The Chief Prosecutor of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, Alexander Luzonapproved at the beginning of September 2018 a brief from the prosecutors Michael Serrano and Ignacio Stampa addressed to the central court of instruction number 6 of the National High Court in which the tax drift of the conversations held in London between Corinna zu Sayn-Wittgensteinex-lover of John Charles I and the retired commissioner Jose Manuel Villarejo.
Tax sources also indicate that Luzon consulted with the then State Attorney General, Maria Jose Segarrathe content of the position expressed in said brief, taking into account that the judge was requested Diego of Egea the provisional dismissal of the proceedings opened by those recordings in which possible illicit acts of Juan Carlos I were addressed, the so-called piece carolthe number 5 of the ‘Tandem-Villarejo case’.
point 5
In said letter, dated September 7, 2018, both prosecutors indicated, in point number 5, that, although there were no sufficient evidence to continue the investigation, there was something important to do.
“The potential tax contingencies incidentally reveal the conversations if it is possible that they deserve the attention of the tax authorities and, where appropriate, could derive in the future in the corresponding tax crime complaints. In this sense, the technicians of the Ministry of Finance (GESTHA) issued a statement on July 12 [de 2018] in which they state that the conversations that have been published have sufficient entity for the AEAT to pay maximum attention to them and verify them,” he said.
This affirmation followed a request that the judge had made to the National Fraud Inspection Organization (ONIF) on September 4, 2018, in which he requested information about Juan Carlos I.
A day later, the head of the ONIF, Jose Manuel Alarcon Estella [ver documento posterior] He responded that the emeritus had not submitted an informative declaration on assets and rights located abroad (model 720) and that there was no evidence that Juan Carlos had accounts abroad.
“Indeed,” as he recalls. Charles Cruzpresident of GESTHA, this newspaper “was asked to open a tax inspection filegiven the information provided in the audios, but also due to the existence of data that was already public knowledge”.
Cruzado later had access to the prosecutors’ brief. “It caught our attention that our request for an investigation was highlighted in the letter from the Prosecutor’s Office. It seemed logical that the Tax agency do something about it,” he says.
“Spontaneous” adjustments
Chief Prosecutor of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office points out in the decree on tax proceedings that the notifications to Juan Carlos I of these investigations, in June and November 2020, did not go into the detail of tax contingencies.
And that, therefore, comes to suggest, it is not possible to question the “spontaneity” of its regularizationsone of the requirements to accept regularizations as good.
“Well, in the decrees for the initiation of both investigative proceedings, in the respective notifications there was no reference to the facts to which the tax returns carried out on February 2 and 3, 2021 Juan Carlos of Bourbonfor the simple reason that at that time the circumstances to which they refer were unknown…”.
deliberate passivity
In its decree, Luzon highlights the work of “officials of the Superior Corps of State Treasury Inspectorsdesignated by the Tax Agency itself and with full access to all the information of tax importance contained in their databaseswhose essential collaboration in this complex investigation has been carried out with the utmost rigor and with the desirable speed”.
But isn’t this “maximum rigor” and “desirable speed” contradicting the deliberate passivity between 2018, when data on investigations begin to come out? Or is Luzon perhaps telling us something else: namely, that officials have actually put all their expertise into the task of refine the adjustments?
It appears from the decrees that the ONIF has advised John Charles I in the presentation of regulations. And to remake them. Because it is said that the regularizations of the payments of the Zagatka Foundation of Liechtenstein was made on February 2 and 3, 2021. That is, in two days. What happened? Had the representatives of Juan Carlos I not done the numbers correctly and did they have to come back the next day?
Supplementary Statements
But that is not all. 16 days later, on February 18, they presented other two additional statements of the exercises corresponding to the years 2016 and 2017. Why did the ONIF not open an inspection in light of these contradictions?
The two notifications on the proceedings of the 100 million dollars (64.8 million euros) and the payments – regularized as donations – of almost 600,000 euros from the “friend” Allen Sanginés-Krause they were generic communications that offered to appear in person to Juan Carlos I, an initiative that he did not accept.
However, the third, in December 2020, on the Island of Jersey Trustis accurate.
It reads as follows: “These investigative procedures are aimed at specifying the legal entity of the activities of a ‘trust’ called The JRM 2004 Trustincorporated in 2004 in Jersey, with an approximate amount of 8.5 million pounds (10.2 million euros), with various indications that point to His Majesty the King Emeritus D. Juan Carlos de Borbón y Borbón, as the ultimate owner of the funds” D. Juan Carlos de Borbón y Borbón.
“formal” notice
Related news
But of course when it comes to “formal” noticeas a rule, is also useless because the applied engineering in this case went beyond said ‘trust’ or fideicomiso to another ownership, that of the friend and adviser of Juan Carlos I, the historian and former banker Joaquin Romero Maura. Who by the way is afflicted with advanced Alzheimer’s.
The final result: 85,596,266.69 euros passed through the hands of Juan Carlos I abroad before the “maximum rigor” of the Tax agency (Luzon said). That he considers a success of his ‘investigation’ (or ‘deliberate ignorance’) the somewhat more than 5 million euros regularized (€678,393.72 for the payments of Allen Sanginés-Krause and 4,395,901.96 euros by Zagatka).