Although on many occasions, it goes unnoticed by consumers, several service stations charge - with the consumption ticket for their fuels -
a road tax destined to municipalities
to finance road works.
Although the stations have been resisting this initiative of the municipalities for years, in several of them, the rate continues to increase the already high fuel prices.
A survey by the Confederation of Hydrocarbon Trade of the Argentine Republic (CECHA) shows that
in Pinamar - for example - a rate of 3% is charged
on the value of the price of a liter, while in Merlo, the surcharge is 2 ,5% ;
in Ituzaingó, 2% and in Rosario;
of 1.6%.
Also the stations located in Tigre, Escobar and Florencio Varela charge an additional 1% on the price of gasoline and Avellaneda receives another 0.6%.
The suppliers in the municipalities of
Vicente Lopez and San Isidro, in turn, receive rates of 0.88% and 4.39%
respectively.
There are also municipalities that charge a fixed amount.
This is the case of José C. Paz, with $5.10;
San Isidro, with $4.39;
Vicente López with $0.88;
San Fernando, with $1.28;
Castelli, with $4, and Hurlingham, with $0.85.
Faced with this situation, service stations continue to denounce
the unconstitutionality of the measure
.
As explained by Isabelino Rodriguez, president of CECHA, “this is a double taxation - municipal and national - for which we are paying taxes and it is not fair because
it harms the stations that have to sell fuel at a higher price
and lose competitiveness compared to other stations. from neighboring towns,” commented the manager.
Another argument put forward by the station owners, among others, is the principle of reasonableness: “It does not seem reasonable to have a tax that cannot demonstrate and verify the provision of the service, that is, the verification of effective consideration, or
the payment could not be reasonably justified. link between what is charged and the real cost of the service
,” explained other chambers such as FAENI and CESGAR.
For this reason, business owners aim to judicialize the claim.
At the request of CECHA, constitutional lawyer Daniel Sabsay made an analysis on the constitutionality of the road taxes of the different Municipalities of the Province of Buenos Aires.
In legal terms and among other reasons, the expert explained: “since the Buenos Aires municipalities share in the tax on liquid fuels created by Law 23,966,
the establishment of a tax on an already taxed good, such as the road tax, generates a double taxation that collides with the constitutional regime,”
he said.
"In addition, Decree Law 505/58, to which the Province of Buenos Aires adhered through Decree Law 7374/66, creates the National Highway Directorate, and in its article 29 inc. c), it commits the provinces as well as the municipalities not to establish local taxes on liquid fuels and lubricants with any tax," the lawyer continued.
"The mere contrast of the literality of Law 23,966 with the municipal Ordinances allows us to appreciate that we are in the presence of identical taxes and taxpayers. This is how
double taxation and the consequent unconstitutionality of road taxes is configured,"
he explained.