Diego Martín-Abril shares his views on the classification of offenses against the Public Treasury.

Diego Martín-Abril, Counsel of Tax and former Director General of Taxes at the Treasury, has commented on the criminal nature of tax crimes in Spain, in ElPaís.

Gómez-Acebo & Pombo’s Counsel, Diego Martín-Abril, commented on the objective element of the crime of fraud against the Public Treasury in view of the drop in the number of crimes committed in this area in recent years.

Martín-Abril pointed out that “It is to be welcomed that the difference between tax offense and tax crime is so clear in quantitative terms”. He added that, in Spain, unlike other countries, there are no thresholds that serve as a reference and the subjective factor is the one that prevails.

All this, moreover, regardless of the tax on which it falls – on income, wealth, consumption, etc. – and whether the offender is an individual or a legal entity.

Likewise, the experts commented on the reason for the fall in the commission of these crimes and that, since 2011, the volume of complaints for this type of fraud has been reduced significantly, up to 80%. That year the number of cases processed for indications of crime by officials of the Tax Agency (AEAT) exceeded a thousand, with a combined amount of defrauded quota exceeding 900 million euros. From this point on, the number of complaints fell gradually and in 2022 -the last year with available data- only 184 proceedings were initiated, a drop of 82% from the highest level.

In the years prior to the financial crisis, the number of complaints of this type was around 800 per year, with total amounts that could exceed 900 million euros. After the 2011 record, the volume began to decline and, as of 2018, it fell below the 200 offenses per fiscal year barrier for the first time, with amounts of €100 million or €200 million. While it is true that in 2022, there were only 184 complaints, these accounted for an unusual defrauded quota of 612 million, an “extraordinary” figure, as the AEAT points out.

Experts debate the reason for the drop: the deterrent system of the sanctioning regime, the new systems for investigating these crimes and the exchange of information between jurisdictions, or the interest in law enforcement.

Read full article.