Tax Regularization Regimes and Pending Criminal Cases

1.  Moratorium, suspension of criminal action, and preliminary measures
    

In the case “SAIEGH, Alberto s/ recurso de casación” (docket number CPE 529/2016/452/CFC67), the first instance court annulled the preliminary injunction, and the travel ban that had been imposed on the accused before suspending the criminal action. The action had been suspended because the accused had adhered to a moratorium.

The Argentine Tax Authority appealed the decision, arguing that the injunction should remain in effect until the entire amount of the debt was settled. In this regard, the Criminal Court of Appeals in Financial Matters overturned the first instance ruling and ruled that the measures had to remain in effect until the debt was fully paid.

The defense filed an appeal before the Federal Court of Cassation. Chamber I of the Court understood that keeping the preliminary measures and the travel ban lacked proportionality and necessity. It emphasized that these measures would not fulfill their primary objective: to ensure compliance with a potential conviction.
 

2. Tax evasion and money laundering
    

In the case “VIEYRA FERREYRA, Diego Alberto and others s/ recursos de casación” (docket number FCB 1392/2020/87/CFC3), the Federal Court of Appeals in the Province of Cordoba investigated a criminal organization dedicated to issuing apocryphal invoices. The investigation also included individuals who allegedly used these invoices to simulate expenses, reduce the taxable base, and evade taxes.

The Public Prosecutor’s Office pressed charges against these taxpayers for money laundering, having confirmed a patrimonial increase presumably derived from the criminal activity. During the investigation, certain users of the fraudulent invoices adhered to the regime for the regularization of tax debts established by Law 27541. In doing so, they sought to suspend the criminal action until the completion of the payment plan agreed to with the Tax Authority was verified.

Accepting the arguments of certain taxpayers, the Federal Court of Appeals in the Province of Cordoba ordered suspending the criminal action for the crimes of tax evasion and money laundering until the final compliance with the regularization plan was confirmed.

The General Prosecutor's Office (MPF), the Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF), and the Argentine Tax Authority (DGI) filed an appeal before the Federal Court of Cassation, requesting that the investigation into the alleged money laundering continued. They argued that this was a crime independent from tax evasion and that, therefore, suspending the criminal action regarding the tax crime should not extend to the money laundering one.

Chamber IV of the Court ruled that, although criminal action for tax evasion had been suspended or extinguished, it was not appropriate to extend the effects of Law 27,541 to the crime of money laundering. Thus, it allowed continuing the investigation of the taxpayers for the alleged money laundering.