09/02/2021 18:34
Clarín.com
Politics
Updated 09/02/2021 18:34
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation endorsed the
collection of a municipal rate from Quilmes to the oil company Axion Energy
and thus gave rise to the rest of the Buenos Aires districts to collect local rates.
The ruling was signed by judges Horacio Rosatti, Juan Carlos Maqueda, Elena Highton de Nolasco and Ricardo Lorenzetti, these two concurrently.
President Carlos Rosenkrantz excused himself.
The measure, which
had a previous ruling in the Buenos Aires Court
, obliges companies to pay safety and hygiene rates above the base of the taxpayer's gross income as long as the result, according to the arguments of the highest national court, is not "Unreasonable", "disproportionate" or "dissociated" from the services provided by the municipality.
The
original claim had been filed by Esso, current Axion Energy
, against the municipality of Quilmes, because it, based on the third paragraph of Article 35 of the Multilateral Agreement, intended to charge a remainder for the Security and Hygiene Inspection Fee (TISH).
The oil company maintained that
the position of the municipal treasury was illegitimate because it settled the tax by computing the income originated in other municipalities of the Province of Buenos Aires
in which Esso did not have authorized premises or establishments; because the rate did not originate in an effective provision of a municipal service and because there was a disproportion between the amount of the rate and the cost of the service.
But
the Buenos Aires Supreme Court rejected that claim
, based on the fact that the regulations that were applied gave rise to the municipality to compute gross provincial income in the tax base, even those accrued in other municipalities in which the plaintiff did not have a premises or establishment.
He also pointed out that there was an effective provision of the service and ruled out that the rate was disproportionate.
From that decision,
Esso took his claim directly before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
, which convened an informative public hearing, on June 6, 2019, with the participation of the parties, interested third parties and "amicus curiae" , the so-called friends of the court.
This Thursday the national court ratified the decision of the provincial court of appeal.
In his ruling, he
ruled out analyzing what pertains to the scope of Article 35 of the Multilateral Agreement
, since "that aspect of the lawsuit was a matter outside his extraordinary competence, insofar as it is linked to an issue of provincial public law, which it was resolved - in that area - without arbitrariness ".
In addition, through the vote of the
Maqueda-Rosatti
tandem
, the Court was in charge of setting the guidelines to which municipal rates are subject.
.
Along these lines, he argued that the attribution of the municipalities to create a rate is subject to the following guidelines: the clear and precise definition of the taxable event and the individualization of the services or activities that are offered;
the organization and provision of the service to the taxpayer, because otherwise the collection would be without cause importing a violation of property rights;
and the adequate and precise quantification of the tax (taxable base, aliquot, exemptions and deductions), for which the tax authority must prudently weigh, among other parameters, the global cost of the service or activity concerned and the taxable capacity.
Carlos Rosenkrantz, President of the Court, excused himself from voting.
Photo: Juano Tesone.
Regarding the quantification of the fees, the highest court recalled that for it to constitute a legitimate manifestation of the tax power, its amount had to take into consideration not only the cost of the services that are made available to each taxpayer but also their capacity. contributory.
And it concluded that "
there are no constitutional objections to resort to the taxpayer's gross income as an indicator of taxable capacity
and a factor for calculating the taxable base of a tax such as the one considered in the proceedings, as long as this does not lead to unreasonable results. , disproportionate and dissociated from the direct and indirect benefits that the municipality faces to organize and make the service available ".
The decision of the Court could derive in the future rejection of claims from companies to municipalities for the payment of taxes or fees that are imposed.