly fulfills its powers under the mentioned acts.