The following is a translated excerpt from an article published by the wire service, Infobae.
The law firm Amsterdam & Partners (based in London and Washington) has launched an unprecedented battle against the Spanish Treasury . These lawyers have already described the tax inspectors of the Spanish Tax Agency as “pickpockets” in the international press and are considering new media campaigns to denounce the agency’s violation of its own Code of Ethics by harassing taxpayers from other countries.
At the center of this entire dispute is the “Beckham Law ,” a special tax regime for workers, professionals, business owners, and investors residing in Spain. Taxpayers who benefit from it pay taxes for six years only on income generated in Spain, excluding income originating in other countries from their tax base. The exception is employment income, which will be fully taxed in Spain regardless of where it is generated, at a flat rate of 24% up to €600,000 . Beyond this amount, income earned is taxed at a rate of 47%. As this special regime represents a loss of public revenue, the Agency monitors these taxpayers with special care to prevent irregularities and fraud. This zeal the Anglo-Saxon firm describes as “arbitrary abuse of state power.”
“The Tax Agency has demonstrated a pattern of discrimination and persecution against high-income foreigners,” the firm explains on the website it has named ‘Spanish tax pickpockets.’ The media campaign forced the Spanish Treasury to contact the firm. The contact was Soledad Fernández Doctor , Director General of the State Tax Administration Agency (AEAT). However, this exchange of letters has not allayed the firm’s concerns.
Amsterdam & Partners has sent a letter asking the Tax Agency to clarify its position and to “underline the importance of transparency and public scrutiny in matters of general interest and good administration, particularly when they involve the treatment of taxpayers and the application of tax incentives .” In it, it openly asks the Tax Agency to take a stand and answer the following 13 questions.
- What proportion of those who opted for the special regime were rejected when applying for the certificate confirming their choice?
- What proportion of those who opted for the special regime were questioned by the Tax Agency about their qualifications before receiving the certificate?
- What proportion of those who were not subsequently questioned had their qualification for the special regime challenged in an audit?
- What proportion of the individuals subject to audit had left Spain before receiving notification of the start of an audit?
- What proportion of those selected for audit are not Spanish nationals?
- What proportion of those audited were audited when filing their first tax return under the special regime?
- On average, in cases where an audit was initiated, how many years elapsed between the issuance of the Certificate to the taxpayer and the notification of the initiation of an audit process?
- How many cases have been resolved by: provisional settlement with agreement, provisional settlement in compliance, provisional settlement in disagreement?
- What are the figures for all cases not related to the ‘Beckham Law’?
- How many legal disputes or challenges related to the ‘Beckham Law’ have arisen before December 31, 2022, and since January 1, 2023, following the revision of the law in 2023?
- Please confirm that the only category of taxpayer resident in Spain with assets exceeding €50,000 outside of Spain who is not required to file Form 720 would be someone legitimately assessed under the ‘Beckham Law’.
- Please confirm that the only category of taxpayer resident in Spain who is not required to file the Special Solidarity Tax would be someone legitimately assessed under the ‘Beckham Law’.
- Do you think it is likely that the management and handling of the special regime provided for in the ‘Beckham Law’ will negatively affect its adoption, thus frustrating the political objective of the Spanish Government and Parliament?