the Administrative Controversial Chamber of the Supreme Court I passed a ruling that overturned the taxpayer filing requirement Personal income tax declaration By electronic means via the Internet, envisaged in The decision of the Ministry of Finance on March 4 of 2019, because it makes this commitment to everyone in a general way without specifying “assumptions and conditions” that justify reasons of economic and technical ability, professional dedication or other reasons for imposing this obligation.
In this way, the Supreme Court upholds in its decision an appeal from the Spanish Association of Tax Advisers, and declares invalid several articles of the Treasury order that established this general tax.
The court notes that the partially annulled order includes as a novelty that “the possibility of obtaining the declaration and corresponding payment or return documents on printed paper generated through the draft/declaration processing service of the State Tax Administration Agency” disappears. Instead, the order adds, the statement must be submitted “by electronic means over the Internet” through the procedures and places it specifies.
The Supreme Court explained that the General Tax Code “recognizes the right of citizens to use electronic media, but not the obligation of them,” as well as the duty of the administration to promote its use.
The Supreme Court affirms that “the administration can implement measures that promote and facilitate the achievement of a specific goal, in this case the use of electronic, computer and telematic means and technologies, but it cannot impose their compulsory use on citizens.”
Likewise, she adds, the general tax law recognizes the right to interact with the administration and to do so with the necessary guarantees through electronic, computer or remote means and means, “but not the obligation to do so, and certainly not as a consequence of this standard, the meaning of which is clear as a general principle of the tax legal system The judges affirm.
Do not characterize any personal situation
For this reason, the Supreme Court affirms that, according to Article 96.2 of the Law on the Right of Citizens to Interact Electronically with the Administration, the legal authorization stipulated in other articles of this Law and the Personal Status Law cannot be interpreted. Income tax “allows the Minister of Finance to establish an obligation in general where Article 96.2 of the Act states right”.
And this is exactly what the impugned order does, as subject to the obligation to file the declaration electronically directed to the full collective potential of the taxpayer for a tax, as for the income tax of natural persons, is up to the generality of natural persons who carry out the taxable event, without distinction of any A personal case that justifies the imposition of the obligation to declare and settle by electronic means,” the judges added.
On the other hand, they have demonstrated that defining the assumptions and conditions for submitting declarations by electronic or remote means does not mean that the law authorizes the regulatory rule to revoke the right, which is what the questionable Treasury order does, but rather that any requires defining the characteristics or circumstances of certain taxpayers, which distinguish them from The group of taxpayers – for whom electronic association is a right – that justifies the importance of imposing upon them the obligation of electronic association by necessity, rather than by right, exercisable or not to do so in this way.
The judgment was rendered by the Second Division of the Chamber of Disputes, with a presentation by Judge Rafael Toledano, and annulling the previous decision of the National Court, which did not agree with the Association of Tax Advisers regarding the invalidity of the imposition of personal action. Income tax statement online.
The most important economic dates of the day, with keys and context to understand their scope.