Cristobal Lopez and Fabian de Souza They opened a A new front in the court battle with the Federal Administration of Public Revenue (AFIP). The Patagonians want at least one of their companies to be exempt from the value added tax (VAT) regime. $12.3 million unpaid, But the background sea is much bigger: $1,247.1 million in debt.

The final chapter focuses on Oil from M&Sone of the firms Indalo Group. Lopez and de Souza argue that AFIP excludes it from the VAT regime, after concluding that it is consistent with the same general benefits that the agency has granted to other companies. But the AFIP rejected their claim when they were presented to the administrative headquarters and hence they ended up in court.

The counterpoint was prompted by a resolution issued in February 2021 by the Head of the Legal Department of the Large National Taxpayer Area, which Decided not to grant ‘Exclusion Certificate’ to Oil M&S In VAT collection regimes as regulated by General Decree 2226. He did this after confirming that the firm did not meet the established requirements.

in the face of this rejection, Lopez and de Sousa sued the AFIP. The case is being considered in the Federal Disputed Administrative Court no. 9, where their lawyers said that AFIP’s decision would be wrong and that the bankruptcy opening of Oil M&S creditors in 2018 would prove them right.

However, the AFIP response was: Absolute. In his court appearance, he said his collection management department had confirmed that the November 2019 deadline had not even been opened for creditors to go to the competition to confirm their credits and that, therefore, the tax credit had not been confirmed.

Not only that. AFIP also informed Judge Pablo Caisals that the differences between Lopez and de Souza with Oil M&S go beyond the $12.3 million in unpaid VAT. that he could concentrate the discussion at a glance. They informed that the debt of this firm exceeds the national state 1,247.1 million dollars in taxes and social security.

“Therefore,” said two AFIP attorneys, “it is not clear what a ‘benefit’ is.” [en mayúsculas, en el original] He is going to get Encartada [por Oil M&S] In these actions, when outside the regime of RG 2226, It does not have the capacity to deal with the excessive liabilities it has with the national treasury Nor was the mentioned circumstance observed in the bankruptcy proceedings.

“Once again,” they argued, “the company owes this AFIP DGI agency the staggering sum of $1,247,112,827.85 set forth in Article 32 LCQ. [por la ley de concursos y quiebras] And without prejudice to the results of the process, intends to obtain tax benefits through this trial, as it turns out, contained in RG 2226″.

double reverse

specializes in providing comprehensive services to the oil industry, Oil M&S is under judicial review in other files which were developed for years. Among them, the criminal case in which Lopez, de Souza and Osvaldo Sanfelice likely Money laundering through the firm Agosto SA. The Federal Chamber of Buenos Aires confirmed their prosecution in August 2020.

Now, in the meantime, AFIP’s administrative decision to keep the petroleum M&S under VAT withholding and collection regime implies Double down for Lopez and De Sous. On the one hand, from an economic point of view. But also from a political perspective, since the counterpoint with AFIP started during the government Mauricio Macri -which was condemned for allegedly orchestrating the persecution- but continued and reaffirmed during the administration Alberto Fernandezwho before He worked as a lawyer for Indalo Group.

In this context, Lopez and De Souza went to court seeking an injunctive relief in favor of Oil M&S. They argued that behavior is the chair of the organism Mercedes Marco Del Ponti And now he’s in charge Charles Castanito It is “illegitimate, impermissible and constitutionally void” as it would lead to “a grotesque abuse of right”.

AFIP rejected these and other arguments. “Also, in this case, it would be less possible to estimate any possibility of granting fiscal benefits. A company whose liabilities exceed its assets“, – noted in the treasury. “It will experience sufficient solvency to be granted any tax relief.”

Now Judge Keisals has to decide.