Preceding. As of today, the Constitutional Court stops Sunat, the Tax Court and the Judiciary from charging millionaire debts generated by delays in resolving conflicts with the State.
As of today, the Constitutional Court (TC) prohibits the Sunat and the Fiscal Court from charging default interest for those taxpayers —from companies with gigantic debts to a small business— whose legal term set in the Tributary Code has already expired while legal disputes with the State are ongoing.
Conditions
The director of the master’s degree in Taxation at the UPC, Francisco Pantigoso, maintains that a precedent is set, since the decision is binding and, therefore, applies to all those who have been waiting several decades for a solution and, even, for those that are being processed. In this last point, the Judiciary must annul the amounts that they want to collect.
It is worth specifying that the restriction on the collection of default interest will be valid as long as the delay in resolving the dispute has been caused by the tax administration: nine months in the case of Sunat and one year for the Tax Court.
And, if it is shown that the taxpayer caused the delay in processes —adds swampy for La República—, the imputation of these charges will proceed.
It also establishes that taxpayers have the right to wait for a resolution that observes the verdict of the TC or they can resort to the negative administrative silence for a contentious administrative process.
Will it hurt the state?
Peru has approximately unresolved judicial controversies for 15 years with approximately 1,400 taxpayers, for more than S/13,400 million, 80% of this amount responds to interest, according to the tax official Jorge Picon.
For example, Telefónica —which will have to pay S/3,000 million to the State after a decision by the Supreme Court— will have to honor this debt because the process has already ended, according to tax expert David Bravo.
“(Telefónica) is obliged to pay and this precedent does not apply. ICSID is not a judicial body; therefore, it does not have the status of pending judicial process. In processes with a final judgment (return) does not apply”, the also partner of EBS Abogados explains to this newspaper.
Finally, the lawyer points out that, in the best of cases, if ICSID agrees with the companies that question the verdicts, the State would pay compensation, but the ruling is not altered.
Source: Larepublica
Alia is a professional author and journalist, working at 247 news agency. She writes on various topics from economy news to general interest pieces, providing readers with relevant and informative content. With years of experience, she brings a unique perspective and in-depth analysis to her work.
