Post by account_disabled on Feb 20, 2024 2:25:21 GMT -5
For Morena, there are many arguments to overturn this tax . “The fact of approving it in an amendment to a bill, skipping the reports of the State Council, CGPJ and other organizations as filters, is something quite denounceable and ugly. "There is also no need for urgency and necessity to approve the tax where it was said that it was caused by the repercussions of the War in Ukraine."
In the opinion of this fiscal expert, there are other arguments with more weight, such as the fact that “ there is improper retroactivity , the draft of this rule was not known until the month Fax Lists of December and the tax has many components that are temporary , there are things that must be assessed over months, which creates a situation of clear legal uncertainty .”
From his point of view, “the most important arguments about its constitutionality are on the side that there is a fraud of law . With this tax, the Government says that what it intends is harmonization through the back door. Assets cannot be harmonized in this way , that is a competence that was transferred to the autonomous communities through the LOFCA, regional regulations and other regulations. If the State wants to recover it, it must follow the same procedure established for the transfer.”
Regarding Madrid's initiative to appeal through litigation in the National Court, Morera emphasizes that “it is a logical decision. This is a letter that we keep in case the Constitutional Court validates the tax. We will continue to appeal because there may be not only constitutional but legal principles that have been infringed .”
In this regard, he emphasizes that “this approval of the tax on large fortunes violates the principle of legal certainty. This is a fundamental right enshrined in European regulations themselves. It could reach the Supreme Court and even the European CJEU . Even if the Constitutional route did not work, I have the contentious route of going to other instances and even ending up jumping to the EU. That is another longer path in time.
In the opinion of this fiscal expert, there are other arguments with more weight, such as the fact that “ there is improper retroactivity , the draft of this rule was not known until the month Fax Lists of December and the tax has many components that are temporary , there are things that must be assessed over months, which creates a situation of clear legal uncertainty .”
From his point of view, “the most important arguments about its constitutionality are on the side that there is a fraud of law . With this tax, the Government says that what it intends is harmonization through the back door. Assets cannot be harmonized in this way , that is a competence that was transferred to the autonomous communities through the LOFCA, regional regulations and other regulations. If the State wants to recover it, it must follow the same procedure established for the transfer.”
Regarding Madrid's initiative to appeal through litigation in the National Court, Morera emphasizes that “it is a logical decision. This is a letter that we keep in case the Constitutional Court validates the tax. We will continue to appeal because there may be not only constitutional but legal principles that have been infringed .”
In this regard, he emphasizes that “this approval of the tax on large fortunes violates the principle of legal certainty. This is a fundamental right enshrined in European regulations themselves. It could reach the Supreme Court and even the European CJEU . Even if the Constitutional route did not work, I have the contentious route of going to other instances and even ending up jumping to the EU. That is another longer path in time.