RIVISTA DI DIRITTO TRIBUTARIO INTERNAZIONALE - Rdti.it

G. Petrillo: Interpellation in the Statute or Ta.xpayers' Rights
examination consists of a series of provisions safeguarding the taxpayer's
right of defence: for example, the provision that recognises the
right to suspension of tax-collection when appropriate security is offered
by the taxpayer; the prohibition of seizure and attachment of
goods in the course of the proceedings, provided the Administration
runs no risk of loss of security; the automatic suspension of collection
of alI fines in the presence of an appeal (68); the generaI presumption
of the taxpayer's good faith with the consequent obligation for the administration
to provide proof of guilt in view of the application of
fines; lastIy, in the context of an "economico-administrativa" procedure,
the possibility for those who file a complaint in first instance to
apply directIy to the "Tribunal Economico - Administrativo CentraI",
skipping the "Tribunal Regional o [oca!" (69).
Again on this topie, see Santiago Ibànez Marsilla, Un l1uevo procedimiento sancionador
en materia tributaria, pero ibasta con guardar las (onnas?in Revista Internauta
de Pràtica luridica, n.l!1999, who deerns that the imposition of "sanciones"
presupposes the exercise of the ius puniendi of the State, in conflict with the position
held by other doctrinal authorities (Bayona de Perogordo, l.J.: El procedimento
sancionador", Conferencia pronunciada en el Curso sobre evasiòn y fraude fiscal,
UIMP, Santander, 1994, recogida por Soler Roch, M. T.: "Deberes tributarios y Derechos
Humanos", Revista Tècnica Tributaria, n. 30, 1995) which defines the exercise
of punitive power as a tool intended to re-establish a balance broken by those who
do not rneet their taxation obligations te the detriment of those who do. Again with
regard to the new fining system outlined by the LDGC, see Josè Garberi Llobregat,
El nuevo règimen sancionador en materia tributaria, via internet: httpll noticias. juridicas.com.
(68) On this point, see luan Martìn Queralt, Carmelo Lozano Serrano, Gabriel
Casado Ollero, losè Manuel Tejerizo Lòpez, Curso de derecho financiero y tributario,
who draw attention to the substantial harmony existing, in praetical terms, between
the above preeept and Art. 138.3 of Ley 30/1992 which, consistently \vith the fundamental
right to the presumption of innoeence,. foresees that the penalties beeome enforceable
at the ti me when they have become final from the administrath'e standpoint.
Upon comparison \,\,'ith our system, it ean be seen that the Spanish taxpayer enjoys
greater proteetion, sinee Art. 19 of Legis. Deeree 472/97, which is certainly not
above eriticism, extends as per Art. 68 Lgs Decr 546/ 92) to fiscal penalties the principle
of fractioned collection whil e judgement is pending, foreseeing however the possibility
for the regional tax disputes board, at the party's request and against provision
of security, to suspens the execution of the contested act \'\''ithin the limits within which
the Iatter can be enforced after the first-Ievel verdict.
(69) This was aimed to meet a strongly-felt social demand for rapid and economie
administrative justice, in order to speed up the settlement of "Ias reclamaciònes"; in
this manner, the latter can be settI ed, as a ruIe, before a single court: the "Tribunal Regional
o Local", for cases of lesser amount, or the "Tribunal Centrai" for those of
greater amount.
RIVISTA DI DIRITTO TRlBFTARIO INTER\AZIONALE 3121101