PSOE asks the Supreme Court to condemn the PP for tax crimes in light of new evidence in the ‘Bárcenas case’

The PSOE’s public prosecution in the case of the black fund that financed the PP for almost 20 years (1990-2009) sent a letter on August 19 to the Supreme Court in which it requests that it study the documentation in the possession of a court in Tarragona on the alleged maneuvers of the Ministry of Finance, then headed by Cristóbal Montoro, in order to confront Judge Pablo Ruz -instructor of the Bárcenas case- and thus avoid the PP being convicted of tax crimes. While Judge Ruz asked the Treasury experts to inform him of the amount of fraud by the PP for not paying taxes on the illegal donations it received; those responsible for the Treasury disagreed with the judge to argue that these illegal donations were not required to be declared in the corporate tax.

The body dependent on the Ministry of Finance prepared the report requested by Ruz, clarifying that its criteria were “absolutely contrary to that used by express mandate of the judicial authority,” according to the head inspector of the National Office for Fraud Investigation (ONIF), Margarita García-Valdecasas. The report revealed the result of an unpaid fee of 220,167 euros, above the minimum established by law (120,000 euros) to charge for tax crime.

The PSOE’s written accusation reaches the Supreme Court when this body supposedly deliberated six months ago on the appeals filed against the National Court’s ruling that condemned the former treasurer of the PP, Luis Bárcenas, and the architectural firm that was in charge of the renovation of the headquarters of the conservative party, for paying and charging for these works with black money. In addition, the ruling considered it proven that the PP was financed with illegal donations and condemned the party as subsidiary civilly liable for the crime committed by the person who was its treasurer. “Bárcenas managed the cash funds contributed to the Popular Party as private donations through parallel accounting – B accounting – whose income and expenditure were not recorded in the official accounting and, therefore, were not audited by the Court of Auditors,” states the ruling of the National Court.

Although the Supreme Court deliberated six months ago on the appeals filed against this ruling, it is still unknown when it will make its decision public. The PSOE is now asking the Supreme Court to request the Tarragona court to return the emails seized from Minister Montoro’s entourage so that, after analysing them, it may decide to annul the ruling on the bank and return the case to the National Court so that its prosecution may be carried out by a different chamber. However, the PSOE will renounce this request if the Supreme Court agrees, as requested by the popular prosecution in its first appeal, to condemn the Popular Party for tax offences for not declaring the corporate tax corresponding to the income received through illegal donations.

The PSOE believes that the emails seized by the Tarragona court demonstrate the lack of objectivity of the tax experts “and their failure to serve the general interest in order to defend particular interests, those of the party (PP) which was exonerated from fiscal responsibility.”

Three of the seized emails that appear in the case opened in Tarragona, where the consulting firm Equipo Económico founded in 2006 by former minister Cristóbal Montoro is being investigated for possible influence peddling, detail how the judicial threat against the PP was managed within the ministry.

January 29, 2015: “No tax consequences.” “Minister, for the meeting at 9.30 (…). The first annex to the note describes why the amount of financing (whether it is higher or has different conditions than those provided for in the Law on the Financing of Political Parties) has no tax consequences for the purposes of Corporate Tax. The report will be ready to be sent to the judge next week (…). The judge has expressly asked the officials to decide whether there would be a crime in the party if the entire amount of financing that did not comply with the provisions of the Law on the Financing of Political Parties was not considered exempt for the purposes of Corporate Tax. The Tax Agency considers that non-compliance with the Law on the Financing of Political Parties must be administratively sanctioned and has no tax consequences of any kind. The AEAT is not going to quantify the impact.”

February 11, 2015 “Credible arguments, absence of crime.” “The AEAT officials have given credible arguments that the PP has not committed any crime in the financing of the party. The irregular nature of the financing does not change the tax regime of the income received by the party, which should be considered exempt for the purposes of corporate tax. The prosecutor has been convinced and the opinion of the State Attorney is that this avenue of accusation has been closed.”

March 26, 2015. “If you ask, there is no crime in the PP.” “If you ask, the Tax Agency maintains its opinion, there is no crime in the Popular Party, but there is in UNIFICA [empresa que acometió las obras de reforma de la sede del PP y cobró parte del servicio en dinero negro]. In turn, Justice is considering the possibility that the State Attorney’s Office will appeal the judge’s ruling. [ordenando una informe sobre el fraude fiscal del PP al no pagar el impuesto de sociedades por las donaciones ilegales recibidas en 2008]. In this case, arguments would also be requested from the AEAT to support the appeal. The decision would be taken by the National Court, which has already considered on previous occasions that an illegal donation should not be exempt from corporate tax…”. Judge Pablo Ruz and three magistrates of the fourth section of the National Court maintained that the illegal donations were an extraordinary income of the PP as they did not comply with the provisions of the Law on Party Financing and therefore defended the criterion that the conservative party should have paid the corresponding corporate tax.